单词 | 相对来说 |
释义 | 〔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〔katakana〕A relatively angular kana used for writing foreign words or official documents, such as telegrams.片假名:一种相对来说生硬的假名,用来写外来文或官方文件,如电报〔background〕A position or an area of relative inconspicuousness or unimportance.不重要的地方:相对来说不显著或不重要的位置或地区〔clean〕Producing relatively little radioactive fallout or contamination:无放射性尘埃的,无污染源的:相对来说几乎不产生放射尘和污染源的:〔clean〕Producing relatively little pollution:清洁的,无污染的:相对来说几乎不产生污染的:〔limited〕Abbr. ltd.,Ltd.,Ld.Of, relating to, or being transportation facilities, such as trains or buses, that make few stops and carry relatively few passengers.缩写 ltd.,Ltd.,Ld.直达的,乘客人数有限制的:较少停靠且相对来说搭载较少乘客的交通工具如火车或汽车的,与其有关的〔tame〕"The sea otter is gentle and relatively tame"(Peter Matthiessen)“海獭性情温和并且相对来说不怕人”(彼得·马蒂恩森)〔landslide〕The downward sliding of a relatively dry mass of earth and rock.地滑:一堆相对来说干燥的泥土和岩石的向下滑动〔tantra〕Any of a comparatively recent class of Hindu or Buddhist religious literature written in Sanskrit and concerned with mysticism and magic.密教经典:任一部用梵文写成的成书时间距现在相对来说较近的印度教或佛教宗教文学作品,讲述了神秘主义和秘法〔calculate〕 Calculate, the most comprehensive,often implies a relatively high level of abstraction or procedural complexity: Calculate 是最广泛的,常隐含一种相对来说水平较高的抽象化或过程的复杂性: 〔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〔early〕Maturing or developing relatively soon:早熟的:相对来说较快地发育成熟: |
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。