我重譯的W. Edwards Deming的兩本書，除了增加一些被莫名其妙刪掉處，多了些"譯注"作解說、補充說明、糾錯用；不過我沒有機會與北京的編輯就"整體"談，因為他連索引之作都認為太費我時間。
有許多東西和相關信息，我認為該編一本Companion to W. Edwards Deming.
他很討厭清楚的翻譯，說翻譯得清楚， 就像把飯嚼爛了再餵給別人吃，不給讀者自己領會的機會。 但我感覺，看翻譯書本來就困難重重，讀者就像爬過無數道牆， 已經累得半死了，還要他們自己揣摩一切實在強人之難...... 所以我盡可能給讀者多一點幫助。」梁永安對古代著名佛經譯者鳩摩羅什的翻譯觀，是過度解釋了， 原文是：《高僧傳》二〈鳩摩羅什傳〉云：「初沙門慧僧叡才識高明，常隨什傳寫。什每為叡論西方辭體， 商略同異，云：『天竺國俗甚重文製，其宮商體韻以入絃為善， 凡覲國王必有讚德。見佛之儀，以歌歎為貴，經中偈頌皆其式也。 但改梵為秦失其藻蔚，雖得大意，殊隔文體。有似嚼飯與人， 非徒失味，乃令嘔噦也。』」(CBETA, T50, no. 2059, p. 332, b23-29)
《懸而未決的莒哈絲》p.235, note 78. 繆詠華根據法譯本轉譯，所以在紅色段有點不通順。
The sight was ordinary enough; what was strange was the rhythmical order with which my imagination had invested it; and the fact that the ordinary sight of two people getting into a cab had the power to communicate something of their own seeming satisfaction. The sight of two people coming down the street and meeting at the corner seems to ease the mind of some strain, I thought, watching the taxi turn and make off. Perhaps to think, as I had been thinking these two days, of one sex as distinct from the other is an effort. It interferes with the unity of the mind. Now that effort had ceased and that unity had been restored by seeing two people come together and get into a taxicab. The mind is certainly a very mysterious organ, I reflected, drawing my head in from the window, about which nothing whatever is known, though we depend upon it so completely. Why do I feel that there are severances and oppositions in the mind, as there are strains from obvious causes on the body? What does one mean by ‘the unity of the mind’? I pondered, for clearly the mind has so great a power of concentrating at any point at any moment that it seems to have no single state of being. It can separate itself from the people in the street, for example, and think of itself as apart from them, at an upper window looking down on them. Or it can think with other people spontaneously, as, for instance, in a crowd waiting to hear some piece of news read out. it can think back through its fathers or through its mothers, as I have said that a woman writing thinks back through her mothers. Again if one is a woman one is often surprised by a sudden splitting off of consciousness, say in walking down Whitehall, when from being the natural inheritor of that civilization, she becomes, on the contrary, outside of it, alien and critical. Clearly the mind is always altering its focus, and bringing the world into different perspectives. But some of these states of mind seem. even if adopted spontaneously, to be less comfortable than others. In order to keep oneself continuing in them one is unconsciously holding something back, and gradually the repression becomes an effort. But there may be some state of mind in which one could continue without effort because nothing is required to be held back. And this perhaps, I thought, coming in from the window, is one of them. For certainly when I saw the couple get into the taxicab the mind felt as if, after being divided, it had come together again in a natural fusion. The obvious reason would be that it is natural for the sexes to co-operate. One has a profound, if irrational, instinct in favour of the theory that the union of man and woman makes for the greatest satisfaction, the most complete happiness. But the sight of the two people getting into the taxi and the satisfaction it gave me made me also ask whether there are two sexes in the mind corresponding to the two sexes in the body, and whether they also require to be united in order to get complete satisfaction and happiness? And I went on amateurishly to sketch a plan of the soul so that in each of us two powers preside, one male, one female; and in the man’s brain the man predominates over the woman, and in the woman’s brain the woman predominates over the man. The normal and comfortable state of being is that when the two live in harmony together, spiritually co-operating. If one is a man, still the woman part of his brain must have effect; and a woman also must have intercourse with the man in her. Coleridge perhaps meant this when he said that a great mind is androgynous. It is when this fusion takes place that the mind is fully fertilized and uses all its faculties. Perhaps a mind that is purely masculine cannot create, any more than a mind that is purely feminine, I thought. But it would he well to test what one meant by man-womanly, and conversely by woman-manly, by pausing and looking at a book or two.