it is true that 用法的八卦，Yahoo名人娛樂都在討論

"The fundamental question is, are we going to follow the law?"
「拗咩吖，大家仲信唔信法律制度先？」

繼上次問到Twitter老細口啞之後，美國參議員Ted Cruz接受《Fox News》Sean Hannity訪問，評論大選兩邊嘅爭拗同輿論偏頗嘅情況，再提出一個跨黨派政見立場，值得所有人反思嘅問題，到底大家仲信唔信法律制度先？還是靠响social media打嘴炮或者記者講就得㗎？

"The fundamental question is, are we going to follow the law?"

"The way the system works is, you follow the law...You know, one of the frustrating things as a citizen, you see all these tweets going back and forth, you see allegations of this happened, that happened. It's hard to know, it's hard for anyone to know, all right, is this true, what's true?"
（行之有效嘅制度就係法律制度，作為一個國民，最失望就係睇見啲Tweets你來我往，呢個話見到乜乜，嗰個就講物物，根本無人知，亦唔會知真定假，點知咩真相呀？）

"The only way to know is, we have a legal process -- we have state courts, we have federal courts that can hear legal claims."
（要知道真相嘅唯一方法，就係經過法律程序，我地有各級法院去審理呢啲法律上嘅指控。）

"And right now, it is incumbent on the Trump Campaign's lawyers to go in and prove their case in court -- to lay out evidence -- to lay out evidence of illegally cast votes, lay out evidence of what was done right and what was done wrong. And when the process is over, we're going to know the result..."
（去到呢一步，在任總統嘅律師團咪要去法庭去闡述自己嘅理據囉，用證據解釋咩做啱或者乜嘢做錯。當個法律程序完成，大家咪知道結果囉，拗咩呢？）

"Now, the fact that you or I might say that or someone might tweet that -- that's not conclusive evidence. That needs to be determined in a court of law."
（依家我可以响Twitter講呢樣，佢又講另一樣，呢啲唔係可信嘅證據黎㗎，可信與否係要靠法庭決定嘅。）

"It's amazing that reporters are running around screaming, no, no, no, we can't resolve any of these legal matters."
（最「奇妙」就係啲記者四周圍同人講「No, no, no，呢啲問題係唔可以用法律解決㗎」）

其實Ted Cruz提出呢個概念，去到呢刻到底仲有幾多人明白呢？還是為咗個人政見、立場或者喜惡，而忘記咗？

美國國內係咁，國外就更加...

#選皇帝

Photo Source：FoxNews
訪問原片：
https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1326264919529025538?s=20

毋忘五大訴求　公民抗命有理
—10‧20九龍遊行陳情書
（案件編號：DCCC 535/2020）

——————————————————
「毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中」
撐阿銘，即訂閱Patreon：
patreon.com/raphaelwong
—————————————————

胡法官雅文閣下：

　　2012年，我第一次站在法庭上承認違反「公安惡法」，述說對普選的盼望，批評公安惡法不義，並因公民抗命的緣故，甘心樂意接受刑罰。當年我說，如果小圈子選舉沒有被廢除，惡法沒有消失，我依然會一如故我，公民抗命，並且我相信將會有更多學生和市民加入這個行列。想不到時至今日，普選仍然遙遙無期，我亦再次被帶到法庭接受審判，但只是短短７年，已經有數十萬計的群眾公民抗命，反對暴政。今日，我承認違反「未經批准的政府」所訂立「未經批准的惡法」之下的「未經批准集結」罪，我不打算尋求法庭的憐憫，但請容許我佔用法庭些微時間陳情，讓法庭在判刑前有全面考慮。

暴力之濫觴

　　在整個反修例運動如火如荼之際，我正承擔另一宗公民抗命案件的刑責。雖然身在獄中，但仍然心繫手足。我在獄中電視機前見證6月9日、6月16日及8月18日三次百萬港人大遊行，幾多熱愛和平的港人冒天雨冒彈雨走上街頭，抗議不義惡法，今日關於10月20日的案件，亦是如此。可能有人會問，政府已在6月暫緩修例，更在9月正式撤回修例，我等仍然繼續示威，豈非無理取鬧？我相信法官閣下肯定聽過「遲來的正義並非正義」（Justice delayed is justice denied）這句格言。當過百萬群眾走上街頭，和平表達不滿的時候，林鄭政府沒有理睬，反而獨行獨斷，粗暴踐踏港人的意願，結果製造出後來連綿不絕的爭拗，甚至你死我活的對抗。經歷眾多衝突痛苦之後，所謂暫緩撤回，已經微不足道，我們只是更加清楚：沒有民主，就連基本人權都不會擁有！

