Name: 與前男友複合之前--看這個 (Before You Get Back With Your Ex — Watch THIS)
Uploaded: 2025-07-17T08:23:59.000Z
Duration: 13 min 48 s

進階形容詞比較級句型

News that two people who had a harrowing break-up are now trying to get back together again a few months or years down the line tends, among sensible people, to raise at the very least suspicion, if not outright irritation and despair. Why are these two cursed lovers heading back to the old chaos and drama? Isn't this just a fantasy sprung from naivety, loneliness and most probably short-term lust? Shouldn't they keep faith with their original choice, double down on the highs and lows of dating and perhaps each buy a dog? And yet, to deny ex-couples any legitimate chance to revisit their situation also feels excessively punitive and in its way naïve, insisting blindly that people can never change, that psychotherapy and introspection, books and conversations, time and long walks have nothing whatsoever to teach us, is as foolish as to assume that change can come readily and lightly. For every misguided attempt to resume a relationship, there must be a proportion of equally misguided refusals to countenance a new start, born not out of wisdom so much as pre-emptive fear and disbelief that people are, occasionally, able to learn a new thing or two. We need to make progress a tool with which to strip the matter of sentiment and rationally distinguish mature from sentimental plans. What follows is a sequence of questions, amounting to a kind of examination, that exes who are meeting up again after a long break should discuss with one another – and as importantly, with themselves – before coming anywhere near to holding hands, let alone – and here we must be very definitive – going to bed.

兩個經歷了痛苦分手的人在幾個月或幾年後試圖重新走到一起的消息，在理智的人看來，即使不是直接的惱怒和絕望，也至少會引起懷疑。為什麼這對被詛咒的戀人又要回到過去的混亂和戲劇中去？這難道不是出於天真、孤獨和很可能是短期的慾望而產生的幻想嗎？難道他們不應該堅持自己最初的選擇，加倍享受約會的高低起伏，或許還可以各買一條狗嗎？然而，剝奪前任情侶重新審視自己處境的任何合法機會，也讓人覺得是一種過度的懲罰，而且在某種程度上也是一種天真，盲目地堅持認為人是永遠不會改變的，認為心理治療和檢討、書籍和談話、時間和長時間的散步都

To the question, should we meet up for dinner, the standard response should from now on be – let's take the School of Life's re-entry examination first. So, here's how it goes.

對於 "我們要不要一起吃個飯 "這個問題，從現在起，標準的回答應該是--先參加生命學校的復學考試吧。那麼，事情是這樣的

情態副詞

Firstly, can you meet me for a re-entry examination that may take up to seven hours, over five separate meetings and involve soliciting the views of two of our good friends as well?

首先，你能否與我見面，進行一次可能長達 7 個小時、分 5 次進行的再入境檢查，並徵求我們兩位好朋友的意見？

One of the major signs that a relationship is viable is that both parties are willing to give up an unusual, even inordinate amount of time to the intellectual exploration of its past flaws. The more they can stand to examine the horror, the less it need to recur.

一段關係是否可行的主要標誌之一，就是雙方都願意放棄不尋常的、甚至是過多的時間，對其過去的缺陷進行智力探索。他們越能忍受對恐怖的審視，恐怖就越不需要重現。

The greatest predictor of success is an advanced capacity to think without defensiveness, pride or impatience about all that was most terrible. Everything that feels a bit unromantic is paradoxically truly romantic, in the sense of being conducive to love. Which is why this test is deliberately, provocatively framed in the most boring, hard-headed way possible.

成功的最大預示因素是一種先進的思考能力，對一切最可怕的事情不設防、不驕傲、不急躁。一切讓人感覺有點不浪漫的事物，從有利於愛情的意義上來說，恰恰是真正浪漫的。這就是為什麼這個測試故意用最無聊、最生硬的方式進行。

It should sound extremely forbidding and very unsexy. We concretely prove our love by being ready to discuss our feelings for hours with some of the tenacity of a lawyer and the steadiness of an accountant, this rather than abseiling down a clock tower with roses or making furious love in a hotel room.

這聽起來應該非常可怕，非常不性感。我們以律師的堅韌和會計師的穩重，準備數小時討論我們的感情，以此來具體證明我們的愛，而不是帶著玫瑰從鐘樓上跳下，或者在酒店房間裡狂熱地做愛。

Second question. Are we here because we've learned things or because we miss one another?

