<p>他用非此即彼 is a sentence fragment, thus Google translate does not translate it well.</p>

<p>非此即彼 literally means "if not this, then it is that", leaving no other choice. 
I think 非此即彼的二元论 means "binary terms, which means leaving only two choices", it is not a literal translation but one with additional information as ordinary people may not know what 二元论 means.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-31T04:47:46.437Z
even if one knows what 二元论 is, this word has multiple meanings. 非此即彼的二元论 is one of them. However, I do think this translation is poor.
Danke Xie
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-29T20:32:01.633Z
2014-05-29T20:45:12.507Z
2014-05-29T20:45:12.507Z
xngtng
<p>非此即彼 means 非(not)此(this)即（then)彼（that)
二元论 - binary system</p>

<p>Here, "非此即彼" and "二元论" express the same meaning. It seems duplicate. But as said by @zhantongz "binary system"(二元论) is a term too difficult for ordinary people, "非此即彼" is an official expression easier to understand. </p>

<p>I think that's why NY Times translate it like this. It's a bit complex but reasonable:)</p>

<p>Hope this can help</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-30T13:25:51.693Z
2014-05-30T13:25:51.693Z
user3690966
<p>I'm having problems figuring The NY Times' translation. Why so complex?</p>

<p>他用非此即彼的二元论来表述这个选择. He presented the choice in binary terms</p>

<p>So Google Translate gives me:</p>

<p>他用非此即彼 - He used one or the other.</p>

<p>This I don't get it. He used not 此-this 即-? 彼- that</p>

<p>二元论 - dualism</p>

<p>来表述这个选择 - to formulate these options</p>

<p>Here's the context:</p>

<p>奥巴马说，有朝一日，当美国不再受到直接威胁时，“军事行动的门槛必须要提得更高。”他用非此即彼的二元论来表述这个选择，暗示他的批评者想用武力解决全球的许多麻烦。</p>

<p>In the future, when the United States is not directly threatened, “the threshold for military action must be higher,” Mr. Obama said. He presented the choice in binary terms, suggesting that his critics want to use force to solve many of the world’s troubles.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-05-29T19:49:34.250Z
非此即彼 is a philosophical term (in English it's called "Either/Or"). I think this translation is much too complex.
musicnothing
<translation>
NY Times 翻译: He presented the choice in binary terms - 他用非此即彼的二元论来表述这个选择. Too complex?
# NY Times 翻译: He presented the choice in binary terms - 他用非此即彼的二元论来表述这个选择. Too complex?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-05-29)

I'm having problems figuring The NY Times' translation. Why so complex?

他用非此即彼的二元论来表述这个选择. He presented the choice in binary terms

So Google Translate gives me:

他用非此即彼 - He used one or the other.

This I don't get it. He used not 此-this 即-? 彼- that

二元论 - dualism

来表述这个选择 - to formulate these options

Here's the context:

奥巴马说，有朝一日，当美国不再受到直接威胁时，“军事行动的门槛必须要提得更高。”他用非此即彼的二元论来表述这个选择，暗示他的批评者想用武力解决全球的许多麻烦。

In the future, when the United States is not directly threatened, “the threshold for military action must be higher,” Mr. Obama said. He presented the choice in binary terms, suggesting that his critics want to use force to solve many of the world’s troubles.

**Tags:** translation

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: 非此即彼 is a philosophical term (in English it's called "Either/Or"). I think this translation is much too complex.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2014-05-29. Score: 3

他用非此即彼 is a sentence fragment, thus Google translate does not translate it well.

非此即彼 literally means "if not this, then it is that", leaving no other choice.
I think 非此即彼的二元论 means "binary terms, which means leaving only two choices", it is not a literal translation but one with additional information as ordinary people may not know what 二元论 means.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: even if one knows what 二元论 is, this word has multiple meanings. 非此即彼的二元论 is one of them. However, I do think this translation is poor.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2014-05-30. Score: 1

非此即彼 means 非(not)此(this)即（then)彼（that)
二元论 - binary system

Here, "非此即彼" and "二元论" express the same meaning. It seems duplicate. But as said by @zhantongz "binary system"(二元论) is a term too difficult for ordinary people, "非此即彼" is an official expression easier to understand.

I think that's why NY Times translate it like this. It's a bit complex but reasonable:)

Hope this can help


---

