"It's nothing. I'm fine."

「沒事，我很好。」

"These allegations are completely unfounded."

「這些指控毫無根據。」

"The company was not aware of any wrongdoing."

「本公司對於任何違法行為一概不知。」

"I love you."

「我愛你。」

We hear anywhere from 10 to 200 lies a day, and we spent much of our history coming up with the ways to detect them.

我們每天聽到約 10-200 個謊，而且自古以來，我們不斷想辦法辨識這些謊言。

From medieval torture devices to polygraphs, blood pressure and breathing monitors, voice stress analyzers,

包括中世紀的刑具到現代的測謊機，血壓心跳偵測器、聲音壓力分析儀、

eye trackers, infrared brain scanners, and even the 400-pound electroencephalogram.

眼動追蹤器、紅外線大腦掃描機，甚至重達 400 磅（180 公斤）的腦波儀。

But although such tools have worked under certain circumstances, most can be fooled with enough preparation.

儘管這些工具已經在特定情況下發揮作用，但只要充分準備，大多能唬弄過去。

And none are considered reliable enough to even be admissible in court.

而且沒有一項測謊工具被法庭認可有足夠可靠度。

But what if the problem is not with the techniques, but the underlying assumption that lying spurs physiological changes?

但如果問題不在於技術，而在說謊引起的生理變化呢？

What if we took a more direct approach, using communication science to analyze the lies themselves?

我們何不直接一點，從溝通學的角度來分析謊言？

On a psychological level, we lie partly to paint a better picture of ourselves,

從心理層面來看，說謊是為了呈現自己美好的一面，

connecting our fantasies to the person we wish we were rather than the person we are.

以連結幻想中的完美自我，而不是現實中的自我。

But while our brain is busy dreaming, it's letting plenty of signals slip by.

但腦袋忙著編織美夢的時候，許多訊號就溜掉了。

Our conscious mind only controls about 5% of our cognitive function, including communication,

我們的意識只控制 5% 的認知功能，其中包含溝通，

while the other 95% occurs beyond our awareness.

其餘的95%則由潛意識控制。

And according to the literature on reality monitoring, stories based on imagined experiences are qualitatively different from those based on real experiences.

另外，根據文獻中的現實監測，依想像經歷所編的故事和根據實際經歷所編的故事，兩者在性質上並不相同。

This suggests that creating a false story about a personal topic takes work and results in a different pattern of language use.

這意味著捏造個人的故事很費功夫，導致用字遺詞的模式不同。

A technology known as linguistic text analysis has helped to identify four such common patterns in the subconscious language of deception.

一種叫做「語境分析」的技術幫我們找出了四種常見的潛意識謊言特徵。

First, liars reference themselves less when making deceptive statements.

第一、說謊的人編造謊言時較少提到自己。

They write or talk more about others, often using the third person to distance and disassociate themselves from their lie.

他們把書寫或話題焦點擺在別人身上，經常藉由他人讓自己從謊言中抽身。

Which sounds more false, "Absolutely no party took place at this house" or "I didn't host a party here"?

哪一句聽起來比較假：「絕對沒有任何派對在這裡舉行」或「我沒有在這裡舉辦派對」？

Second, liars tend to be more negative, because on a subconscious level, they feel guilty about lying.

第二、說謊者往往比較負面，因為在潛意識中，他們因撒謊而良心不安。

For example, a liar might say something like, "Sorry, my stupid phone battery died. I hate that thing."

舉例來說，說謊者可能會說「抱歉我的爛手機掛了，恨死它了！」

Third, liars typically explain events in simple terms, since our brains struggle to build a complex lie.

第三、說謊者通常會用淺白的字詞來說明事情，因為我們的大腦要編織複雜的謊言很費力。

Judgment and evaluation are complex things for our brains to compute.

判斷及評估對大腦而言相當複雜。

As a US President once famously insisted, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

如同前美國總統著名的發言：「我跟那位女士沒有發生性關係」。

And finally, even though liars keep descriptions simple, they tend to use longer and more convoluted sentence structure,

最後一點，雖然說謊者用字淺白，卻常常拐彎抹角，

inserting unnecessary words and irrelevant but factual-sounding details in order to pad the lie.