　　在本案之中，雖然我們都沒有鼓動或作出暴力行為，但根據早前8‧18及10‧1兩宗案件，相信在控方及法庭眼中，案發當日的暴力事件仍然可以算在我們頭上，如此，我有必要問：如果香港有一個公平正義的普及選舉，人民可以在立法會直接否決他們不認可的法律，試問2019年的暴力衝突可以從何而來呢？如果我們眼見的暴力是如此十惡不赦，那麼我們又如何看待百萬人遊行後仍然堅持推行惡法的制度暴力呢？如果我們不能接受人民暴力反抗，那麼我們是否更加不能對更巨大更壓逼的制度暴力沈默不言？真正且經常發生的暴力，是漠視人民訴求的暴力，是踐踏人民意見的暴力，是剝奪人民表達權利的暴力。真正憎恨暴力，痛恨暴力的人，不可能一方面指摘暴力反抗，又容忍制度暴力。如果我需要承擔和平遊行引發出來的暴力事件的刑責，那麼誰應該承擔施政失敗所引發出來的社會騷亂的罪責呢？

社會之病根

　　對於法庭而言，可能2019年所發生的事情只是一場社會騷亂，務必追究違法者個人責任。然而，治亂治其本源，醫病醫其病根，我雖然公民抗命，刻意違法，控方把我帶上法庭，但我卻不應被理解為一個「犯罪個體」。2019年所發生的事情，並不是我一個人或我們這幾位被告可以促成，社會問題的癥結不是「犯罪份子」本身，而是「犯罪原因」。我明白「治亂世用重典」的道理，但如果「殺雞儆猴」是解決方法，就不會在2016年發生旺角騷亂及2017年上訴庭對示威者施以重刑後，2019年仍然會爆發出更大規模的暴力反抗。

如果不希望社會動亂，就必須正本清源，逐步落實「五大訴求」，從根本上改革，挽回民心。2019年反修例運動，其實只是2014年雨傘運動的延續而已，縱使法庭可能認為兩個運動皆是「一股歪風」所引起，但我必須澄清，兩個運動的核心就是追求民主普選，人民當家作主。在2019年11月24日區議會選舉這個最類近全民普選的選舉中，接近300萬人投票，民主派大勝，奪得17個區議會主導權，這就是整個反修例運動的民意，民意就是反對政府決策，反對制度暴力，反對推行惡法，不容爭辯，不辯自明。我們作為礦場裡的金絲雀，多次提醒政府撤回修法，並從根本上改革制度，而在10月20日的九龍遊行當然是反映民意的平台契機。如今，法庭對我們施加重刑，其實只不過是懲罰民意，將金絲雀困在鳥籠之內，甚至扼殺於鼓掌之中，窒礙表達自由。

堅持之重要

　　大運動過後的大鎮壓，使我們失去《蘋果日報》，失去教協，失去民陣，不少民主派領袖以及曾為運動付出的手足戰友都囚於獄中，不少曾經熱情投入運動的朋友亦因《國安法》的威脅轉為低調，新聞自由示威自由日漸萎縮，公民社會受到沈重打擊，我亦失去不少摯友，有感傷孤獨的時候，但我仍然相信，2019年香港人的信念，以及所展現人類的光輝持久未變。我不會忘記百萬人民冒雨捱熱抗拒暴政，抵制惡法，展現我們眾志成城；我不會忘記人潮紅海，讓道救護車，展現我們文明精神；我不會忘記年青志士直接行動反對苛政，捨身成仁，展現我們膽色勇氣；我不會忘記銀髮一族走上街頭保護年青人，展現我們彼此關懷；我不會忘記「五大訴求」，不會忘記2019年區議會選舉，展現我們有理有節。

