黑马非马: 语言中的磕磕碰碰 (娱乐至上)

By N. Gregory Mankiw Published in The American Economist

My assignment is to describe how I work. I take on this task with mixed feelings. One can easily become vain in the process of public introspection, and vanity is a trait best left private. It is not entirely clear to me why anyone should care about idiosyncrasies--except, perhaps, for my colleagues, students, and family, who have no choice but to live with them.

接到编辑部的邀请说，要我介绍一下我的工作经验，这令我有点百感交集。在公众面前自省容易使人飘飘然，而这种虚荣心我觉得还是放在私底下比较好。除了跟我生活在一起而别无选择的同事们，学生和家人，我不太清楚为什么其他人也会关心我的这些脾性。

Yet when other economists write essays of this sort, I enjoy reading them. I like to think that these essays edify me in some way, but at the very least they appeal to the voyeur in me. So, I figured, others may learn from a brief essay about how I work. Or, at least, they may be amused by it.

然而，我很是喜欢看其他经济学家写的这类文章，在某种程度上，那些文章给我以启发，最起码也能满足我的一些窥私欲。因此我想，其他人或许能从我的工作经验中学到点什么东西，或至少说能从中得到些乐趣什么的。

I have organized this essay around six rules of thumb that I follow as I go about my working life. I have chosen these rules largely for their positive value-- they describe my behavior. I do not pretend that the way I work necessarily holds any prescriptive value for anyone else. But it may. If these rules of thumb ring true to others and help them to run their lives, so much the better.

这篇文章里，我把我的工作经验总结为六条原则。我写下这些经验是因为它们的积极价值—能很好地描述我的行为。不肯定我的工作经验一定对他人有重大价值，但或许有所裨益。如果这些经验对某些人有用并能够帮助到他们的生活，那无疑是最好不过。

Rule No. 1：Learn from the Right Mentors

Rule No. 1：良师诤友

I learned how to practice my trade from four distinguished economists. Perhaps the reason was good career planning on my part. More likely, it was just good luck.

从四位优秀的经济学家那里我学会了如何进行我的职业研究(trade)。而就我自己而言，可能是因为我有一个良好的生涯规划，更可能的是，我仅仅是运气好而已。

In the spring of 1977, as a freshman at Princeton, I took Principles of Microeconomics from Harvey Rosen. Harvey was an excellent teacher. I remember finding the material easy and, at the same time, feeling that I was learning a tremendous amount. Each lecture was filled with insights that were novel, profound, and so stunningly obvious that it seemed I should have known them all my life. But, of course, I didn't. Principles of microeconomics was the most eye-opening course I have ever taken. All subsequent courses in economics have exhibited the property of diminishing returns.

1977年春，我还是普林斯顿的大一新生的时候，我选了Harvey Rosen的微观经济学原理。Harvey是个好导师。我仍记得，从容地找资料学知识，同时还觉得从中能学到了很多很多。他的每一堂都是那么地富有真知灼见，那么新奇，那么深奥，而又是那般令人震撼的浅显，仿佛这一生都要去追寻这些知识。不过当然，我没有去这么做。微观经济学原理是我上过的最有启迪、开眼界的一门课，以致后来在上过的其他经济学课程中所学到的都无法与其相媲美。

For reasons that are a mystery to me now, Harvey hired me as a research assistant for the summer after my freshman year. I knew very little economics, for I had taken only the two principles courses. I did know something about computer programming (a fact that surprised my own research assistants, for changes in technology have made this human capital long obsolete). For whatever reason, Harvey did hire me, and the experience proved invaluable. I knew so little that Harvey had to teach me whatever he needed me to know. Spending a summer being tutored by a top teacher and scholar is the best learning experience I can imagine. To this day, I have never learned so much in so short a period of time.

为什么Harvey会在大一暑假雇我作他的研究助理，这个原因我仍不得而知，现在还一直是个谜团。当时我只上过两门经济学基础课程，对经济学知之甚少。我只是对计算机编程有点了解(这一点也是我的研究助理所感到惊奇的，技术变革已使这种人力资本很早就过时了)。不管怎样，Harvey还是雇了我，后来的事实证明那是一次非常珍贵的经历和体验。由于我对经济学不甚熟悉，Harvey不得不教我很多他得使我理解掌握的知识。整个暑假在一位卓越的导师和学者那里接受最悉心的较导，是我所能想得到的最棒的学习历程了。时至今日，我还没在如此之短的时间内学到那么多的东西。

Eventually, my interests drifted toward macroeconomics. As a senior at Princeton, I took graduate macroeconomics from Alan Blinder, another excellent teacher. At the same time, I wrote my senior thesis under Alan's supervision. In the thesis, I tried to make sense of the cyclical behavior of the real wage, which has puzzled macroeconomists at least since the publication of Keynes's General Theory. Part of my senior thesis became a paper co-authored with Alan, which we later published in the Journal of Monetary Economics. More important, as I worked on the thesis, I became convinced that imperfections in goods markets were at least as important as imperfections in labor markets for understanding the business cycle. This conviction eventually led to my involvement in a line of research now called New Keynesian Economics.

