www射-国产免费一级-欧美福利-亚洲成人福利-成人一区在线观看-亚州成人

 





 
Parents under scrutiny
[ 2006-11-13 14:56 ]

Dear Xin:
This is Jack who works with a foreign trading company in Guangzhou. I have just graduated from college. My major was Business English. I like English grammar very much. No matter what English articles I read, I pay more attention to sentence structures and usages of words than other contents.

Today I find this sentence confusing. This sentence, I think, is wrong. What is your opinion?

Title of the news article: 廣州鼓勵獨生子女夫婦生二胎
Sentence: Parents who are the only children of their families are being encouraged to have a second child in a major effort to balance the city's aging population.

我覺得這個句子有問題. parents 是中心詞。who are the only children of their families 是定語從句, who 代替parents , 如果把parents 放在這個定語從句里, 就是parents are the only children of their families. 顯然這句話是有問題的, 要不parents = the only children了。 根據句子本來要表達的意思,我覺得改成以下兩句比較好一些.

1. Parents (of / who have) the only children in their families are being encouraged to have a second child in a major effort to balance the city's aging population.

2. Parents in whose families there are the only children are being encouraged to have a second child in a major effort to balance the city's aging population.

I am looking forward to your reply.

- Jack

Dear Jack,
You've done a great exercise. You'll learn from it. I'll just point out a thing or two to help you learn.

Unlike most people, you've encountered a confusing sentence in English and have chosen to clear up the confusion by making an extra effort. Keep it up.

Your conclusions are wrong, but your grammatical analysis is correct. Parents, like you say, are the subject matter in the article (I found the article in full via Google). "Who are the only children of their families", like you say, is the attributive clause modifying "parents".

And yes, parents are the only children of their families ("parents = the only children"), which you say is not as it should have been. It should.

That is where you got it wrong. If I understood you perfectly, your confusion might have arisen from your failing to grasp the main point of the article.

You thought a new regulation was introduced in regard to parents of all one-child families. That is incorrect. The regulation in fact addresses only those couples who had themselves been an only child (before they grow up, got married and had their own families). So far, each of these couples has one child. They are encouraged to have one more.

You've done a great exercise in that after this lot of work you put in, you won't forget the lessons to be learned.

Praises aside, let me offer you a piece of advice.

When reading, focus on meaning. You say you "pay more attention to sentence structures and usages of words than other contents". I think you should pay at least as much, if not more, attention to "other contents".

In what is called extensive reading, which is what you'll be doing most of the time as a foreign trade businessman, you skim (casting broader looks) through texts rather than scan (examining and scrutinizing every word in print). You must learn to extract meaning quickly and correctly.

Now that you're out of school, you won't have the time to do what you used to do in school - "intensive reading", that is, whereby you get to tear sentences apart and to analyze how and why some words work better when they are bundled in a particular way. You may continue to do that, of course, so long as you find the time for inking foreign trade deals.

Besides, if you focus on meaning you'll actually find it easier to do what you enjoy doing - taking sentences apart and scrutinizing words for their grammatical significance. Once you've got the main points, the rest just falls into place.

Or in the spirit of your writing (mixing English with Chinese), this is what the Chinese call 綱舉目張。

Thank you, Jack, for sharing.

 

About the author:
 

Zhang Xin is Trainer at chinadaily.com.cn. He has been with China Daily since 1988, when he graduated from Beijing Foreign Studies University. Write him at: zhangxin@chinadaily.com.cn, or raise a question for potential use in a future column.

 
 
相關文章 Related Stories
 
         
 
 
 
 
 
         

 

 

 
 

48小時內最熱門

     

本頻道最新推薦

     
  Why shambles?
  如何翻譯“加強精神文明建設”
  What is a rotation player?
  Feeble or febrile
  如何翻譯“穩健的財政政策和貨幣政策”

論壇熱貼

     
  福娃英文名更改,為何事先不考慮好?
  C-E: 臺下諸葛亮 臺上豬一樣
  請教高人:關于社保方面的詞匯
  “流行金曲”大家評
  常用英語口語1000句
  婚禮上牧師的證言




主站蜘蛛池模板: 美国做受三级的视频播放 | 99久久免费精品国产免费高清 | 宫女淫春3在线观 | 操哭美女| 性盈盈影院在线观看 | 中文字幕毛片 | 女人张开腿让男人捅爽 | 毛片免费全部免费播放 | 爽爽视频在线观看 | 欧美一级三级在线观看 | 2022国内精品免费福利视频 | 成年女人看片免费视频频 | 福利社色 | 日韩毛片在线播放 | 国产情侣普通话刺激对白 | 精品久久一区二区三区 | 黄色网址亚洲 | 另类视频综合 | 亚州一二区 | 日本αv| 岛国搬运工最新网地址 | 日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 99视频久久精品久久 | 1204国产成人精品视频 | 国产大片线上免费看 | 国产三级午夜理伦三级 | 韩国美女激情视频一区二区 | 大量愉拍情侣在线视频 | 91情侣高清精品国产 | 日本在线视频免费看 | 九九精品视频在线播放 | 欧美一级片 在线播放 | 精品久久久久久久久久久 | 久久精品视频在线观看榴莲视频 | 国产成人综合久久亚洲精品 | 国产三级在线观看免费 | 国产人做人爱视频精品 | 特级毛片在线播放 | 免费黄色在线网址 | 亚洲国产日韩欧美在线 | 久久亚洲私人国产精品va |