奶油 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 8 年前

麻煩幫我翻譯這段英文的小文章

Captain Kirk made a grievous grammatical error when he said that the mission of the Enterprise was “to boldly go where no man has gone before.”He should have said , according to these editors , “to go boldly where no man has gone before, ”which immediately clashes with the rhythm and structure of ordinary English.

In fact , this prescriptive rule was based on a clumsy analogy with Latin where you can’t splint an infinitive because it’s a single word , as in facary[ph] to do. Julius Caesar couldn’t have spilt an infinitive if he wanted to.

That rule was translated literally over into English where it really should not apply. Another famous prescriptive rule is that, one should never use a so-called double negative.

Mick Jagger should not have sung, “I can’t get no satisfaction , “he really should have sung, “I can’t get any satisfaction.”

Now, this is often promoted as arule of logical speaking, but “can’t” and “any” is just as much of a double negative as “can’t” and “no.”

The only reason that “can’t get any satisfaction” is deemed correct and “can’t get no satisfaction” is deemed ungrammatical is that the dialect of English spoken in the south of England in the 17th

已更新項目:

請不要給我google翻譯 謝謝唷~~~ :)

3 個解答

評分
  • 8 年前
    最佳解答

    Captain Kirk made a grievous grammatical error when he said that the mission of the Enterprise was “to boldly go where no man has gone before.”He should have said , according to these editors , “to go boldly where no man has gone before, ”which immediately clashes with the rhythm and structure of ordinary English.

    In fact , this prescriptive rule was based on a clumsy analogy with Latin where you can’t splint an infinitive because it’s a single word , as in facary[ph] to do. Julius Caesar couldn’t have spilt an infinitive if he wanted to.

    That rule was translated literally over into English where it really should not apply. Another famous prescriptive rule is that, one should never use a so-called double negative.

    Mick Jagger should not have sung, “I can’t get no satisfaction , “he really should have sung, “I can’t get any satisfaction.”

    Now, this is often promoted as arule of logical speaking, but “can’t” and “any” is just as much of a double negative as “can’t” and “no.”

    The only reason that “can’t get any satisfaction” is deemed correct and “can’t get no satisfaction” is deemed ungrammatical is that the dialect of English spoken in the south of England in the 17th

    科克船長提出一個嚴重的語法錯誤時他說企業的使命是"大膽地去前哪兒沒有人了。他應該說,根據這些編輯器"要大膽地去凡之前走了沒有人,"其中立即與衝突的節奏和結構的普通英語。事實上,此說明性的規則基於與拉丁美洲地方你不能因為它是單個的單詞 facary [ph 值] 做夾板不定式笨拙的類比。朱利斯 · 愷撒不能有潑不定式,如果他想要的。這一規則是字面上超過英文翻譯它真的應不適用。另一個著名的規範性規則是一個永遠不應使用所謂的雙重否定。米克 • 賈格爾應不唱"我不能得到不滿意,"他真的應該已經唱過,"我不能得到任何滿意"。現在,這往往促進作為 arule 的邏輯來說,但是"不能"和"任何"是一樣的雙重否定,因為"不能"和"不"。"不能得到任何滿意"是正確,"無法滿足"的唯一理由是被視為不合語法是英語口語在 17 世紀的英格蘭南部方言

  • Jedi
    Lv 4
    8 年前

    當柯克船長說企業號的使命是“大膽的去從前還沒有人去過的地方”時, 犯了一個嚴重的文法上的錯誤,他應該說,根據這些編者的意見“大膽的去該用to go boldly 而不是 to boldly go”, 這立即與普通英語的節奏和結構有衝突。

    事實上,這個約定俗成的的規則是基於一個拉丁文的笨拙的類比,你不能撕裂一個不定詞(to + 動詞原型) (不能在to 與動詞原型中間加入字),因為不定詞是一個單一的字。即使凱撒大帝想要,他也不能撕裂一個不定詞。

    這條規則原封不動搬到英文來, 但是它確實並不應該適用於英文。另一條約定俗成的規則是,一個人永遠不能用所謂的雙重否定。

    Mick Jagger不應該曾經唱出“我不能得到不滿意” ,他真的應該唱,“我不能得到任何滿意。”

    現在,這經常升級為合邏輯的講話的一條規則,但“不能和任何”是跟“不能和沒有”一樣的雙重否定。

    “不能得到任何滿意” 被認為是正確的, “不能得到不滿足” 被視為不合語法的唯一原因,是17世紀在英格蘭南部的英文方言。

    參考資料: Myself
  • 8 年前

    科克船長提出一個嚴重的語法錯誤時他說企業的使命是"大膽地去前哪兒沒有人了。他應該說,根據這些編輯器"要大膽地去凡之前走了沒有人,"其中立即與衝突的節奏和結構的普通英語。事實上,此說明性的規則基於與拉丁美洲地方你不能因為它是單個的單詞 facary [ph 值] 做夾板不定式笨拙的類比。朱利斯 · 愷撒不能有潑不定式,如果他想要的。這一規則是字面上超過英文翻譯它真的應不適用。另一個著名的規範性規則是一個永遠不應使用所謂的雙重否定。米克 • 賈格爾應不唱"我不能得到不滿意,"他真的應該已經唱過,"我不能得到任何滿意"。現在,這往往促進作為 arule 的邏輯來說,但是"不能"和"任何"是一樣的雙重否定,因為"不能"和"不"。"不能得到任何滿意"是正確,"無法滿足"的唯一理由是被視為不合語法是英語口語在 17 世紀的英格蘭南部方言

還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。