到后来，我的兴趣转移到宏观经济学上去了。大四的时候，我上了Alan Blinder的宏观经济学研究生课程，他也是个优秀的导师。那时我在他的指导下写我的毕业论文。论文中，我力图搞清楚实际工资的周期特征 (the cyclical behavior of the real wage) ，这个问题至少从凯恩斯的《货币通论》出版以来就一直困惑着宏观经济学家。后来，毕业论文的某部分内容在货币经济学杂志 (Journal of Monetary Economics) 上由我和Alan共同署名发表。尤为重要的是，随着我对论文研究的逐 渐深入，我愈加相信，在对商业周期(business cycle)的理解上，货物市场的非理想状态 (imperfections in goods markets) 至少和劳动力市场的非理想状态 (imperfections in labor markets) 的地位是值得相提并论，等量齐观的。最终，在这个信念的引领下，我选择了现在被称作新凯恩斯主义经济学 (New Keynesian Economics) 的研究工作。

When I entered MIT's graduate program in the fall of 1980, Larry Summers was a young assistant professor. Larry's enthusiasm, breadth of knowledge, and quick mind attracted me, and we spoke together at MIT during the year and at NBER during the following summer. When Martin Feldstein brought Larry to work at the Council of Economic Advisers in September 1982, Larry brought me along with him. I was fortunate to be able to work closely with Larry during the brief period when he was already a great economist but not yet a famous one.

在1980年我进入MIT研究生院深造时，Larry Summers 还是位年轻的助理副教授 (assistant professor) ，他激情四射，经纶满腹，思维敏捷，这些都深深地吸引了我。 在MIT的第一年和接下来的在(美国)国家经济研究局(NBER)那个夏天，我们相谈甚欢。1982年9月，Martin Feldstein 带他到(美国)经济顾问委员会 (Council of Economic Advisers) 工作是，而他又捎上了我。时间虽短，能和Larry共事还是一件很幸运的事，那时他虽非如雷灌耳，但也颇有成就了。

When I returned to MIT, Stanley Fischer served as my dissertation adviser, as he did for a remarkable number of students in my class. Stan was a model of professorial balance. As a lecturer, he gave clear and even-handed presentations in a field that can be confusing and divisive. As an adviser, he encouraged students to pursue their interests with the highest standard of rigor without imposing his own intellectual agenda on them. My dissertation, like most in recent years, was a collection of loosely related papers bound together for the sole purpose of getting a degree. It bore the soporific title, "Essays on Consumption."

我回到MIT后，Stanley Fischer成了我的毕业论文导师 (dissertation adviser) ，他还带了班里的很多学生。Stan在研究和教学之间做得非常好，堪称典范。作为一个讲师，不论主题多么繁复，他都表达清晰，讲解公正 (even-handed) ，显得尤为游刃有余；作为一个导师，他鼓励学生们按追寻兴趣，严格要求，但他也不把自己的学术日程 (intellectual agenda) 强加于人。就像近些年为混个学位的论文一样，当初我的毕业论文就是很多题旨松散论文拼凑起来的大杂烩。论文题目是毫无新意令人反胃的“论消费”。

When I look back at these four mentors-- Rosen, Blinder, Summers, and Fischer-- I see in them various characteristics that I have developed over time. They are prolific writers. Their research tends to be empirical and policy-oriented. They take teaching seriously.

回首我的四位导师——Rosen, Blinder, Summers, and Fischer，我在他们身上发现并逐渐学到了他们的各种优点和品格。他们都是著作等身的大学问家。他们的工作都是倾向于经验和以国家政策为导向的研究，治学严谨，堪为世范。

All of my mentors have shown interest in reaching a broader audience than can be found writing in academic journals. All four of them have taken time away from academia to work in policy jobs in Washington. Three out of four have written textbooks, and two of them have written more than one textbook.

从他们的学术著作中可知，我的导师们乐于找到更多的听众。他们总是从学术研究中抽空参与华府的政策研究工作中去。四人之中，三人写过教科书，有两人更是不止一本。

It is easy to see why mentors matter. Mentors determine your professional outlook in much the way that parents determine your personal outlook. Mentors, like parents, give you your values. They teach you what kind of behavior to respect and what to avoid. And they teach these lessons indirectly, more often through their actions than through their words. The major difference is that your parents are predetermined. You get to choose your mentors.