　　法官閣下，我對於當日的所作所為，不感羞恥，毫無悔意。我能夠在出獄後與群眾同行一路，與戰友同繫一獄，實是莫大榮幸。若法治失去民主基石，將使法庭無奈地接受專制政權所訂立解釋的法律限制，隨時變成政治工具掃除異見，因此爭取民主普選，建設真正法治，追求公平正義，仍然是我的理想。在這條路上，如有必要，我仍然會公民抗命，正如終審法院海外非常任法官賀輔明（Lord Hoffmann）所言，發自良知的公民抗命有悠久及光榮的傳統，歷史將證明我們是正確的。我期望，曾與我一起遊行抗命的手足戰友要堅持信念，在艱難歲月裡毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中。

　　最後，如9年前一樣，我想借用美國民權領袖馬丁路德金牧師的一番話對我們的反對者說：「我們將以自己忍受苦難的能力，來較量你們製造苦難的能力。我們將用我們靈魂的力量，來抵禦你們物質的暴力。對我們做你們想做的事吧，我們仍然愛你們。我們不能憑良心服從你們不公正的法律，因為拒惡與為善一樣是道德責任。將我們送入監獄吧，我們仍然愛你們。」（We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you.）

　　願慈愛的主耶穌賜我們平安，與我和我一家同在，與法官閣下同在，與香港人同在。沒有暴徒，只有暴政；五大訴求，缺一不可！願榮耀歸上帝，榮光歸人民！

第五被告
黃浩銘
二零二一年八月十九日

Lest we forget the five demands: civil disobedience is morally justified
- Statement on 10‧20 Kowloon Rally
(Case No.: DCCC 535/2020)

Your Honour Judge Woodcock

In 2012, I stood before the court and admitted to violating the "Public Security Evil Law". I expressed my hope for universal suffrage, criticized the evil law as unjust, and willingly accepted the penalty for civil disobedience. Back then, I said that if the small-circle election had not been abolished and the draconian law had not disappeared, I would still be as determined as I was, and I believe that more students and citizens would join this movement. Today, universal suffrage is still a long way off, and I have been brought before the court again for trial. But in just seven years, hundreds of thousands of people have already risen up in civil disobedience against tyranny. Today, I plead guilty to "unauthorised assembly" under an unapproved evil law enacted by an unauthorised government. I do not intend to seek the court's mercy, but please allow me to take up a little time in court to present my case so that the court can consider all aspects before sentencing me.

The roots of violence

At the time when the whole anti-extradition law movement was in full-swing, I was taking responsibility for another civil disobedience case. Although I was in prison, my heart was still with the people. I witnessed the three million-person rallies on 9 June, 16 June and 18 August on television in prison, when many peace-loving people took to the streets despite the rain and bullets, to protest against unjust laws. Some people may ask, "The Government has already suspended the legislative amendments in June and formally withdrew the bill in September, but we are still demonstrating, are we not being unreasonable?" I am sure your Honour has heard of the adage "Justice delayed is justice denied". When more than a million people took to the streets to express their discontent peacefully, the Lam administration ignored them and instead acted arbitrarily, brutally trampling on the wishes of the people of Hong Kong, resulting in endless arguments and even confrontations. After so many conflicts and painful experiences, the so-called moratorium is no longer meaningful. We only know better: without democracy, we cannot even have basic human rights!

In this case, although we did not instigate or commit acts of violence, I believe that in the eyes of the prosecution and the court, the violence on the day of the incident can still be counted against us, based on the August 18 and October 1 case. And now I must ask - If Hong Kong had a fair and just universal election, and the public could directly veto laws they did not approve of at the Legislative Council, then how could the violent clashes of 2019 have come about? If the violence we see is so heinous, how do we feel about the institutional violence that insists on the imposition of draconian laws even after millions of people have taken to the streets? If we cannot accept violent rebellion, how can we remain silent in the face of even greater and more oppressive institutional violence? The true and frequent violence is the kind of violence that ignores people's demands, that tramples on their opinions, that deprives them of their right to express themselves. People who truly hate violence and abhor it cannot accuse violent resistance on the one hand and tolerate institutional violence on the other. If I have to bear the criminal responsibility for the violence caused by the peaceful demonstration, then who should bear the criminal responsibility for the social unrest caused by failed administration?

