求中譯／英譯： 屬句子／段落： In Asian cultures, power distance is high—meaning that there is a well-defined social hierarchy. As such, service providers clearly define their role as providing service, and the concept of service has been institutionalized in Asia (Schmitt and Pan 1994). Accordingly, we found the service providers in Hong Kong to be far less likely to blame service failures on the customers they serve. Likewise, this service mentality means that employees would not opt for a “no action” response in the recovery strategy. Rather, they are willing to render “extrarole” activity if that serves to make up for the poor service. This service orientation probably also explains why employee response to customer needs and requests accounts for the highest occurrence of incidents in the Hong Kong sample. The considerable power distance in Asian cultures may also explain why employees whom we interviewed took fewer spontaneous initiatives than those in other studies. As individuals tend to maintain the hierarchical social order, the service providers need to follow a strict role script in the interaction rather than take spontaneous action. We believe that this well-defined hierarchical structure is the reason that the service contact persons in our HK study were more prone to involve managerial personnel in the recovery initiatives (strategy 6 in Exhibit 4), whereas this did not surface in the BBM study. 我的試譯： 我第一段的翻譯說到 在亞洲文化，權力差距高---這意味著有一個明確的社會階層，因此，服務業者明確定義 了他們自己的角色提供服務，和服務的概念在亞洲已經制度化 因此，在香港我們找到了服務業者不太可能的失敗的原因在於他們的客戶很少不滿服務。 同樣，這種服務的心態，使員工在補救策略時不會選擇一個“不採取行動”的反應。相反 ，他們願意提供“額外”的角色補償惡劣的服務，這項服務的取向大概也解釋了為什麼員 工回應客戶的需要和要求，在香港佔最高發生的事件樣本。 第二段 在亞洲文化的相當大的權力差距也許可以解釋為什麼我們採訪了其中員工自發主動性少於 其他研究，個人傾向於維持等級的社會秩序，服務業者需要遵循嚴格的角色腳本的相互作 用，而不是採取自發行動。我們認為這個明確定義層次結構的原因，在香港服務員更容易 學習主管的積極主動性（策略6圖表 4），而這在BBM研究中沒有顯示出來。 提問： 我的問題是，第一段我自己的翻譯結果好像跟第二段有衝突， 第一段說員工在補救策略時不會不回應，也願意提供額外補償， 但第二段卻說員工自發性少於其他研究 請問是翻譯上有問題嗎? 謝謝!!! --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 118.171.172.192