第二個問題。我們在這裡是因為學到了東西，還是因為彼此想念？

This is a highly binary and leading question and there is only one possible answer. Opt for the wrong one and the exam is declared void immediately. Missing someone can be very moving, but it has nothing, strictly nothing to do with a fitness to return. One can miss someone and know, or should know, that they are absolutely not a person ever to get close to again. One can both utterly regret a partner and not in any way benefit from being with them. Of course, someone might tell a lie at this juncture, but at least it will be clear to them that they are having to deceive in order to proceed. No one can be in any doubt as to the purpose of this exam, to search out and probe at signs of learning rather than signs of love.

這是一個高度二元化的引導性問題，只有一個可能的答案。如果選擇了錯誤的答案，考試就會立即宣告無效。思念一個人可能會讓人非常感動，但這與是否適合回來完全沒有關係。一個人可以想念一個人，也可以知道，或者應該知道，他絕對不是一個可以再親近的人。一個人既可以對伴侶感到無比遺憾，也可以對與伴侶在一起沒有任何益處。當然，有人可能會在這個時候說假話，但至少他們會清楚地知道，為了繼續下去，他們不得不欺騙自己。沒有人會懷疑這次考試的目的，那就是尋找和探究學習的跡象，而不是愛情的跡象。

Third question. Have we substantially changed since we were last together? To put it even more bluntly, the only reason two people should ever attempt to restart a relationship is because something has fundamentally changed in both of them. Nothing else counts, that we once got on, that we almost had a child or had five together, that we still know each other's nicknames, that they really look very nice sitting across the table from us.

第三個問題自從上次在一起後，我們是否發生了實質性的變化？說得更直白一點，兩個人想要重新開始一段感情，唯一的理由就是雙方都發生了根本性的變化。其他的都不算數，比如我們曾經相處得很好，我們差點有了一個孩子或者一起生了五個孩子，我們還知道對方的暱稱，他們坐在我們對面看起來真的很不錯。

The sole and exclusive reason to be exploring once more is because one feels one has learnt some very significant things in the interregnum.

再次進行探索的唯一原因是，人們覺得自己在間歇期學到了一些非常重要的東西。

Fourth question. Can we say why we've changed, at length and in depth, not merely feel we have changed? Can we turn warm intentions into words, and a lot of words at that? The cynic tends to chip in at this point to add anyone can say they've changed, but what's hard, and what counts, is to show one's changed. Actions, not words, are where it's at. To which we'd say, yes, of course, but also that people who can describe at some length – we're talking a minimum of five hours of conversation – about what's going on in them, and hear what's at play in the other, also have a good chance of following through at the level of action. Analytically precise words are not always cheap. It's not a simple matter to speak clearly about one's past emotional immaturity and idiocy, and by the time people can, it's a sign of a certain dawning wisdom which can stretch beyond mere fine intentions. At the same time, we should be very suspicious of any ex who tries to pass off their reluctance to sit an exam or their unwillingness to speak as a small matter indicating nothing other than a personal preference. Oh, I'm not so good with language. Words fail me. I don't do introspection very well. I love you, but I can't always say why. We're sorry for such a person. We also know that they plainly do not merit another chance. We both agree that this exam commits us to nothing whatsoever.

第四個問題。我們能否詳細而深入地說出我們改變的原因，而不僅僅是感覺我們已經改變？我們能否將溫暖的意圖化為文字，而且是大量的文字？在這一點上，憤世嫉俗者往往會加入進來，補充說任何人都可以說自己已經改變了，但最難、最重要的是表現出自己的改變。關鍵在於行動，而不是言語。對此，我們會說，是的，當然，但同時也會說，那些能夠用一定的篇幅--我們說的是至少五個小時的談話--描述自己身上發生了什麼，並聽到對方身上發生了什麼的人，也很有可能在行動層面上取得成功。分析準確的話語並不總是便宜的。要清楚地說出自己過去不成熟的情感

It's an exploration, nothing more or less. Both parties have to recognise that they may have to walk away with nothing and it won't be anyone's fault. Why did we fight so much?

這是一次探索，僅此而已。雙方都必須認識到，他們可能會一無所獲，這不是任何人的錯。我們為什麼要爭吵？

We're coming to the core of the examination. It's a luxury of couples who will never get back together again that they can concentrate on the good sides of their story. They can listen to songs and daydream about the sweet times without any need to remember reality.

