這波疫情宅在家
我像是讓自己放了假
剛才早安新聞還跟小路說感覺好像在過年
因為通常我只有春節假期會通宵追劇
來推薦好劇學英文啦，筆記大整理📒
蘋果原創自製的影集 The Morning Show
卡司超強，大咖飆戲就是好看
美國演員公會獎SAG最佳女主角
艾美獎最佳男配
因為自己週一到週五都在做直播新聞節目
看戲裡面跟新聞有關的討論特別有感
至於職場勾心鬥角，我真的就是看戲
因為我們團隊超級和諧，感恩的心
嚴格說起來
整齣戲以新聞為背景但重點不是新聞
而是 #MeToo
談性別與職場文化，多樣不扁平
如果喜歡女力議題值得一看
第二季正在拍了
劇本文筆很好，我覺得捕捉到新聞人（news people）講話用字精簡偏難的特點，很值得學進階對話英文
總之我覺得很好看，就一口氣把十小時看完了
跟你們分享我的筆記
———
我發現內容太多，完整版我放在電影英文課社團
付費學員可以看
👇🏻 電影英文課 實用英文單字
https://bit.ly/3nG23rZ
———
✏️實用口語
You can’t let it get to you. 不能中招
We need eyeballs. 眼球代表收視率
✏️漂亮表達法
He lit up the room. 讚美
He made everyone feel like family. 溫馨
Her comment has lit a fire in the debate nationwide. 生動
Were there any repercussions? 後續影響
Bring this one home. 好好完成，不是帶回家
This stays with us. 講膩 between you and me 可以用
We’re in this together. 同理心
Don’t annihilate yourself in the process just for the sake of pushing the buttons you’re not supposed to push. 很兇可是很帥，不要為求大膽而白目引火自焚/自毀前程
spit out your bones and some grizzle 把你啃噬殆盡
That ship is sailing as we speak. 木已成舟
A self-serving pile of shit 自私的人渣
I’m talking to you about you. 為了你好
go against the grain 違反常理
Keep your back to the wall without an opening and watch for sb 慎防小人
Don’t believe your own press. 不要自我陶醉
Don’t surround yourself with yes people. 很好的句子
Look your best 命令別人dress up
go unchecked 默許
I know where your skeletons are buried, my friend. 知道你不堪的秘密
✏️專業說法
especially in the 18-34 demo(demographic)
特別是18-34歲族群
hitting live numbers we haven’t seen in years
即時收視率達到近年高峰
And we’re out. Back in two minutes. 直播現場用語，簡單帥氣
mic sb. 別麥克風，動詞
sexual predator 性掠食者
Put sb’s head on a spike 斬首示眾
✏️進階口語詞彙
agency 自主權
insidiously 潛伏地
Incongruous 不一致/不和諧
sexual innuendo 性暗示
honor the rules 守規矩
culpable 有罪
complicity 共犯
corroborate 證實
fall guy 代罪羔羊
To lay a guilt trip 道德綁架，罪惡感勒索
car crash 災難現場，表示很悲劇
hit by a bus 表示很慘
quid pro quo 禮尚往來
oversized ego 自我膨脹
scintillating 耀眼精彩的
titillating 引人興奮的
✏️社交英文
Look who it is! It’s XXX. 熱絡感
There she is! Kelly Clarkson’s truth-teller. 引用別人講的話創造連結
Big, big day. 共襄盛舉
Nice scrub. I like it. 稱讚鬍子
I could use a favor. 需要你幫忙
When in Rome. 直接省略後半句，入境隨俗
✏️文化知識
crate training （狗狗的）籠子訓練
We all speak a little French. 法文借代髒話哈哈
royal we 皇室用we自居
Mazel tov! （猶太的）恭喜
✏️Quotes
How nice it is to be so comfortable with someone that you can just sit in silence and not have to talk. 真！
Desperation is not a strong position to make a big move.
People get their horrible news delivered to the palm of their hand 24/7, and they get it the way that they like it, colored the way that they want it. And news is awful, but humanity is addicted to it, and the whole world is depressed by it.
believe that省略 在 Re: [文法] 空英一句- 看板Eng-Class - 批踢踢實業坊 的推薦與評價
※ 引述《xiaoa (不事生產)》之銘言：
: 抱歉,現在換我不懂了
: 主格、受格應該是指引出子句的 [the things] 在子句之原句
: 即 we believe (that) [the things] are holding ....
