| 单词 | 文体 |
| 释义 | 〔yet〕In formal styleyet in the sense "up to now" requires that the accompanying verb be in the present perfect, rather than in the simple past: 在正式文体中，yet 表达“迄今”这一意思时，须与现在完成时动词连用， 而不是简单的过去时： 〔couple〕Although the phrasea couple of has been well established in English since before the Renaissance, it has been criticized on several grounds.Grammarians used to insist thata couple of should be used only to refer to things closely linked to one another and so was improperly used in phrases such asa couple of years ago. This objection has not been heard in some time and was never well supported.Modern critics have sometimes maintained thata couple of is too inexact to be appropriate in formal writing. But the inexactitude ofa couple of may serve a useful communicative purpose, suggesting that the writer is indifferent to the precise number of items involved.Thus the sentenceShe lives only a couple of miles away implies not only that the distance is short but that its exact measure is unimportant. Furthermore,a couple of is different from a few in that it does not imply that the relevant amount is relatively small. One might say admiringly of an exceptional center fielder thathe can throw the ball a couple of hundred feet, but not, except ironically,a few hundred feet, which would suggest that such a throw was unremarkable. The usage should be considered unobjectionable on all levels of style.尽管a couple of 这个短语在文艺复兴之前就已在英语中形成， 它仍受到多方面批评。语法学家过去坚持认为a couple of 应该只用于指互相之间紧密相连的东西， 所以在a couple of years ago 这样的短语中用是不适当的。 这样的反对意见长时间没有人提起了，也从未受到太多支持。现代批评家有时也认为a couple of 太不精确，不能很恰当地用于正式的写作中。 但a couple of 的不精确性也有一种很有用的传达交流的意图， 表明作者对于所涉及的事物的精确数目并不太关心。因此她住的只有几英里远 这个句子不仅表明距离很远，同时也表明精确测量是不重要的。 另外a couple of 与 a few 的不同还表现在它不表示有关的数量是相对来说小的。 如果夸赞一个优秀的中外野球手，可以说他能把球抛几百英尺远 ， 若非如此的话，排除反意的可能，a few hundred feet 指抛这么远并没什么稀奇之处。 这种用法在各种文体上都是无可辩驳的〔monotone〕Sameness or dull repetition in sound, style, manner, or color.单调：声音、文体、风格和色彩的同样性或单调的重复〔Atticism〕A characteristic feature of Attic Greek.雅典式的习语，文体，风格等：古希腊雅典个性风格〔doubt〕That is also the usual choice when the truth of the clause following doubt is assumed, as in negative sentences and questions. ThusI never doubted for a minute that I would be rescued implies "I was certain that I would be rescued.” By the same token,Do you doubt that you will be paid? seems to pose a rhetorical question ("Surely you believe that you will be paid"), whereasDo you doubt whether you will be paid? may express a genuine request for information and might be followed bybecause if you do, you should make the client post a bond. In other cases, however, this distinction betweenwhether and that is not always observed, andthat is frequently used as a substitute for whether. If may also be used as a substitute forwhether but is more informal in tone. ·In informal speech the clause followingdoubt is sometimes introduced with but: I don't doubt but (or but what ) he will come. Reputable precedent exists for this construction,as in"I do not doubt but England is at present as polite a Nation as any in the World" (Richard Steele),but modern critics sometimes object to its use in formal writing.See Usage Note at but ,if 在否定句及疑问句中当doubt 后的从句所作陈述被认为是真时，用 that 。 所以我从不怀疑我会被救起 意思就是“我确信我会得救”。 同样你怀疑人家会赖帐吗？ 似乎就成了一个反问句（“你当然相信人家不会赖帐了”）， 而你怀疑人家是否付款吗？ 就表示一个真诚的询问， 可能接下来会说因为如果你怀疑的话，你就该让顾客付保证金 。 在其它情况下，whether 和 that 的区别并不很明显， 而且that 经常用来替代 whether。 If 也经常用来代替whether ， 但是语气不很正式。在非正式语气中doubt 后面的从句有时由 but引导：I don't doubt but （或 but what ) he will come。 这种结构有其先例且属规范用法，如“我不怀疑目前的英格兰象世界上其他国家一样是礼义之邦” （理查德·斯蒂尔），但现代评论家有时反对在正式文体中这样使用 参见 but,if〔who〕The traditional rules that determine the use ofwho and whom are relatively simple: who is used for a grammatical subject, where a nominative pronoun such as I or he would be appropriate, andwhom is used elsewhere. Thus, we writeThe actor who played Hamlet was there, sincewho stands for the subject of played Hamlet; andWho do you think is the best candidate? where who stands for the subject of is the best candidate. But we writeTo whom did you give the letter? sincewhom is the object of the preposition to; andThe man whom the papers criticized did not show up, sincewhom is the object of the verb criticized. ? Considerable effort and attention are required to apply the rules correctly in complicated sentences.To produce