What is a sufficient courtship length?
恋爱期多长才算足够呢？
When I give talks on how to make wise decisions about love relationships, the burning question that someone almost always asks is, “How long do I have to wait?”
当我开展关于如何在恋爱关系中做出明智选择的演讲时，几乎每次都会有人迫不及待地抛出这个问题：“我到底得等多久才合适呀？”
The phrasing of this question illustrates the fact that waiting can feel like working against the tide of biology and the romantic rush of falling in love and making it official.
这一问题的表述说明了这样一个事实，即等待会让人感觉像是在与生物本能以及坠入爱河并确立正式关系的浪漫冲动相抗衡。
To this question, I respond that most of the things that are worth achieving in life require us to delay gratification and to prioritize restraint over indulgence in more primitive drives.
对于这个问题，我的答案是，生命中绝大多数值得努力去成就的事都需要我们学会延迟满足，把克制自我放在首位，而不是一味地放纵那些更为原始的本能冲动。
Recall Walter Mischel's marshmallow study, which showed the value of the ability to delay gratification.
不妨回顾一下沃尔特·米歇尔的棉花糖实验，这一实验彰显了延迟满足能力的重要价值。
Mischel offered a group of 4-year-old children one large, puffy marshmallow, but told them all that if they would wait for him to run an errand, they could have not one, but two, lovely marshmallows.
实验中，米歇尔给一群四岁孩童每人分发了一颗蓬松绵软的大棉花糖，但是告知他们，要是能等他外出办完事回来再吃，届时他们收获的将不仅仅是一颗，而是两颗香甜诱人的棉花糖。
Some of the 4-year-olds were able to control their impulse to snatch up and consume their marshmallows for the duration of Mischel’s 15–20-minute errand (which must have felt like several lifetimes for these 4-year-olds). Others could not.
在米歇尔外出办事的15到20分钟里（对4岁大的孩子来说，这段时间想必如同度过了好几辈子），有些孩子能够克制住自己一把抓起棉花糖吃掉的冲动。有的孩子却没能忍住。
Mischel followed up with his subjects many years later and found that the ability to control impulses and delay gratification was associated with success in many different areas of life as an adult.
多年后，米歇尔对当年的实验对象进行了追踪回访，结果发现，控制冲动和延迟满足的能力与成年后在生活诸多不同领域的成功存在关联。
So, in the realm to waiting a sufficient length of time before marrying, are you willing to wait for an endless supply of lovely marshmallows, or do you want to bite down, right now, on something that resembles a marshmallow but may well turn into a bag of pus once you’ve committed? I wonder if this explains why the Spanish word "esposa" means both “wives” and “handcuffs”?
那么，再回到等待足够长的时间再步入婚姻这个问题，你是愿意等着享用那源源不断的美味“棉花糖”，还是现在就迫不及待地咬上一口看似像棉花糖，可等你一旦决定结婚就很可能变成一包脓液的东西呢？我不禁琢磨，这会不会就是西班牙语里“esposa”这个词既表示“妻子”，又表示“手铐”的原因呢？
But, of course, pointing out that not rushing into a pre-mature commitment is very difficult when we’re in love doesn’t really address the question at hand — that is, how long is it until the cocaine-rush of initial infatuation wears off, and you can make a good decision?
不过，当然啦，热恋时很难做到不急于许下不成熟的承诺，光是强调这一点并不能切实解决我们眼下的问题——我们需要弄清楚的是，起初那种好似吸食可卡因般的热恋劲儿究竟要多久才会消退，好让我们能理智地做出抉择。
Some marital experts would argue that two years is a good amount of time to wait.
有些婚姻专家主张，等待两年是一个较为适宜的时间跨度。
If you are looking for a general rule of thumb, then two years is probably a good length of time for most people, but I don’t personally favor any hard-and-fast rule about how long a courtship should be.
倘若你在找寻一条普适的经验准则，那么对于大多数人而言，两年或许可算作一段较为理想的恋爱时长。不过，我个人并不赞同给恋爱期的长短设定任何绝对化的规则。
I think it depends completely on the character of the people involved, how often they see each other, in what situation(s) they spend their time dating, and how intentional they are about discovering their degree of fit.
我觉得这完全取决于恋爱双方的性格特质、见面的频次、约会时所处的场景氛围，以及他们是否有心去探究彼此契合的程度。
In some cases, it may be wise to wait three or more years before making a decision, and in other cases, a couple may be able to make a wise decision in less than two years.