: 但 [the things are holding ....] 實際上應該是一整個子句
先不要把we believe當作插入語
在 we believe [(that) the things are holding our families together]中
[the things are ...]的確如xi所說是一整個子句
但更精確地說，是由「that」引導的名詞子句
在這裡，that不是關係代名詞，
that所引導的名詞子句，作為主詞時，that不可以省略
作為受詞時，that通常會省略
故believe的受詞是[the things are holding our families together]這個名詞子句
而不是[the things]這個名詞
: 如果把we believe當插入語, 就有主格關代被省略的問題
: Sometimes the things that are holding .... really aren't
: ^^^^ we believe 拿走後應該存在的 關代(that)
的確，這是我原來感到疑惑的地方，為什麼會沒有關代??造成兩個動詞的矛盾
: 而且這句子真要把 we believe 拿掉,
: [the things are holding ....]
: 意思就變調了
也許吧..只是本句我理解的一直是同一個意思..所以不太能體會變調的感覺
唯一的疑惑是文法的結構而已
: 我原本的看法是[the things]當先行詞時, 其下子句的內的[the things]必須去掉
: the things that [we believe that (the things are ....)] aren't
這裡我就對xi的文法結構感到不解了..
the things that we believe.(我們所相信的事情)
^^^^關係代名詞，先行詞為the things，同時作為believe的受詞
we believe ((that) the things are ...)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^名詞子句，believe的受詞
但是合併起來變成..
the things that [we believe ((that) the things are...)]
^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 到底是誰要當受詞???
: 在 [we believe ......] 這層子句, the things 是受格(的部分)*1
: 所以外層(Sometimes the things)的that可省略
: 我本來想說, the things 同時也是內層的子句的一部分, 是不是
: 該把內層(believe 後面)的 that補償回來?*2(至少子句不會跑出一個沒頭兒的動詞)
: 但似乎依照慣例, believe 後面的 that好像是隨高興 愛省略就省略
因為不想把原來的段落分開，所以用顏色標註討論
*1, xi在前面已經指出[the things are holding...]是一個完整的子句
沒錯，我同意，而且說它是作為believe受詞的名詞子句
但是在這裡xi似乎又單獨認為the things是believe的受詞，而非整個子句是受詞
這與我的文法概念相衝突
如果一開始就認為只有the things是believe的受詞，那[the things are holding...]
就不該存在，尤其是子句中的「are」更是眼中釘
既然the things作為受詞，後面頂多是受詞補語，怎麼會有動詞出現呢?
*2,這裡我不大懂，把believe後面的that補償回來是何意?
如前所述，這裡是that引導名詞子句作為believe的受詞，
而且的確如xi所說，通常愛省略就省略
: 那結果就是
: the things (that) we believe (that) (the things) are .... aren't
: ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^
: 可略 慣略 被打壓
: 其實我個人還蠻滿意 這樣省略後剩下的句子的 XD
基本上這個句子的結構還是讓我感到奇怪..
=====
如果從dun給的連結中例句對應，
They pointed out the damage which they supposed had been done by last
night's storm. [2]
原句應該是
They pointed out the damage (they supposed that [the damage] had been done
by last night's storm.)
句中that同樣是引導名詞子句作為supposed的受詞，可省略
the damage是先行詞，於是用關係代名詞作形容詞子句後，變成
They pointed out the damage which (they supposed that ____ had been done
by last nights's storm.)
the damage被搬到前面變which，所以原來的地方空下來
連結中是說，怕that會被誤會成had been的主詞，所以就省略了(但它本來就能省略@@")
故變成
They pointed out the damage which they supposed had been done by ....
但這句和系爭句型The things we believe還是不大一樣
(「系爭」這用語不知大家可否接受)
如果改成The things which we blieve are holding ...就好多了
我想我一直對於we believe the things are holding中的
the things作為we believe的受詞耿耿於懷，所以一直不能接受
前面的which(或that)可省略的說法
或說其實是我誤解了
we believe the things are holding our families together中
believe的受詞的確是「the things」而非「整個子句」?
=====
The things (we believe (that) [the things] are holding ... ) aren't.
The things (we believe (that) [which] are holding ... ) aren't.
The things [which] (we believe (that) are holding ... ) aren't.
The things (we believe are holding ... ) aren't.
以上四句作為我對系爭句型的最終理解，
由四句的演繹過程明顯可見「which」仍然是作為「主格關代」而被省略
感謝各位提供想法的版友~
--
我好像廢話太多了..
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 111.249.129.142
... <看更多>