correctly a sentence such asI met the man whom the government had tried to get France to extradite, we must anticipate when we writewhom that it will function as the object of the verb extradite, several clauses distant from it.It is thus not surprising that writers from Shakespeare onward should often have interchangedwho and whom. And though the distinction shows no signs of disappearing in formal style,strict adherence to the rules in informal discourse might be taken as evidence that the speaker or writer is paying undue attention to the form of what is said, possibly at the expense of its substance.In speech and informal writingwho tends to predominate over whom; a sentence such asWho did John say he was going to support? will be regarded as quite natural, if strictly incorrect. By contrast, the use ofwhom where who would be required, as inWhom shall I say is calling? may be thought to betray a certain linguistic insecurity. ? When the relative pronoun stands for the object of a preposition that ends a sentence,whom is technically the correct form: the strict grammarian will insist onWhom (not who ) did you give it to? But grammarians since Noah Webster have argued that the excessive formality ofwhom in these cases is at odds with the relative informality associated with the practice of placing the preposition in final position and that the use of who in these cases should be regarded as entirely acceptable. ? The relative pronounwho may be used in restrictive relative clauses, in which case it is not preceded by a comma, or in nonrestrictive clauses, in which case a comma is required.Thus, we may say eitherThe scientist who discovers a cure for cancer will be immortalized, where the clausewho discovers a cure for cancer indicates which scientist will be immortalized, orThe mathematician over there, who solved the four-color theorem, is widely known, where the clausewho solved the four-color theorem adds information about a person already identified by the phrase the mathematician over there. ? Some grammarians have argued that onlywho and not that should be used to introduce a restrictive relative clause that identifies a person. This restriction has no basis either in logic or in the usage of the best writers;it is entirely acceptable to write eitherthe man that wanted to talk to you or the man who wanted to talk to you. ? The grammatical rules governing the use ofwho and whom apply equally to whoever and whomever. See Usage Note at else ,that ,whose 确定用法的传统规则who 和 whom 相对简单： who 语法上用作主语，同 I 或 he 等主格代词的位置相同， 而whom 用于别处。 这样，我们写The actor who played Hamlet was there （演哈姆雷特的演员在那边）， 因此who 代表的是 played Hamlet 的主语。 在句子Who do you think is the best candidate? （你认为谁是最好的候选人?）中 who 代表 is the best candidate 的主语。 但是我们说To whom did you give the letter? （你把信给谁了?）， 因为whom 是介词 to 的宾语； 在句子The man whom the papers criticized did not show up, （报纸上批评的那个人没有来）， 因为whom 是动词 criticized 的宾语 。在复杂的句子里，正确应用这些规则需要相当的努力和注意。正确地造出如I met the man whom the government had tried to get France to extradite （我遇到了政府曾努力让法国引渡的那个人）这样的句子， 在写whom 之前我们必须预知它将作动词 extradite 的宾语， 尽管两个词离得很远。这也就难怪自莎士比亚以来的作家经常把who 和 whom 交换使用了。 尽管在正式文体中两者区别仍然存在，但如果在非正式的交谈中严格地遵守这些规则会被认为说话者或作者可能不顾内容而过分注视说话的形式。在口语和非正式书面语中，who 趋向于代替 whom; 人们会认为象Who did John say he was going to support? （约翰说他将支持谁?）这样句子很自然，尽管严格来说它是不正确的。 相反，在应该用who 的地方用 whom 则显出一种语言上的不稳定， 如Whom shall I say is calling? （我说是谁在打电话?）。 当关系代词替代句尾的介词宾语时，whom 在理论上是正确的形势： 严格的语法坚持Whom （而不是 who ) did you give it to?（你把它给谁了？） 但从诺·韦伯斯特以来的语法学家认为whom 在这种情况下过分正式，而把介词放在句尾相对来说又不正式，这就有了矛盾，所以在这种情况下用 who 完全可以接受。 关系代词who 可以用在限定关系从句中，前面不要加逗号， 也可用在非限定关系从句中，则需要加逗号。所以我们既可以说The scientist who discovers a cure for cancer will be immortalized （发现治愈癌症的方法的科学家将会因此而不朽）， 在此处从句who discovers a cure for cancer 指这样的科学家将会不朽， 也可以说The mathematician over there, who solved the four-color theorem, is widely known （在那边的数学家非常出名，他解决了四色定理）， 从句who solved the four-color theorem 给已经由短语 the mathematician over there 确定了的人增加了一些有关他的信息。 有些语法学家认为只有who 而不是 that 可以连接表示人的限定性关系从句。 这种限制在逻辑上没有根据，在最优秀作家的用法中也未有根据；无论说the man that wanted to talk to you （想要跟你说话的那个人）或 the man who wanted to talk to you 都是完全可以接受的。 有关who 和 whom 的语法规则同样适用于 whoever 和 whomever 参见 else,that,whose〔phraseology〕The way in which words and phrases are used in speech or writing; style.