穿插多餘的字句和貌似合理但無關緊要的瑣事來陪襯謊言。

Another President confronted with a scandal proclaimed,

另一位美國總統面對醜聞時聲稱：

"I can say, categorically, that this investigation indicates that no one on the White House staff,

「我敢說，絕對地，調查結果顯示沒有任何一位白宮人員、

no one in this administration presently employed, was involved in this very bizarre incident."

沒有任何一位現任公務員涉入這起荒謬的醜聞。」

Let's apply linguistic analysis to some famous examples.

讓我們從語言學的角度來分析一些有名的例子。

Take seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong.

以七次環法自行車賽冠軍藍斯・阿姆斯壯為例。

When comparing a 2005 interview, in which he had denied taking performance-enhancing drugs, to a 2013 interview, in which he admitted it,

比較他在 2005 年否認服用禁藥以及 2013 年承認用藥的訪問，

his use of personal pronouns increased by nearly three-quarters.

他後者聲明中多了近四分之三的代名詞。

Note the contrast between the following two quotes.

比較以下兩句發言。

First: "Okay, you know, a guy in a French, in a Parisian laboratory opens up your sample, you know, Jean-Francis so-and-so, and he tests it,

第一句：「好，有個巴黎實驗室的傢伙拿出你的樣本，叫尚法蘭西什麼的，他取出你的樣本測試，

and then you get a phone call from a newspaper that says: 'We found you to be positive six times for EPO.'"

然後你就接到報社電話說：『你的紅血生成素 6 次都呈陽性反應』」。

Second: "I lost myself in all of that. I'm sure there would be other people that couldn't handle it,

第二句：「我徹底的迷失了。我相信也有人無法抵擋這種誘惑，

but I certainly couldn't handle it, and I was used to controlling everything in my life. I controlled every outcome in my life."

但我是真的無法控制了。以前我習慣掌控人生中的每件事，能掌握自己人生中每件事情的後果。」

In his denial, Armstrong described a hypothetical situation focused on someone else, removing himself from the situation entirely.

阿姆斯壯在否認時，描述了一段假設情境，把焦點放在別人身上，自己則完全抽離。

In his admission, he owns his statements, delving into his personal emotions and motivations,

但當他坦承用藥，他誠然面對他的說詞，深入探究了自己的情緒及動機，

but the use of personal pronouns is just one indicator of deception.

不過，使用代名詞只是謊話的其中一項線索。

Let's look at another example from former Senator and US presidential candidate John Edwards.

我們再看另一個例子，出自前參議員及美國總統候選人約翰・艾德華。

"I only know that the apparent father has said publicly that he is the father of the baby.

「我只知道小孩的生父曾公開承認這孩子是他的。

I also have not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to,

而我個人從未表示我曾被要求、同意，

or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby."

或提供任何形式的金援給這位女士或者小孩的生父。」

Not only is that a pretty long-winded way to say, "The baby isn't mine,"

艾德華不僅拐彎抹角地說「小孩不是我的」，

but Edwards never calls the other parties by name, instead saying "that baby", "the woman", and "the apparent father".

他也從未提及當事人的名字，而是用「這名小孩」、「那位女士」和「生父」帶過。

Now, let's see what he had to say when later admitting paternity.

我們再來看看他後來承認父女關係時的說法。

"I am Quinn's father. I will do everything in my power to provide her with the love and support she deserves."

「我是昆恩的父親，我會盡我所能給她應得的愛與支持。」

The statement is short and direct, calling the child by name and addressing his role in her life.

這次的聲明簡潔有力，直呼孩子的名字並強調與孩子的關係。

So how can you apply these lie-spotting techniques to your life?

那這些謊言偵測技巧如何運用到生活中呢？

First, remember that many of the lies we encounter on a daily basis are far less serious than these examples, and may even be harmless.

首先，我們日常生活中聽到的謊，都比以上的例子來的稀鬆平常，甚至無傷大雅。

But it's still worthwhile to be aware of telltale clues like minimal self-references, negative language, simple explanations, and convoluted phrasing.

但這些線索仍值得留意，像是迴避提及自己、負面的言語、簡化的說法和冗詞贅字。

It just might help you avoid an overvalued stock, an ineffective product, or even a terrible relationship.

或許你就不會踩到地雷股、買到沒用的商品或陷入一段糟糕的感情關係中。