? 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 7 年前

請求高手幫忙翻譯..感恩

The colonies, which were widely separated in their early days, might be compared to the ancient Greek city-states: All were of the same nation, but they were more competitive than cooperative. The spirit of cooperation among the states was noticeably thin even during the Revolutionary War.

After the revolution, the national was still largely rural and widespread, so there was little spirit of nationalism. People were from Massachusetts, or Virginia, or Pennsylvania, rather than from the United states.

The hard nature of the life of the settlers led to the gradual development of a society far more tolerant of differences among people than had been the case in their native European countries. Ancestors had little to do with a settlers ultimate survival or value to colonial society.

As the political development of the colonies proceeded, strong regional antagonism developed among three groups of people that were established in many states.

In colonial society, the new elite were the residents of the coastal areas that had been settled earliest.

Many of the these people were well-to-do traders. They were better educated than the other groups, and they had regular contact with Europe. The second social group included the people of the piedmont and foothill areas, who were primarily farmers.They lived in less settled areas than the coastal dwellers and had little in common with them, either in wealth or in politics, The third group, the settlers of the still-unopened areas, was gradually moving into the mountains and beyond.

They were almost as out of touch with the coast as they were with Europe. They had some ties with the Piedmont farmers, for often they were farmers themselves. but they had nothing in common with the coastal people.

The result of the differences among these three groups of people was a long period of political struggle in the state legislatures between the people in the East, who had the power, and those In the West, who did not.

已更新項目:

不要GOOGEL翻譯~感恩

4 個解答

評分
  • 匿名使用者
    7 年前
    最佳解答

    殖民地,被廣泛地分散在其早期,可能相比古代希臘城邦: 所有都在相同的國家,但卻比合作更具競爭力。甚至在革命戰爭中的國家之間精神是合作的引人注目地薄。

    在以後的革命,國家仍然是民族主義的主要是民族主義的農村和普遍,所以有小小精神。人們從麻塞諸塞州或弗吉尼亞州,賓夕法尼亞州,而不是美國。

    硬的定居者的生活性質導致遠更寬容的人之間的差異的社會的逐步發展,比一直在其本機的歐洲國家的情況。祖先曾與定居者最終的生存或對殖民地的社會價值不大。

    隨著殖民地的政治發展,強區域拮抗作用開發的人,在許多國家設立了三個群體。

    在殖民地社會中,新的精英是已經解決了最早的沿海地區的居民。

    許多的這些人是富裕的商人。他們被更好地教育比其他群體,並且他們有定期與歐洲接觸。第二個社會組包括人的山前平原和丘陵地區,主要是農民。他們生活在不安定地區比沿海居民和已很少與他們在財富或政治,第三組,定居者仍然原封不動的地區,是逐漸移入山和超越。

    他們幾乎是脫離海岸,因為它們是與歐洲。他們有一些與的聯繫皮埃蒙特的農民,他們往往是農民自己。但他們沒有什麼和沿海人一樣。

    這些三個群體之間的差異的結果是人的長期的政治鬥爭中州議會之間在東部,有權力,人民和那些在中西部,不幹。

    我沒有用GOOGLE翻譯喔

    2014-03-12 18:01:35 補充:

    我安怎?

    我又沒怎樣

    參考資料: 英文文法篇
  • 阿倫
    Lv 6
    7 年前

    The colonies, which were widely separated in their early days, might be

    殖民地, 早期廣泛分布, 可比古代希臘城邦. 全屬於同一國家, 但他們比竟真更合作. 城邦合作的靈改革戰爭分長細. 改革革命, 國家仍舊鄉村和廣泛沒有國家制度. Massachusetts來的人和Virginia, or Pennsylvania而非美國. 定居者的硬性導致一個社會對於差異的包容在人群中已經存在於歐洲國家. 古代祖先跟定居者無關志忠屬於殖民社會.

    compared to the ancient Greek city-states: All were of the same nation, but they were more competitive than cooperative. The spirit of cooperation among the states was noticeably thin even during the Revolutionary War.

    After the revolution, the national was still largely rural and widespread, so there was little spirit of nationalism. People were from Massachusetts, or Virginia, or Pennsylvania, rather than from the United states.

    The hard nature of the life of the settlers led to the gradual development of a society far more tolerant of differences among people than had been the case in their native European countries. Ancestors had little to do with a settlers ultimate survival or value to colonial society.

    As the political development of the colonies proceeded, strong regional antagonism developed among three groups of people that were established in many states.

  • 7 年前

    Jim dude - "national" in this context = "citizens".

    2014-03-12 08:05:54 補充:

    也許阿魂 大大應該用GOOGLE翻譯會比較好一點?

  • 7 年前

    the national was still largely rural and widespread.這句的national後是否漏了一個字?或是national這個字應該只是nation而已?

    2014-03-12 10:24:09 補充:

    I thought about that Prizzy, but it does not make a whole lot of sense.

還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。