说法，措辞：说话或写作时用词或短语的方法；文体〔wish〕 Both usages are likely to sound stilted in informal style, however. ?Whenwish precedes a subordinate clause containing a contrary-to-fact statement, strict grammatical correctness requires that one usewere rather than was : I wish I were (not was ) lighter on my feet. Many writers continue to insist on this rule,but precedent for using the indicativewas in such clauses can be found in the works of many writers, including King Alfred and Jonathan Swift. See Usage Note at if ,want 但这两种用法在非正式文体中会显得不自然。当wish 后面接一个与事实相反的陈述句作从属分句时， 按严格的语法来说，应在从句中用were 代替 was ： I wish I were （不是 was ) lighter on my feet（多希望我能步履轻盈。） 许多作家仍坚持这条规则，但在从句中用表陈述的was 可在许多作家包括金·阿尔弗雷德和约纳森·斯威夫特的作品中找到先例 参见 if,want〔like〕Writers since Chaucer's time have usedlike as a conjunction, but 19th-century and 20th-century critics have been so vehement in their condemnations of this usage that a writer who uses the construction in formal style risks being accused of illiteracy or worse.Prudence requiresThe dogs howled as (not like ) we expected them to. Likeis more acceptably used as a conjunction in informal style with verbs such as feel, look, seem, sound, and taste, as inIt looks like we are in for a rough winter. But here tooas if is to be preferred in formal writing. There can be no objection to the use oflike as a conjunction when the following verb is not expressed, as inHe took to politics like a duck to water. See Usage Note at as 1together 自乔叟年代起，作家就把like 当作连接词用， 但19世纪和20世纪的批评家强烈谴责这种用法，在正式文体中使用这种结构的作家就有可能被指责为文盲或者更糟。为谨慎起见，就写狗不象 （而不是 like ） 我们想的那样叫。 Like在非正式文体中可作为连词和动词如 feel, look, seem, sound 及 taste 连用， 如在看起来我们将有一个难熬的冬天 中。 但这句如果出现于正式文体中人们更倾向于用as if 。 如果其后的动词无明确含义时，将like 作为连接词是不会有任何异议的， 如他对政治简直是如鱼得水 参见 as1together〔likely〕But the unmodified use oflikely is common enough in educated writing, and though it might be better avoided in highly formal style,it should not be regarded as incorrect: 但在受过教育的人的写作中，likely 前不加任何修饰的用法很普遍， 虽然在非常正式的文体中最好避免这种用法，但不应该将它看作是不正确的用法： 〔Kalidasa〕Indian dramatist and lyric poet. His poetry represents the height of the kavya style, as exemplified by his epic poemRaghuvamsa and his lyric poem Meghaduta. 迦梨陀娑：印度剧作家和抒情诗人。他的诗作代表了美文体的巅峰，如叙事诗《罗怙世系》 及抒情诗 《云使》 便是最好的例证 〔try〕The phrasetry and is commonly used as a substitute for try to, as inCould you try and make less noise? A number of grammarians have labeled the construction incorrect.To be sure, associated with informal style,the usage strikes an inappropriately conversational note in formal writing.In the most recent survey65 percent of the Usage Panel rejected the use in writing of the sentence try and 这一词组通常可用来替代 try to ， 如在你能试着少发出点噪音吗？ 中。 一些语法学家认为这一结构不正确。由于这一用法常用于非正式文体，一旦出现在正式文章中便会产生不相适宜的谈话式情调。在最近的调查中，65%的用法评审委员成员反对它被用于如下的句子： 〔everyplace〕The formseveryplace (or every place ), anyplace (or any place ), someplace (or some place ), and no place are widely used in speech and informal writing as equivalents for everywhere, anywhere, somewhere, and nowhere. Though these usages are not incorrect,they should be avoided in formal writing.But when the two-word expressionsevery place, any place, some place, and no place are used to mean "every (any, some, no) spot or location,” they are entirely appropriate at all levels of style.The distinction between the two meanings is often subtle,but acceptability can often be gauged by seeing whether an expression with-where can be substituted. Thus in the sentence everyplace （或 every place ）， anyplace （或 any place ）， someplace （或 some place ），和 no place 的形式作为与 everywhere，anywhere，somewhere 和 nowhere 等价的词，被广泛用于讲话和非正式的书写中。 虽然这些用法并非不正确，也应该在正式的书写中避免使用它们。但是当两词短语every place，any place，some place 和 no place 用于表示“每一（任何，一些，没有）地点或位置”的意思时， 它们在各样文体中都完全适用。两个含意之间的差别常是很微妙的，是否可能接受，常常通过检验-where 式的表达是否能被代替。 因此在句子 〔wish〕 This usage is consonant with formal style,where it is natural to treat the desires of others with exaggerated deference.The corresponding use ofwish with a noun-phrase object is less frequent, though it cannot be regarded as incorrect: 这种用法符合正式文体，因正式文体中对别人的愿望表示出夸大的尊重很自然。