The roots of society's problems

From a court's point of view, it may be that what happened in 2019 was just a series of social unrest, and that those who broke the law must be held personally accountable. What happened in 2019 was not something that I alone or the defendants could have made possible, and the crux of the social problem was not the 'criminals' but the 'causes of crime'. I understand the concept of " applying severe punishment to a troubled world", but if "decimation" was really the solution, there would not have been more violent rebellions in 2019 after the Mongkok "riot" in 2016 and the heavy sentences handed down to protesters by the Court of Appeal in 2017.

If we do not want social unrest, we must get to the root of the problem and implement the "five demands" step by step, so as to achieve fundamental reforms and win back the hearts of the people. 2019's anti-revision movement is indeed a continuation of 2014's Umbrella Movement, and even though the court may think that both movements are caused by a "perverse wind", I must clarify that the core of both movements is the pursuit of democracy and universal suffrage, and the people being the masters of their own house. In the District Council election on 24 November 2019, which is the closest thing to universal suffrage, nearly 3 million people voted, and the democratic camp won a huge victory, winning majority in 17 District Councils. As canaries in the monetary coal mine, we have repeatedly reminded the government to withdraw the extradition bill and fundamentally reform the system, and the march in Kowloon on 20 October was certainly an opportunity to reflect public opinion. Now, by imposing heavy penalties on us, the court is only punishing public opinion, trapping the canaries in a birdcage, or even stifling them in the palm of their hands, suffocating the freedom of expression.

The importance of persistence

As a result of the crackdown after the mass movement, we lost Apple Daily, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union, and the Civil Human Rights Front. Many of our democratic leaders and comrades who had contributed to the movement were imprisoned, and many of our friends who had been passionately involved in the movement had been forced to lay low under the threat of the National Security Law. I still believe that the faith of Hong Kong people and the glory of humanity seen in 2019 will remain unchanged. I will never forget the millions of people who braved the rain and the heat to resist tyranny and evil laws, demonstrating our unity of purpose; I will never forget the crowds of people who gave way to ambulances, demonstrating our civility; I will never forget the young people who sacrificed their lives, demonstrating our courage and bravery; I will never forget the silver-haired who took to the streets to protect the youth, demonstrating our care for each other; I will never forget the "five demands" and the 2019 District Council election, demonstrating our rationality and decency.

Your Honour, I have nothing to be ashamed of and no remorse for what I did on that day. It is my great honour to be in prison with my comrades and to be able to walk with the public after my release. If the rule of law were to lose its democratic foundation, the courts would have no choice but to accept the legal restrictions set by the autocratic regime and become a political tool to eliminate dissent at any time. As Lord Hoffmann, a non-permanent overseas judge of the Court of Final Appeal, said, civil disobedience from the conscience has a long and honourable tradition, and history will prove us right. I hope that my comrades in arms who walked with me in protests will keep their faith and live in love and truth in the midst of this difficult time.

Finally, as I did nine years ago, I would like to say something to those who oppose us, borrowing the words of American civil rights leader Reverend Martin Luther King: "We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you."

Peace be with me and my family, with Your Honour, and with the people of Hong Kong. There are no thugs, only tyranny; five demands, not one less! To god be the glory and to people be the glory!

The Fifth Defendant
Wong Ho Ming
19 August 2021

一翻譯，意思就失落了。讀許多世界文學的英文譯本，許多譯者在前言都會解釋：例如，普希金的詩，在俄文中，原來有一股俄文才體現出來的磅礡，一經英譯，原意多少就失落了。不是譯者筆拙，而是兩種語文，畢竟如兩個人的性格，要把他們匹配在一起，無論怎樣水乳交融，總有些字眼傳遞的感覺，是英文無法表達的。

Lost in Translation，是一個翻譯家無法訴說的遺憾。原文含蓄百轉千迴，話中有話，意外別有洞天，他十分清楚，但翻譯的搜索枯腸，確實找不到心心相印的字眼。此中有真意，欲說已無言，翻譯家常常有這樣的痛苦，不是不精通外文，而是翻譯時多方尋覓還是無法搭得上電線。

例如：中文一句：「捨不得啊」，怎樣英譯呢？ Cannot afford？太冰硬了。 Miss it very much？也不是這個意思。中文的「依依不捨」，一硬譯成英文，原文的那股纏綿繾綣的意思就失落了，這就叫 Lost in translation。