我們即將進入檢查的核心。對於那些再也不會複合的情侶來說，能夠專注於他們故事中美好的一面是一種奢望。他們可以聽著歌，做著白日夢，緬懷甜蜜的時光，而無需回憶現實。

But for those who are thinking of getting back together, there is no alternative but to focus with immense intent on one aspect only of the relationship, what was properly awful about it. And there would have been a lot that was, given that people don't ever sever a tight bond lightly. The priority is to identify and then submit to rigorous analysis all that was most nightmarish, all that it remains extremely painful and eerie to summon. A couple's right to resume is to be measured against their courage in exploring why they failed. Then, what can't I change? But also, what coping mechanisms might we arrive at to deal with these unchangeable aspects? We need to acknowledge that almost certainly we won't be able to alter all of our personalities and this is the moment to get clear with our ex about what is and isn't possible. Broken promises always exact a worse toll than pre-emptively lowered expectations. What do we feel that we aren't, despite a lot of goodwill, going to be able to overcome? And how, if at all, can these stubborn bits of our personalities be handled? Then, how much can we each bear of what won't change?

但是，對於那些打算複合的人來說，別無他法，只能一門心思地專注於這段關係的一個方面，那就是這段關係中最糟糕的地方。鑑於人們不會輕易割斷緊密的紐帶，是以會有很多糟糕的地方。當務之急是找出最可怕的東西，然後進行嚴格的分析，所有這些都讓人感到極其痛苦和陰森恐怖。衡量一對夫婦重新開始的權利，要看他們是否有勇氣探索失敗的原因。那麼，我有什麼不能改變的呢？同時，我們又該採取怎樣的應對機制來處理這些無法改變的方面呢？我們需要承認，幾乎可以肯定的是，我們無法改變自己的所有性格，這時候就需要與前男友說清楚什麼是可能的，什麼是

Frank answers can spare a couple decades of squabbling. Next, what trouble do I bring into the relationship? How am I difficult to live around? There should be no bristling here. Bearable people have a good handle on their unbearable dimensions. We don't need people to be perfect, we just need them to have a decent sense of how imperfect they are and how much their imperfections are going to cause the other pain. Then, what trouble do you bring into the relationship? How are you difficult to live around? We need agreement on the mutual complications that are being brought to the table. Both people should write their answers down, then show the other their analyses. Can both sides agree on what's most horrible in each person? The more alignment there can be, the less future criticism has to feel like nagging, and the more it can fit into a kinder project of helping someone to change as they would, at their saner moments, wish to change. Then, which bits of my anxiety and unhappiness did I discover were not, after all, your fault? What continued to be difficult even without you around? It's highly tempting when in a relationship to assume that all the misery we face is the fault of the lover. We attribute to the main person in our lives a commanding role in determining our state of mind. But when they're gone, we may be forced to realise a more complex truth – that our low moods and neuroses have their origins, in large part, in us rather than in them. It can, oddly, no longer all be their fault. How did life remain hard, even without them? What might they not be to blame for? Then, what I now appreciate more properly about you is… We're meant never to lose sight of what was great about them, but in reality, we sometimes need the perspective of time to get clearer about their virtues. In the long months since we were together, what sides of them did we realise we most deeply valued? Then, what did I learn from meeting other people? A truly tricky subject, but as we're realising, it's a capacity for eating humble pie that stands a restarted relationship in such good stead.

坦率的回答可以避免幾十年的爭吵。接下來，我給這段關係帶來了什麼麻煩？我是如何難以相處的？這裡不應該有毛刺。可以忍受的人都能很好地控制自己無法忍受的方面。我們不需要人們完美無缺，我們只需要他們對自己有多不完美以及自己的不完美會給對方帶來多大的痛苦有一個正確的認識。那麼，你給這段關係帶來了什麼麻煩？你是如何難以相處的？我們需要就彼此帶來的麻煩達成一致。兩個人都應該寫下自己的答案，然後給對方看自己的分析。雙方能否就每個人身上最可怕的地方達成一致？雙方的意見越一致，今後的責備就越不會讓人覺得是嘮叨，也就越能融入到

So what did the bad dates teach us? What did the rejections bring home to us? What did we learn from the flaws of others about the merits of the one we left behind? Then, what will happen when we argue next time, define six arguments that might take place in the future and explore what could be done differently? Design six arguments that might occur going forward. There's another party. You're busy at work again. You're tired and upset that they flirted. How will we behave differently? What could we do other than break up? How might diplomacy replace warfare? Then, the last part of the examination.