尽管不会认为是错误的，但wish 加上名词短语作宾语不太常见： 〔unique〕Over the course of the centuryunique has become the paradigmatic example of the class of terms that do not allow comparison or modification by an adverb of degree such as very, somewhat, or quite. Thus, most grammarians believe that it is incorrect to say that something isvery unique or more unique than something else, though phrases such asnearly unique and almost unique are acceptable. In the most recent survey the sentenceHer designs are quite unique in today's fashion scene was unacceptable to 80 percent of the Usage Panel. · Critical objections to the comparison and degree modification of absolute terms date to the 18th centuryand have been applied to a wide group of adjectives includingequal, fatal, omnipotent, parallel, perfect, and unanimous. According to the standard argument, such words denote properties that a thing either does or does not have but cannot have to a qualifiable degree.Thus ifunique is properly used to mean "without equal or equivalent,” something either is unique or it isn't, and phrases such asvery unique and more unique can only betray a weakening of the sense to mean something like "unusual" or "distinctive.” It is true that comparison and modification ofunique are often associated with the style favored by copywriters, as in the advertisement announcing thatOmaha's most unique restaurant is now even more unique or in the claim that a new automobile is So unique, it's patented. But modification ofunique is also found in the work of reputable writers, where it may lack any connotations of hyperbole.A painting is described asthe most unique of Beckman's self-portraits, and a travel writer states thatChicago is no less unique an American city than New York or San Francisco. The relative acceptability of these usages reflects the semantic subtlety ofunique itself. If we were to useunique only according to the strictest criteria of logic, after all, we might freely apply the term to anything in the worldsince nothing is wholly equivalent to anything else.Clearly, then, when we say that a restaurant or painting is unique,we mean that it is worthy of inclusion in a class by itself according to certain implicit but generally accepted criteria.Thus a legitimately unique painting might be one that realizes an unparalleled aesthetic vision,but not one that is rendered only in pigments whose names begin with the lettero; and a legitimately unique restaurant might be one that serves 18th-century French cuisine according to the original recipes,not one that has been installed in a converted sardine cannery.Given this understanding, it is not inherently impossible to think of uniqueness as a matter of degree,in the sense that one painting or restaurant may be more or less worthy of inclusion in a class by itself than some other. ·What is troubling about the copywriters' use ofunique is not that the word has become a synonym for unusual. Rather, it is the copywriters who are using the word in conformity with strict logic.Uniqueness is claimed for a restaurant in virtue of some trivial properties of its decor or menu,or for a resort hotel that simply happens to have a singularly picturesque view of the bay.Though it may be true that such properties render these thingslogically unique, they do not constitute legitimate grounds for putting the things into a class by themselves according to the criteria ordinarily invoked when things are sorted into classes.In fact, the abuse ofunique can be cloying even when no modification or comparison is involved; when we read an advertisement for a line of sportswear that featuresa unique selection of colors, we may suspect that the distinctive properties of the color selection are not so remarkable as the advertiser would have us believe. But it is not surprising that these uses ofunique should lend themselves to promiscuous modification and comparison; for once it is granted that uniqueness can be claimed for any product or service that is somehow distinctive from all its competitors,it is inevitable that an increase in uniqueness will be seen in every minor innovation.See Usage Note at equal ,infinite ,parallel ,perfect 在本世纪整个过程中unique 已成为不能由程度副词，例 very、somewhat 或 quite， 比较或修饰的一类术语的例证。 因此，多数语法学家认为说某事是very unique 或 more unique than 是不正确的， 虽然短语例如nearly unique 和 almost unique 是可接受的。 在最近的调查中，句子Her designs are quite unique in today's fashion scene （她的设计在现今流行样式的场面中是很独特的） 对用法专题使用小组的百分之八十成员是不可接受的。 对纯粹术语的比较和程度修饰的主要异议可追述到18世纪，并已广泛用到许多形容词中，包括equal, fatal, omnipotent, parallel, perfect 和 unanimous。 根据标准论据，这些单词表示一事有或没有但不能有可修饰的程度的性质。于是如果unique 适当地用于表示“没有相等或相当的”，则某事是唯一的或不是唯一的， 而短语像very unique 和 more unique 仅能表露出说明某事像“不寻常的”或“独特的”的意义的减弱。 