감각을 다루는 GenZ의 회사 영어
“그 얘기 지금 대놓고는 안 하고, 그냥 슬쩍만 언급해둘게요.”
→ We can just allude to it for now without spelling anything out.
→ I’ll just allude to the issue so people know it’s on our radar.
“회의에서 직접적으로 말하기 애매하면, 분위기만 살짝 던져두는 거죠.”
→ If it feels too blunt to say outright, just allude to it and set the tone.
→ You can allude to the concern without putting anyone on the spot.
“애플은 진짜 칩 만드는 전 과정을 편집증 수준으로 하나하나 다 쥐고 흔들어요.”
→ Apple takes almost maniacal control over every step of how their chips get made.
→ They keep such a tight, almost obsessive grip on the chip-making process that nothing moves without their say.
“그 회사는 몇 년 전에 이미 이걸 처음부터 밀어붙였고, 복잡성만 놓고 보면 다른 어떤 회사랑은 비교도 안 될 정도로 훨씬 앞서 있었어요.”
→ They pioneered it years ago with an order of magnitude more complexity than anyone else in the industry.
→ They were doing this long before anyone else, operating at a level of complexity other companies couldn’t even get close to.
“그게 그냥, 뭐랄까… 설명하라고 딱 차려놓은 것 같은 아이디어였어요. .”
→ It was basically a silver-platter idea — the kind that explains itself.
→ It felt like the whole thing was handed to me on a silver platter in terms of how to explain it.
“상식적으로 제일 먼저, 그리고 가장 자연스러운 선택은… 다른 폰을 만드는 거였죠.”
→ The only logical thing to do — and the very first logical step — was to start building other phones.
→ The first thing that made any real sense was to go build other phones.
“그 대규모 운영을 그대로 복제해낼 만한 ‘암묵지’를 가진 회사들은 결국 현지 업체들이에요.”
→ The companies with the tacit knowledge to replicate those operations at scale are the local ones.
→ The only players who actually have the tacit know-how to scale those operations are the local companies.
“애플 전성기 땐 이게 진짜 100% 사실이었어요.”
→ It was absolutely true in Apple’s heyday.
→ During Apple’s peak years, that couldn’t have been more true.
“그건 상황을 좀 자기 입맛대로 읽은 거죠.”
→ It’s a selectively convenient reading of the facts.
→ That’s more of a partisan reading than a fair one.
“그건 좀 자기한테 유리하게 읽은 해석이에요. 약간 계산 들어간 느낌.”
→ That’s a pretty self-serving reading — it lines up a little too perfectly with your angle.
→ It comes off as a self-serving reading, like the facts are rearranged to fit your story.
“그건 너무 비관적으로 읽은 해석이에요. 약간 일부러 어둡게 보는 느낌?”
→ That’s a pretty pessimistic reading of it — like you’re shading it darker than it needs to be.
→ It’s kind of a pessimistic reading, almost assuming the worst without real evidence.
“그건 좀 너무 좋게 봐준 해석이죠. 약간 현실보다 예쁘게 포장한 느낌.”
→ That’s a pretty generous reading — you’re giving them way more credit than the facts do.
→ It sounds like a generous reading, almost bending over backward to see the bright side.
“틀렸다는 건 아니에요. 다만 너무 단순하게 본 해석이죠.
조금만 더 정교하게 보면, 각 결정은 당시 기준으로는 충분히 합리적이었어요.”
→ It’s not that it’s wrong — it’s just a bit too simplistic.
→ A more sophisticated reading is that each decision was rational given the circumstances.
But it’s in the aggregate that Apple played a role in completely hollowing out US industrial
“돌이켜보면, 그건 우리가 반드시 알아챘어야 하는 신호였죠.
‘지금 내부에서 되는 일은 외부에서도 똑같이 구현해야 한다. 특정 팀이나 구조에 이렇게 묶여 있으면 안 된다’—이런 메시지였던 거예요.”
→ In retrospect, that should’ve been the moment we realized,
→ “Everything we rely on internally needs a parallel outside, because we should never be this dependent on one team or one setup.”
“근데 현실은… 오히려 더 거기 올인해버렸죠.”
→ Instead, they basically doubled down.
→ Instead, they ended up doubling down on it even more.
It just strikes me as entirely lopsided that this is clearly the US is in a worse position than China is.
“제 눈에는 이게 너무 한쪽으로 기울어 보입니다.
분명 미국이 중국보다 훨씬 불리한 자리에서 서 있는 거니까요.”
→ It just strikes me as completely lopsided — the U.S. is clearly in a worse position than China.
→ To me, it feels entirely lopsided, with the U.S. ending up far worse off than China.
“중국도 자기들이 얼마나 세다고 굳이 떠벌리고 싶어 하진 않는 것 같아요.”
→ I don’t think China really wants to be out there touting how powerful it is.
→ I doubt China is eager to go around touting just how powerful it’s become.
“그게 너무 매력적이어서, 애플은 결국 모든 걸 거기로 몰아버렸죠.”
→ It was so alluring that Apple ended up consolidating everything there.
→ It was just so compelling that Apple essentially pulled everything into one place.