那麼，糟糕的約會教會了我們什麼？被拒絕讓我們明白了什麼？我們從別人的缺點中學到了什麼，瞭解到我們留下的那個人的優點？那麼，當我們下次爭論時，會發生什麼呢？定義未來可能發生的六種爭論，並探討可以採取哪些不同的方式？設計未來可能發生的六種爭論。還有一個聚會。你又忙於工作。他們調情讓你又累又不高興。我們的行為會有什麼不同？除了分手，我們還能做什麼？外交如何取代戰爭？然後，是最後一部分考題。

Each person should approach one of their very good friends who lived the break up from close quarters and ask them to meet the ex in private, then provide a deep evaluation of the prospects for a successful return. Does this ex now feel safe? Should the couple do this? It sounds extremely odd to bring in a third party. We imagine that couples have all the answers to their own problems. But most people who survive a break up only do so because they have, somewhere in the background, a wise, kind, sceptical friend who listened to the sobbing, counselled when to text and when to block, was always on hand and has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the entire trauma. It seems foolish not to benefit from this person's experience, an inevitable degree of scepticism. They don't want to go through another catastrophe all over again. Even better, they don't love our ex. They won't be going to bed with them.

每個人都應該找到自己的一位非常要好的朋友，請他們私下見見前任，然後對成功迴歸的前景進行深入評估。這位前任現在有安全感嗎？這對夫婦應該這樣做嗎？引入第三方聽起來非常奇怪。我們認為，情侶對自己的問題都有答案。但是，大多數人之所以能在分手後倖存下來，是因為在他們的背後，有一位睿智、善良、持懷疑態度的朋友，他傾聽他們的啜泣，指導他們何時發短信，何時屏蔽，他總是隨叫隨到，對整個創傷過程有著百科全書式的瞭解。不從這個人的經驗中獲益似乎是愚蠢的，這是一種不可避免的懷疑態度。他們不想再重新經歷一次災難。更妙的是，他們並不

They only stand to face the downsides and that's why they're so useful. They aren't a sworn enemy, that won't be of assistance, but nor are they any kind of indiscriminate romantic either. They are a hard-headed realist who saw what the ex put their friend through and doesn't ever want it to happen again. So they need to be brought into the discussion.

他們只會面對不利因素，所以才如此有用。他們不是不共戴天的仇敵，不會提供幫助，但也不是濫情的浪漫主義者。他們是頭腦冷靜的現實主義者，他們看到了前任對朋友的傷害，不希望這種事情再次發生。是以，我們需要讓他們參與討論。

They need a one-on-one meeting with the ex-partner, who should be rather intimidated by the idea but go through it anyway, in the name of love. If the partner can convince this battle-wearied person, true change will have occurred and vice versa. The friend must assess the ex on the following points and score each of them out of ten. How much does the ex understand of the problems they brought into the relationship? How much do they seem able to change? What is their level of defensiveness? What have they understood about themselves? How might they manage conflict more successfully? What do they appreciate about their ex? And assess the overall viability of a return. In short, yes or no?

他們需要與前伴侶進行一對一的會談，前伴侶應該會被這個想法嚇到，但為了愛，還是要去做。如果伴侶能夠說服這位身經百戰的人，那麼真正的改變就已經發生了，反之亦然。朋友必須就以下幾點對前任進行評估，並以十分為滿分。前任對自己給這段關係帶來的問題了解多少？他們似乎能夠改變多少？他們的防禦程度如何？他們對自己瞭解多少？他們怎樣才能更成功地處理衝突？他們欣賞前任的哪些方面？評估迴歸的整體可行性。簡而言之，是還是不是？

That's the end of the examination. We take the gravest decisions of our lives on a whim.

考試到此結束。我們隨隨便便就做出了一生中最重要的決定。

We will properly start to honour love and spare ourselves cycles of dismay and pain when we learn, at last, to disregard our desires and to follow instead the pedantic dictates of sober, sensible, beautifully tedious logic.

當我們最終學會無視自己的慾望，轉而遵從清醒、理智、美麗而乏味的邏輯的迂腐指令時，我們就會正確地開始尊重愛，並免於週而復始的沮喪和痛苦。