的确，unique 的比较和修饰常与撰稿人喜欢的文体相联系， 如在广告中称Omaha's most unique restaurant is now even more unique（奥马哈城的最独特的餐馆现在甚至是更加独特） 或声称新汽车是 So unique, it's patented（如此独特，它取得了专利权）。 但是unique 的修饰也在著名作家的作品中发现， 那里可能缺乏夸张法的任何涵义。描述一张油画为the most unique of Beckman's self-portraits（最独特的贝克曼的自画像）， 一位旅游作家叙述Chicago is no less unique an American city than New York or San Francisco（芝加哥比纽约或旧金山是不逊独特的美国城市）。 这些用法的相对可接受性反映unique 自身语义的巧妙。 如果我们仅按照逻辑的严格标准使用unique ， 则我们终于会自由地把此术语使用于世界上的任何事，因为没有完全等同于另一事的事。于是，显然当我们说餐馆或油画是独特的时，我们意味着根据某种隐含的但可普遍接受的判据它是值得包含在一个等级内的。于是合理独特的油画可能是实现空前未有的审美型的，而不是仅给予名字以字母O开始的颜料； 合理独特的餐馆可能根据原来的食谱提供18世纪法国菜肴的餐馆，而不是配备转换的沙丁鱼罐头食品的餐馆。按这样了解，将独特性视为程度问题不是本来就不可能的，在这个意义上一张油画或一个餐馆或多或少可能是极好的有价值的内涵物而不是其他。关于撰稿人使用unique 的困惑不是此单词已成为 unusual 的同义词。 相反地，正是撰稿人使用此单词与严密的逻辑相一致。对餐馆声称独特性是由于它的布置或菜单的某些不重要的性质，或者对于人们常去的旅馆仅因为有海湾的独一无二地别致的景象。虽然这样的性质使得这些事logically 独特的可能是真实的， 但是当事情进行了分类，根据平常实行的判据把这些事情自身放到一类，他们不组成正常的基础。事实上unique 的滥用会使人发腻，即使在没有涉及修饰或比较的时候； 当我们读运动服装的unique selection of colors（颜色的独特选择） 的一行广告时， 我们会怀疑颜色选择的独特性质并非广告商希望我们所认为的那么明显。但不必惊讶于unique 的这些用法应当适用于杂乱的修饰和比较； 就这一次可以承认，独特性能用来指任何产品或服务，它们与所有的竞争者相比较有某种程度的特色，在每一小的创新中可以看到独特性的增加是必然会发生的 参见 equal,infinite,parallel,perfect〔when〕In informal stylewhen is often used after be in definitions: A dilemma is when you don't know which way to turn. The construction is useful,but it is widely regarded as incorrect or as unsuitable for formal discourse.In formal style there is no alternative but to rephrase such definitions to avoidis when : A dilemma is a situation in which you don't know which way to turn. You are in a dilemma when you don't know which way to turn. 在非正式文体中when 常在定义中用在 be 后面： 进退两难就是当你不知道该走哪条路的时候。 这个结构是有用的，但被广泛认为它对正式交谈来说是不正确的或者是不合适的。在正式文体中没有替代词，只能改变措辞以避免is when ： 进退两难就是这样一个你不知道该怎么办的处境。 当你不知道你该做什么时你就处于进退两难的维谷了 〔nuance〕sensitive to delicate nuances of style;对文体细微差别的敏感；〔sequacious〕Persisting in a continuous intellectual or stylistic direction:前后一贯的：以连续的理智的或文体的方向持续的：〔euphuism〕An affectedly elegant literary style of the late 16th and early 17th centuries, characterized by elaborate alliteration, antitheses, and similes.尤弗伊斯体：一种流行于16世纪末17世纪初的装腔作势追求高雅的文体，以头韵、对句和明喻为特点〔whatever〕Bothwhatever and what ever can be used in sentences such as Whatever (or What ever ) made her say that? Critics have occasionally objected to the one-word form,but it is supported by extensive precedent in reputable writing.The same is true of the formswhoever, whenever, wherever, and however when these expressions are used similarly. In adjectival uses only the one-word form is used:Take whatever (not what ever ) books you need. ? When a clause beginning withwhatever is the subject of a sentence, no comma should be used: Whatever you do is right. Otherwise, a comma may be used:Whatever you do, don't burn the toast. ? When the phrase preceding a restrictive clause is introduced bywhichever or whatever, that should not be used in formal writing. It is regarded as incorrect to writewhatever book that you want to look at; one should write insteadWhatever book you want to look at will be sent to your office or Whichever book costs less (not that costs less ) is fine with us. See Usage Note at however ,that whatever 和 what ever 这两个词都可用在例如 Whatever （或 What ever ) made her say that?（究竟是什么使得她说那样的话?） 这样的句子里。 批评家们经常反对单一词形，但有声望作品的大量先例却支持了单词形式。同样地，当whoever, whenever, wherever 及 however 这些表述被用于类似情况时，其情形也是如此。 用作定语时只用单词形式：Take whatever （不是 what ever ） books you need。（拿那些你要的书） ？ whatever 为句首的从句作句子主语时，不能用逗号： Whatever you do is right（无论你做什么都是对的）。 在其他情况可以用逗号：Whatever you do, don't burn the toast（不管你做什么，不要烤糊了吐司） ? 当先于一限定性从句的短语是由whichever 或 whatever引入时， that不能用在正式文体中。 这样的句子：whatever book that you want to look at（无论哪本你想看的书） 是被看作不正确的； 相反应该是Whatever book you want to look at will be sent to your office（你想看的任何一本书都将会送到你的办公室去） 或者 Whichever book costs less （不是 that costs less ) is fine with us（花费少一些的书比较适合我们） 参见 however,that〔elegance〕The central meaning shared by these nouns is "refined and tasteful beauty of manner, form, or style": 这些名词所共有的中心意思是“举止，形式或文体的高雅及优美”： 〔each〕An exception is made wheneach follows the verb with a first-person plural subject: one may say eitherWe boys have each our own room or We boys have each his own room, though the latter form is somewhat stilted in modern use. ·The expressioneach and every is likewise followed by a singular verb and singular pronoun in formal style: 一个例外是当each 前面动词带有第一人称复数形式的主语时： 既可以说我们男孩子们每人都有各自的一间房 或者也可以说 我们男孩子们每人都有他各自房间 ， 虽然后一形式在现代用法中有些过时。