在某些情形下，等待三年甚至更久再作决定或许才是明智的选择；而在另一些情形里，一对情侣可能用不了两年就能做出明智的选择。
As I write this, I’m imagining that some readers may be thinking, “Three years? Really? That seems like much too long!”
在撰写这篇文章时，我就料到有些读者或许会想：“三年？真的吗？这未免也太久了！”
If you are thinking along these lines, the question to ask is, “When might it be wise to wait three years or longer?”
如果你也是这么想的，那不妨反问自己：“什么情况下等待三年甚至更久才是明智之举呢？”
To this, I would say, a lengthy courtship would be wise any time three years (or more) have passed, but you still know relatively little about each other.
对此，我想说，当你们携手走过了三年（或更久），却依然对彼此知之甚少时，延长恋爱期就是明智之选。
For example, consider the case of a courtship that has played out during multiple successive military deployments.
举个例子，设想有这么一段恋情，它在一轮又一轮连续的军事部署期间悄然滋长。
A military combat deployment is one of the most emotionally super-charged environments imaginable. Life and death may be at stake daily. The threat of loss of the other boosts attraction considerably for both partners.
军事作战部署环境堪称人们所能预想到的情绪张力最为强烈的场景之一。身处其中，每一天都有可能面临生死考验。失去对方的危机感会极大程度地提升彼此之间的吸引力。
Lack of access to each other, paired with short-lived reunions during R & R weekends, fuels unrealistic fantasies of the true potential of the relationship.
两人聚少离多，只能趁着休整周末短暂相会，如此一来，便催生了对这段关系真实发展潜力的诸多不切实际的幻想。（译者注：R & R 为 Rest and Recuperation（休整与恢复） 的缩写，通常指在军事部署或高强度工作期间，为士兵或工作人员提供的短暂休假时间。）
Real compatibility is hard to assess based on limited opportunities for interaction.
在交流机会寥寥无几的情况下，很难判断两人是否真的合拍。
The fantasy script of the stateside partner incorporates the potent thought, “My partner is a hero,” and all sorts of positive traits are then linked to this global perception.
留守国内一方的幻想剧本中会融入一种强烈的认知——“我的爱人是英雄”，继而将各种美好品质都投射到这个整体印象中。
On the flip side, it’s quite heady stuff to be told that you are the person a soldier holds in his or her heart amidst the chaos of war.
另一方面，当听到身处混乱战场的军人将你视作心中至宝时，任谁都会心潮澎湃。
In this case, a much longer courtship may be necessary if you want to make a good decision.
在这种情况下，若想做出明智抉择，或许就需要一段更长的恋爱期。
Extending the courtship period in all cases will progressively minimize your relative risk of developing lasting regrets down the line.
在所有情况下，延长恋爱期都能逐步降低你日后心生持久遗憾的相对风险。
Getting married is described as a leap of faith for a reason, but when you wait a significant length of time before you “make it official,” the leap is not nearly so great.
人们将婚姻形容为“信仰之跃”（译者注：“信仰之跃”意味着个体在面对无法用理性证明的信仰时，选择相信并接受这种信仰）是有原因的，不过，若你在“正式确定关系”之前等待足够长的时间，那么这“一跃”的风险就没那么大了。
In each audience that I’ve spoken to about marital decision-making, there is almost always someone who raises a hand and says, “My parents fell in love and got married a month later, and they’ve been completely happy together for the last 50 years.”
每次当我与听众探讨婚姻决策问题时，几乎每次都会有人举手发言：“我爸妈一见钟情，认识才一个月就结婚啦，这五十年来，他们一直琴瑟和鸣、幸福美满。”
The core of this statement is an assertion that lifelong happy marriages are possible with very short courtships. I wouldn’t disagree with this.
这句话的核心在于一个论断，即：即使恋爱期很短，也完全有可能缔结一段终身幸福的婚姻。对于这一点，我并无异议。
My point is that it’s a matter of relative risk.
我想表达的是，这其实是个相对风险高低的问题。
Sure, a handful of marriages might thrive after short courtships, but for every one of these examples, a much greater number end in divorce.
诚然，确实存在少数婚姻，即便恋爱期较短，也能发展得美满幸福。然而，对应每一个这样的成功案例，往往会有更多以离婚收场的失败案例。
So, in all cases, if we were to honestly weigh the emotional, psychological, and financial costs of a bad decision, wouldn’t wisdom in all cases suggest a relatively long courtship?
因此，无论何种情形，只要我们如实权衡错误决定可能招致的情感伤痛、心理压力和经济损失，就会发现，从理性角度出发，在任何情况下，谈一段相对漫长的恋爱都是更优选择，不是吗？