還有，從前的中國少女，向男人撒嬌，一跺腳，喜歡說：「我不依你」。「我不依你」，有千般的嗲氣，萬分的嫵媚，在輕罵之中，帶有像絲一樣的溫情，不可能英譯，這是語文的一種奇特的意態，再高手的大師，在外文也找不到一項言詞的配混。

還是英文和法文之間比較易溝通。大量的法語詞彙，直接入侵英文，像 Deja-vu，乾脆用法文原文入英，市場不干預 Laissez-faire，法文最先發明，今天已無國界。連開演唱會，最後一句 Encore，也必定由千萬歌迷狂呼高喊才有地動山搖的震撼，用英語叫 Again，或者 Once more，不行，這就叫 Lost in Translation。

人世間的溝通，常有百詞莫辯的時候。一個詞彙的精緻，一碟小菜的美味，還有一個女人的溫柔，該怎樣來傳遞而表達呢？花能解語，但語不可詮花，一切的美感都凝聚在舌尖， Lost in Translation，是一種酥在骨子裡的痛苦。惟有經歷過這樣的折磨，才明白這世界，不止翻譯是徒勞，有時溝通也是白費，真情幻意的妙諦，盡在意會之中。

【誠徵翻譯評論】

clip #39 的主題為翻譯文學，以下摘錄自海明威作品《老人與海》的原文選段，並引張愛玲、藍婷和楊照的譯本，希望收集讀者對各譯本的評語，由編輯部整理後刊於專題。

讀者可於留言欄發表評論，字數不限。

----------------------------------------------------

Original text by Ernest Hemingway:
“You better be fearless and confident yourself, old man,” he said. “You’re holding him again but you cannot get line. But soon he has to circle.”
The old man held him with his left hand and his shoulders now and stooped down and scooped up water in his right hand to get the crushed dolphin flesh off of his face. He was afraid that it might nauseate him and he would vomit and lose his strength. When his face was cleaned he washed his right hand in the water over the side and then let it stay in the salt water while he watched the first light come before the sunrise. He’s headed almost east, he thought. That means he is tired and going with the current. Soon he will have to circle. Then our true work begins.
After he judged that his right hand had been in the water long enough he took it out and looked at it.
“It is not bad,” he said. “And pain does not matter to a man.”
He took hold of the line carefully so that it did not fit into any of the fresh line cuts and shifted his weight so that he could put his left hand into the sea on the other side of the skiff.
“You did not do so badly for something worthless,” he said to his left hand. “But there was a moment when I could not find you.”

張愛玲譯：
「老頭子，你還是顧你自己吧，你也得勇敢，有自信心，」他說。「你沒讓他掙脫，但是你收不回釣絲來。但是他不久就得要轉圈子了。」
老人現在用他的左手和肩膀來拉住他，他彎下腰來用右手掬起水來，洗掉他臉上糊著的稀爛的鯕鰍肉。他怕那腥氣會使他作嘔，他一嘔吐，就沒力氣了。他臉洗乾淨了，又把右手伸在船邊的水裏洗了洗，然後就讓它泡在那鹽水裏，同時他注視著日出前天剛剛亮起來的情景。他是差不多朝東走，他想。可見魚是疲倦了，跟著潮流走。不久他就得轉圈子了。然後我們真正的工作就開始了。
他認為他的右手泡在水裏時間夠長了，就把它拿出來，朝它看看。
「不壞，」他說。「疼痛是不礙事的，並不傷人。」
他小心地握住那釣絲，使它不至於嵌進新割破的地方，他向另一邊倚著，使他可以在船那一邊把左手插到水裏去。
「你這無用的東西，這次成績倒還不錯，」他對他的左手說。「但是起初有那麼一會子我找不到你。」