这种表达each and every ， 在正式文体中的后面也同样地使用单数动词和单数的代词： 〔Comines〕French diplomat, political adviser, and historian whoseMémoires (1524) are among the most perceptive historical documents of the Middle Ages. 柯门斯，菲利浦·德：(1447?-1511) 法国外交家、政治顾问和历史学家，他的《回忆录》 （1524年）是中世纪最有洞察力的历史文体之一 〔bombast〕All these nouns designate speech or writing marked by an extravagance or affectation of style that the content does not warrant.这些名词都表示语言或文字的浮夸或空洞无物的虚假文体。〔cryptograph〕A device for translating plain text into cipher.密码机：一种将简单的文体译成密码的装置〔clarity〕Clearness of thought or style; lucidity:清晰，明晰：思想或文体的直率；透明：〔neoclassicism〕A revival in literature in the late 17th and 18th centuries, characterized by a regard for the classical ideals of reason, form, and restraint.新古典主义：17、18世纪晚期的文学复兴，以尊重古代典型的推理形式和严谨文体为特征〔neither〕As a conjunctionneither is properly followed by nor, not or, in formal style: 作为一个连词，在正式文体中neither 后宜跟 nor 而不是 or ： 〔markup〕Detailed stylistic instructions written on a manuscript that is to be typeset.标示字体：写于待排版手稿上的详细文体提示〔sneak〕Snuck is an Americanism first introduced in the 19th century as a nonstandard regional variant ofsneaked. But widespread use ofsnuck has become more common with every generation. It is now used by educated speakers in all regions,and there is some evidence to suggest that it is more frequent among younger speakers thansneaked is. Formal written English is naturally and properly more conservative than other varieties, of course,and heresnuck still meets with much resistance. Many writers and editors have a lingering unease about the form,particularly if they recall its nonstandard origins.In fact, our consolidated citations, exhibiting almost 10,000 instances ofsneaked and snuck, indicate thatsneaked is preferred by a factor of 7 to 2. And 67 percent of the Usage Panel disapproves ofsnuck. Nevertheless, in recent yearssnuck has been quietly establishing itself in formal writing. An electronic search of a wide range of reputable publications turns up hundreds of citations forsnuck, not just in sports writingbut in news columns and commentary: Snuck 是一个美国独创词， 19世纪作为sneaked 的不标准的地方变体被首次引入。 在每一代，snuck 这个词都得到了广泛应用。 现在，任何地区受过教育的人都使用它，而且证据显示在年轻的使用者中，它比sneaked 更加常用。 当然，正式的文字英语自然要比其它语体保守一些，在这里，snuck 一词还是受到了排挤。 许多作家和编辑对这个词的形式有一种长久的反感，特别是联系到它不标准的起源。实际上，在我们反复验证过的显示约一万个使用sneaked 和 snuck 的引文中， 表明sneaked 受到青睐的程度为七比二。 用法专题使用小组成员中百分之六十七的人的反对snuck 一词。 但是，最近几年，snuck 在正式文体中也悄悄确立了它的地位。 对一系列著名出版物的电子扫描调查显示出几百处使用snuck 的地方， 而且不光是在体育文章中，在新闻专栏和评论中也有使用： 〔stylistic〕Of or relating to style, especially literary style.文体的：文体（论）的，与文体（论）有关的，尤指文学风格〔text〕from Latin [structure, context, body of a passage] [from past participle of] texere [to weave, fabricate] * see teks- 源自 拉丁语 [结构，上下文，文体] 源自texere的过去分词 [构成，构造] * 参见 teks- 〔Avesta〕A body of ancient Persian writings, a sacred text of Zoroastrianism.阿维斯塔：古波斯语中的一种文体，用来书写祆教圣书〔lexicon〕A stock of terms used in a particular profession, subject, or style; a vocabulary:专门词汇：用在特殊的职业、学科或文体中的一种语系的专用名词；词汇：〔this〕 This informal usage is best avoided in formal writing except where conversational tone is deliberately being sought.See Usage Note at that 除非有意使用对话语气，这种非正式用法最好避免用于正式文体中 参见 that〔which〕The antecedent ofwhich can sometimes be a sentence or clause, as opposed to a noun phrase,as inShe ignored him, which proved to be unwise. They swept the council elections,which could never have happened under the old rules. Such examples are unexceptionable,but care should be taken that this usage does not cause ambiguities.The sentenceIt emerged that Edna made the complaint, which surprised everybody may mean either that the complaint was surprising or that it was surprising that Edna made it. The ambiguity can be avoided with paraphrases such asIt emerged that Edna made the complaint, a revelation that surprised everybody. ? In its use to refer to the contents of sentences and clauses,which should be used only when it is preceded by its antecedent. When the antecedent follows,what should be used, particularly in formal style: Still, he has not said he will withdraw, which is more surprising but Still, what (not which ) is more surprising, he has not said he will withdraw. See Usage Note at that ,what ,whose which 的先行词有时可为一个句子或一个从句， 与名词短语相对立，如在句子她忽视了他，结果证明这是不明智的。 