很容易可以理解跟从良师的重要性。他们在很大程度上决定了我们的学术前途，就像我们的父母决定我们的个人前途。像父母那样，他们引导我们的价值观。他们教会我们该敬重什么和避免什么。更多时候，他们是身教多于言传地间接教导我们。其中的差异就是父母是命中注定的，但你可以选择你的导师。

Rule No. 2: Work With Good Co-Workers

Rule No. 2: 合作发展

I have been lucky to be able to work with many talented coauthors.In approximate order of appearance, they include Alan Blinder, Bryan Boulier, Larry Summers, Julio Rotemberg, Matthew Shapiro, David Runkle, Avery Katz, Bob Barsky, Steve Zeldes, Jeff Miron, Mike Whinston, John Campbell, Andy Abel, Richard Zeckhauser, David Romer, Larry Ball, MilesKimball, David Weil, Olivier Blanchard, Susanto Basu, Robert Barro, Xavier Sala-i-Martin, Bob Hall, Niko Canner, and Doug Elmendorf. Some of these co-authors were my mentors, others were my contemporaries (often fellow students at MIT), and still others were students of mine at Harvard. In recent years, I have done most of my research with these co-authors.

我很有幸能与许多才华横溢的同事一起工作合写论文。我 先后和Alan Blinder, Bryan Boulier, Larry Summers, Julio Rotemberg, Matthew Shapiro, David Runkle, Avery Katz, Bob Barsky, Steve Zeldes, Jeff Miron, Mike Whinston, John Campbell, Andy Abel, Richard Zeckhauser, David Romer, Larry Ball, MilesKimball, David Weil, Olivier Blanchard, Susanto Basu, Robert Barro, Xavier Sala-i-Martin, Bob Hall, Niko Canner, 以及Doug Elmendorf 等在一起工作过。他们之中，有的是我导师；有的是我同龄同道 (多为在MIT学习的(研究生)同学) ；还有的是我在哈佛的学生。近年来我也和他们完成过很多研究项目。

Why are co-authors so important for the way I work?

为什么共事者对我的工作方式很重要呢？

One reason is found in Adam Smith's famous story of the pin factory. Smith observed that the pin factory was so productive because it allowed workers to specialize. Research is no different--it is just another form of production. Doing research takes various skills: identifying questions, developing models, providing theorems, finding data, expositing results. Because few economists excel at all these tasks, collaborating authors can together do things that each author could not do as easily on his own. In manufacturing knowledge, as in manufacturing pins, specialization raises productivity. (The puzzle is why Adam Smith chose to ignore his own analysis and write The Wealth of Nations without the benefit of a co-author.)

理由之一就是在亚当·斯密 (Adam Smith) 的那个大头针工厂的典故里面。他发现，大头针工厂之所以会高效生产，是因为工人自行分工，专业生产。研究工作也是殊途同归——它也只是另一种形式的生产。做研究需要各种能力：理清问题、构造模型、提出法则、寻找数据、诠释结果等等。很少有单个的经济学者在各个方面都出类拔萃，而在一起合作共事可以解决原本无法独自轻松搞定的问题。创造知识，如同生产大头针一样，专业化才会有高产出。(奇怪的是，亚当·斯密并没有像他自己分析的那样进行专业分工，与人一起合著《国富论》。)

The second reason I work with co-authors is that it makes my job less solitary. Research and writing can be a lonely activity. It is easy to spend endless hours with a pad and pencil or in front of a computer without human contact. Some people may like that kind of work, but not me. Arguing with my co-authors makes my day more fun.

理由之二，一起共事研究，他们使我的工作不再孤立，相反和他们的联系更为密切。研究和写作可以是独立的事情。因为我们可以轻而易举地做到长时间在拿着只笔在草稿纸上做计算，或者独自一人坐在电脑前面工作。也许有些人会喜欢这样，但我不是。因为和其他同事一起工作，讨论问题时，大家坚持自己的主张会使工作更轻松有趣。

The third reason I work with co-authors is the most important: a good co-author improves you forever. In the most successful collaborations, both co-authors learn from the experience. A co-author can help you expand your knowledge, improve your skills, and expose your biases. Even after the collaboration is over, you take these benefits with you to future projects. To a large extent, as I have grown older, my co-authors have become my mentors.

理由之三，这也是我跟同事合著的最重要的一个原因，一个好的同事常常会使你进步。在绝大部分的成功合作中，双方都可以从中获益。他可以帮你扩展你的专业知识，提高你的研究能力，暴露你的学术偏见。乃至在合作完成之后，你还可以把这些带到日后的研究中去。随着我的年龄增长，我的合作者在很大程度上说来也是我的导师。