藍婷譯：
「你還是自己勇敢一些，對自己要充滿信心才是、老頭。」他對自己說：「你現在只能握住繩子，可是你還不能收回繩子。相信他很快就會繞圈子了。」
老人現在用左手和肩膀撐住繩子，彎下腰用右手掬起水來，洗掉臉上糊成一團的肉渣，他很怕那腥味會使自己作嘔，只要一嘔吐，就會沒力氣了。他把臉洗乾淨，又把右手伸到船邊的水裏洗一洗，然後就讓他泡在鹽水裏，並注視著太陽升起之前的第一道曙光，魚幾乎是朝東方前進，他想，這表示牠已經很疲倦了，所以只好順著海流前進。相信等一會牠就會開始轉圈子，到那時候我們便要一決勝負了。
他認為他的右手在水裡泡得夠久了，於是便把他拿回來瞧一瞧。
「還不算壞嘛！」他說：「疼痛並不礙事，也算不了甚麼。」
他小心地握住繩子，使它不致於又磨擦新割破的地方，然後，把繩子向另一邊轉移一下，以便左手可以在船的另一邊放進海水裏面。
「你這沒用的傢伙，你還不算太差勁！」他對著自己的左手說：「不過有一陣子我差點找不到你。」

楊照譯：
「你自己最好甚麼都不怕，充滿自信，老傢伙，」他說：「你又掌握住他了，不過你沒辦法把線拉回來。不過很快地，他得繞圈圈。」
老人用左手和肩膀掌握那魚，彎下身舀水在右手，把臉上黏著的海豚魚肉洗掉。他擔心魚肉讓他噁心，一旦吐了會失去力量。臉乾淨了，他將右手伸出船沿進到水裡，然後讓手留在鹹水裡，看著太陽升起前最早的光線出現。他幾乎是朝東了，他想。這意味著他累了，所以順著洋流游。很快地他就得繞圈圈了。那樣真正的活兒就開始了。
他判斷右手在水中夠久了，他把手拿出來，盯著手看。
「還不壞，」他說：「疼痛對一個男人來說不算一回事。」
他小心地握住釣線，避免碰到新割的傷口，然後移動重心，以便能夠將左手從小船的另一邊放進海中。
「你這次還算蠻有用的，」他對左手說：「但有一陣子我找不到你。」

まりおねっと色々ちゃんねるん
@xuBtEd7OzJKdhFL

GenGenさんです!?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_6JRBOxfKRylVbEns3PS4w/live

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
初見さん・常連さん問わず気軽コメントして頂けると嬉しいです。
コメントは挨拶から入っていただけると助かります。
質疑歓迎ですが返しずらいコメントはスルーさせていただきます
できる限り返させるように頑張ります。

ちょっとでも面白いと思ったらチャンネル登録お願いします。
【生放送のルール】
誹謗・中傷・過度な下ネタ・過度な過激な言動・過度な宣伝
政治ネタNG　脱線しすぎる内容　など見ている方が不快になるコメントなどは最初だけ注意します、その後続くようなら対処します。

・配慮のないコメント
・課金の煽りなどはおやめください視聴者さん同士でも煽りはおやめください。
・過度なガチャ煽り、過度なガチャ報告基本はNGで
お願いします、Twitterなどで自分への報告は大丈夫です。
・暴言に対して反応する方
(基本、スルーでお願いします）
酷い場合はブロックなどします。
・誹謗中傷、および人が嫌がること言動はNG
・親しき中にも礼儀
・過度な下ネタ、卑猥な発言
海外の方も気軽にコメントしていただけると嬉しいです
Google翻訳を使って調べながらになってしまうので返信が遅れてしまうことが
あります、申し訳ありません。


コラボや企画、お仕事などはTwitterのDMにお願いいたします。

Twitter　
https://twitter.com/xuBtEd7OzJKdhFL?lang=ja
ボイスねっとん！！
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqRDixCroGDQM_L_V4V9SqA

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxQqPrDzS7v8AKWJTiXci2g?disable_polymer=true
小説
https://ncode.syosetu.com/n8418em/
Thank you for watching.
I am happy if you can comment casually whether Mr. Hatsumi and regulars.
Although I am welcoming questions, I will throw through comments
I will do my best to return as much as possible.

I would be happy if you would like to comment overseas as well
It will be delayed as the reply will be checked using Google translation
There is no excuse.

If you think that it is a little interesting, please register your channel.

【Rules of live broadcast】
Comments such as slander · slander · excessive down-speech · excessive publicity, etc. making it uncomfortable for those looking

· Unconscious comments

· Those who react to insult
(Basic, Through please)
If it is severe it will block etc.
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝


チャンネル登録よろしくお願いします

youtube声優です。
Voice actor
Acteur vocal
Sprecher