他们在委员会选举中一举获胜，这在旧体制下是永远不会发生的。 这样的例子是无懈可击的，但应该小心谨慎以使这种用法不致于引起模棱两可。句子It emerged that Edna made the complaint, which surprised everybody（埃德娜发出了使每个人都很吃惊的怨言） 既可以指怨气让人吃惊也可以指抱怨的是埃德娜而让人吃惊。 用例如It emerged that Edna made the complaint, a revelation that surprised everybody.（埃德娜大加抱怨，这发现让大家都很吃惊） 这样的句子就可以避免模棱两可。 在它被用来指句子或从句内容时，which 只用在先行词在其前面时。 当先行词跟在后面时，就应该用what ，特别是在正式文体中： Still, he has not said he will withdraw, which is more surprising（他依然还是没说他将退出，这更让人吃惊） 但另外一种形式 Still, what （不用 which ) is more surprising, he has not said he will withdraw.（然而，更让人吃惊的是他还是没说他将退出） 参见 that,what,whose〔that〕The standard rule isthatthat should be used only to introduce a restrictive (or "defining") relative clause, which serves to identify the entity being talked about;in this useit should never be preceded by a comma.Thus, we sayThe house that Jack built has been torn down, where the clausethat Jack built tells which house was torn down, orI am looking for a book that is easy to read, wherethat is easy to read tells what kind of book is desired. Onlywhich is to be used with nonrestrictive (or "nondefining") clauses, which give additional information about an entity that has already been identified in the context;in this use,which is always preceded by a comma. Thus, we sayThe students in Chemistry 10 have been complaining about the textbook, which (not that ) is hard to follow. The clausewhich is hard to follow does not indicate which text is being complained about; even if it were omitted,we would know that the phrasethe textbook refers to the text in Chemistry 10. The use ofthat in nonrestrictive clauses like this, though once common in writing and still frequent in speech,is best avoided in formal style. ·Some grammarians have argued that symmetry requires thatwhich should be used only in nonrestrictive clauses, asthat is to be used only in restrictive clauses. Thus, they suggest that we should avoid sentences such asI need a book which will tell me all about city gardening, where the clausewhich will tell me all about city gardening indicates which sort of book is needed. Such use ofwhich is useful where two or more relative clauses are joined by and or or, as inIt is a philosophy in which the common man may find solace and which many have found reason to praise. Which is also preferred to introduce a restrictive relative clausewhen the preceding phrase itself contains athat, as inI can only give you that which I don't need (not that that I don't need ) or We want to assign only that book which will be most helpful (preferred tothat book that will be most helpful ). · That may be omitted in a relative clause when the subject of the clause is different from the referent of the phrase preceding the clause. Thus, we may say eitherthe book that I was reading or the book I was reading, where the subject of the clause (I ) is not the referent of the phrase the book. Omission ofthat in these cases has sometimes been described as incorrect, but the practice is extremely common and has ample precedent in reputable writing. ·There have also been occasional objections to the omission ofthat in its use to introduce a subordinate clause, as inI think we should try again. But this usage is entirely idiomatic and is in fact favored with some of the verb phrases that can introduce such clauses:thus, one would more normally write 标准规则中，that 应只被用于引导限定性（或“确定的”）关系从句， 这些从句用于明确正被谈论的实体；在这种情况下，前面决不能有逗号。因此，我们说杰克建的房子已经拆毁了 ， 在这里，从句杰克所建的 指明哪幢房子被拆毁了， 或者我正在找一本易读的书 ， 在这里，易读的 指明哪类书是需要的。 只有which 用于非限定性（或“不确定的”）从句中， 为已经在上下文中定义的实体提供附加信息；在此用法中，which 之前总有逗号。 因此，我们说化学10班的学生一直在抱怨这课本，实在 （不是 that ) 是太难懂了 。 从句which is hard to follow 并不指明哪一课本被抱怨； 即使它被省略，我们也知道the textbook 指化学10班的课本。 That 象这样用于非限定性从句中， 虽然在写作中曾很普遍而且在口语中依然频繁出现，但在正式文体中最好避免使用。一些语法学家认为对称性要求which 应只用于非限定性从句中， 就象that 只用于限定性从句中。 因此，他们建议我们应该避免诸如我需要一本关于城市园艺的书 这样的句子， 这里从句which will tell me all about city gardening 指明需要何种书。 当两个或多个关系从句被and 或 or 连接时， which 的这种用法很有用， 如是哲学使普通人找到慰藉并使许多人有理由去称颂。 Which 也用作引导限定性关系从句，在当前置短语中含有that 时， 如我只能给你我不需要的东西 （不是 that that I don't need )或 我们只想分发那本最用的书 （好于that book that will be most helpful )。 当从句主语与从句前短语所指不一致时，that 在关系从句中可以省略。 因此，我们可以说the book that I was reading 或者 the book I was reading 。 在这里，从句主语(I )和短语 the book 的主语不同。 在这些情况下，that 的省略有时被认为是错误的， 但是这在实际中极普遍而且在规范写作中有充分的先例。对于that 用于引导从句时被省略偶然持有异议， 如在我认为我们应该再试一次 中。 