Yahoo奇摩知識+ 將於 2021 年 5 月 4 日 (美國東部時間) 終止服務。自 2021 年 4 月 20 日 (美國東部時間) 起,Yahoo奇摩知識+ 網站將會轉為唯讀模式。其他 Yahoo奇摩產品與服務或您的 Yahoo奇摩帳號都不會受影響。如需關於 Yahoo奇摩知識+ 停止服務以及下載您個人資料的資訊,請參閱說明網頁。

匿名使用者
匿名使用者 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前

請幫忙修正兩句翻譯(語意不順)

All the same, problems remain. In my view, the new

historians--from Edward Thompson to Roger Chartier--have been largely

successful in revealing the inadequacies of traditional materialist and

determinist explanations of individual and collective behaviour over the short

term and in showing that in everyday life and in

moments of crisis alike, it is culture that counts. On the other hand,

they have done little to challenge the importance of material factors, of the

physical environment and its resources, over the long term. It still seems useful to regard these material factors as

setting the agenda, the problems to which individuals, groups and,

metaphorically speaking, cultures try to adapt or respond.

儘管如此,問題仍然存在。在我看來,新史學(從湯普森到夏爾提埃)的史家基本上已經成功地點出傳統唯物史觀的不足之處,以及(傳統史家)用決定論解釋個人和集體短期的行為

and in showing that in everyday life and in

moments of crisis alike,

另一方面,從長遠來看,他們採取什麼行動來挑戰重要的物質因素、自然環境和資源。

. It still seems useful to

regard these material factors as setting the agenda, the problems to which

individuals, groups and,

舉例而言,用文化去適應或回應。

1 個解答

評分
  • mwl_r
    Lv 7
    1 0 年前
    最佳解答

    Apart from the quoted sentences, there are a few more mistakes in your

    passage that call for corrections. It was for this reason that I did not

    participate myself in translating the ambiguous passage you put up earlier.

    參考資料: nil
還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。