但这种用法完全符合语法而且实际上有一些引导这样从句的短语支持；因此，可以正常应用 〔whose〕It has sometimes been claimed thatwhose should be used only as the possessive form of who and should thus be restricted to animate antecedents, as ina man whose power has greatly eroded. But there is extensive literary precedent for the use ofwhose as the possessive of which, as inThe play, whose style is rigidly formal, is typical of the period. In an earlier survey this example was acceptable to a large majority of the Usage Panel.The alternate formof which also can be used to this purpose, as in The play, the style of which is rigidly formal, is typical of the period. But as this example demonstrates, substitutingof which for whose may result in stiltedness. See Usage Note at else ,which ,who 人们有时认为whose 只应作为 who 的所有格形式并限于表示有生命的先行词， 如在句子a man whose power has greatly erode. （能力已大大衰退的人）中。 但把whose 用作 which 的所有形式也是有许多先例的， 如 the play, whose style is rigidly formal, is typical of the period. （这个剧本的文体僵化正式，是当时的典型）。 在早期，这种用法对于用法专题小组的多数人来说都是可以接受的。其变化形式of which 在这种情况下也可用，如 The play, the style of which is rigidly formal, is typical of the period. 。但象 这个例子所显示的一样，用of which 代替 whose 会显得不自然 参见 else,which,who〔care〕It is true that a close examination of the syntax of the phraseI could care less reveals that it ought by rights to mean something like "I care more than I might,” rather than "I don't care at all.” But while the illogicality of a phrase may be reason enough for excluding it from formal writing,this illogicality cannot be invoked as grounds for keeping it out of the colloquial language,particularly when the phrase is itself an expression of casual indifference.See Usage Note at cannot 对短语I could care less 的句法的仔细研究揭示，该短语按理应有类似“我极其在意，甚于我应该做的”的意思，而不表示“我一点儿也不介意”，这一点确凿无疑。 但是，尽管由于一个短语有不合逻辑性的含义，也许这一点足以使其不合逻辑的用法被排除在正式文体之外；这不合逻辑性却不能被援引作为把它排除在口语用法之外的根据，尤其是当该短语本身只是一个非正式的或随意的表达语时 参见 cannot〔shall〕The sentenceYou shall have your money expresses a promise ("I will see that you get your money"), whereasYou will have your money makes a simple prediction. · Such, at least, are the traditional rules.But the distinction has never taken firm root outside of what H.W. Fowler described as "the English of the English" (as opposed to that of the Scots and Irish), and even there it has always been subject to variation.Despite the efforts of generations of American schoolteachers, the distinction is largely alien to the modern American idiom.In Americawill is used to express most of the senses reserved for shall in English usage, andshall itself is restricted to first person interrogative proposals, as inShall we go? and to certain fixed expressions, such asWe shall overcome. Shall is also used in formal style to express an explicit obligation,as inApplicants shall provide a proof of residence, though this sense is also expressed bymust or should. In speech the distinction that the English signal by the choice ofshall or will may be rendered by stressing the auxiliary, as in I will leave tomorrow ("I intend to leave"); by choosing another auxiliary, such as must or have to; or by using an adverb such as certainly. · Many earlier American writers observed the traditional distinction betweenshall and will, and some continue to do so.The practice cannot be called incorrect,though it may strike American ears as somewhat mannered.But the distinction is difficult for those who do not come by it natively,and Americans who essay ashall in an unfamiliar context run considerable risk of getting it wrong, and so of being caught out in that most embarrassing of linguistic gaffes, the bungled Anglicism.See Usage Note at should 句子你将得到你的钱 表达了一种承诺（“我将保证你得到你的钱”）， 而你会得到你的钱 仅仅做出了简单预测。 这些至少是传统规则。但是这种用法上的区别仅局限于H·W·福勒所描述的“英格兰人的英语”（与苏格兰人和爱尔兰人的英语相对），即使在英格兰英语中它一直在变化。尽管经过几代美国学校教师的努力，这种区别对现代美国习惯用语仍是相当生疏的。在美国，will 被用来表达在英国用法中大多为 shall 保留的含义， 而shall 则限于第一人称疑问句式的提议， 如在我们该走了吧? 及某些固定表达中， 例如我们会克服的。 Shall 也用在正式文体中表示明确职责，如申请者应提供居留证明 ， 虽然这个意义也可用must 或 should 表达。 在口语中可以通过强调助动词shall 或 will ，如 我 将 于明天离开 （“我打算明天离开”）；或通过选择另一个助动词 must 或 have to ；或通过使用如 certainly 这样的副词来表达英国人用这两个词时的区别。 许多早期的美国作家注意到了shall 和 will 之间的传统区别， 而且一些人仍在继续这样做。这种用法不能被称作不正确，虽然美国人听起来有点矫揉造作的意味。但是这种区别对于那些不能通过母语了解它的人是困难的，而且在一个不熟悉的上下文中，试图用shall 的美国人很有可能犯错误， 因而在许多令人难堪的语言即被搞得一团糟的英式英语中出丑 参见 should |
| 随便看 |
英汉汉英双解词典收录301015条英汉双解翻译词条，可根据汉字查询相应的英文词汇，基本涵盖了全部常用汉字的英文读音、翻译及用法，是英语学习及翻译工作的有利工具。