🖐🏽 五分鐘，Ken帶您看懂國際大小事— 🇺🇸
📰 The dying teenager who wanted world peace and love
🀄 垂死少年但願世界和平愛相隨
📘《Ken的文法筆記 I.》即將出售(詳置頂貼文)
When Californian teenager Jeff Henigson was diagnosed with brain cancer and given two years to live, a children's charity granted him the wish of a lifetime. But Jeff didn't choose to go to Disneyland or meet his favourite footballer - Jeff just wanted world peace.
📌 人生無常，這篇文章主人翁就是一個例子。Jeff給診斷患有(diagnosed with) 腦癌(brain cancer)，他的一生中唯一願望(the wish of a lifetime)是世界和平(world peace)。
In the summer of 1986, 15-year-old Jeff Henigson was riding his bike to the local electronics shop to buy the last part for a "super laser" he'd been building, when he was hit by a van.
"It's coming in the opposite direction and she doesn't see me and just smashes right into me," Jeff says. "And I'm launched, like a rocket, 10 feet backwards. I land on the back of my head."
Jeff wasn't wearing a helmet, and was knocked unconscious. A few hours later, he woke up in hospital. He seemed to be OK, though, so he was discharged the same day.
📌 在1986年夏天，他騎自行車時發生意外，被廂形貨車 (van) 撞到，由於他沒有戴安全帽(helmet)，因此被撞到不省人事(knocked unconscious)。他幾個小時醒來，看似可以了，所以在同一天出院(discharged)。
But within a few weeks Jeff began having seizures and he returned to the hospital, this time to have a CT scan of his brain.
If it had shown injuries from the cycling accident, Jeff would not have been surprised. But the news was worse than that - the scan revealed a tumor.
"Two things went through my mind," Jeff says. "One was a plan to lose my virginity that summer. And let's just say that did not work out. The second was to complete my laser project."
📌 他在幾個星期内感到不舒服，回到醫院進行電腦斷層掃描(CT scan)，竟發現掃描顯示他有腫瘤(美: tumor 英: tumour)
Jeff was an ambitious teenager, whose dream was to work for Nasa. He believed that the best way to impress them was to build "the most amazing laser" which could bounce a beam off of a reflector that had been left on the moon by Apollo 11.
But the laser was also a way for him to bond with his father, a distant figure, who had served with the US Navy in World War Two.
📌 這段講述Jeff的夢想：為太空總署(NASA)工作。他希望建造一個激光器，令NASA對他留下好的印象。這個項目也是個與他爸爸建立緊密關係(bond with his father)的方法。
"I didn't know at the time if that was because of the war or something else. But my father was separate, emotionally, from the rest of us. And I thought, 'Here's this thing we have in common. This fascination with science. This fascination with space.' And that's why I pursued it."
Though Jeff's father never mentioned his experiences in the Pacific when the nuclear bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he would talk, at length, about nuclear weapons, the nuclear threat and the US's relationship with the USSR. And this seems to have had an impact on Jeff.
📌 Jeff解釋他跟爸爸的共同點是迷戀科學(fascination with science)、迷戀太空(fascination with space)。他爸爸詳盡地談及核武器(nuclear weapons)、核威脅(nuclear threat)以及美國跟蘇聯的關係(the US’s relationship with the USSR)，這對Jeff有影響。
"There was a fictional film in the early 1980s called The Day After. It was about the Soviet Union dropping nuclear bombs on the US. I was probably 11 years old, and I was scared out of my mind. I would often fall asleep at night and go straight into a nightmare about nuclear war," Jeff remembers.
Jeff hoped not only that he would get that dream job with Nasa, but that the organisation would start to work with the USSR rather than competing with it.
"Even when I was fairly young, I could see the potential for collaboration between the US and Soviet Union," he says. "It just never made sense to me that we were pointing nuclear weapons at each other, when we could be collaborating to do extraordinary things in space."
📌 Jeff 不但希望在NASA工作，而且希望NASA會開始跟蘇聯合作，在太空合作做非凡事情 (collaborating to do extraordinary things in space)。
全文請至
https://reurl.cc/jq5Dy1
📘【Ken的高頻單字筆記 I】
購買辦法：https://is.gd/H8W7Qj
👨🏫【實用英語扎根培訓】
課程網址：https://reurl.cc/m95QDl
whose文法 在 Re: [文法] whose的用法- 看板Eng-Class - 批踢踢實業坊 的推薦與評價
本文旨在總結以下這考題所引起的多種看法。雖非最近的話題，但覺得當時的討論沒結果
，懸在那裡，故在此整理，以資參考。
問題句：They were the Boy Scouts whose job it is to help elderly people cross
the street.
兩大癥結：
1. it 什麼作用？可不可省？
2. 為何 whose 前沒逗點？有無逗點代表什麼意義？
一些先前的回應和相關推文：
:===================================================================
: 作者 msbaker (honey) 看板 Eng-Class
: 標題 [文法] whose的用法
: 時間 Thu Jan 19 14:00:20 2012
:─────────────────────────────────
:請教一題關於whose的用法:
:They were the Boy Scouts _____ to help eldery people cross the street.
:A. whose was the task
:B. to whom it was the task
:C. it was whose task
:D. whose task it was
:答案是D
:我看書上的解說是,Boy Scouts意為童子軍. whose task it was to help...
:(他們的任務是....)中的"it"是先行代詞,代替後面的不定詞.等於說"to help...
:was their task."
:我還是不明白這個句子的架構,為什麼會有一個"it"出現? 如果沒有"it",句子就不對了
嗎?
:我對這樣的句子覺得很陌生.請教大家,如果我要查相關用法,可以怎麼查呢?
:我想再多找一下文法書,把自己不明白的地方再弄清楚.
:謝謝回答
:==========================================================================
: 作者 EngLearner (英語客) 看板 Eng-Class
: 標題 Re: [文法] whose的用法
: 時間 Thu Jan 19 21:38:06 2012
:──────────────────────────────────────
:※ 引述《msbaker (honey)》之銘言：
:: 請教一題關於whose的用法:
:: They were the Boy Scouts _____ to help eldery people cross the street.
:(二)至於 "it" 為何會在此，可以從兩個角度解讀:
:(1)文法:"it" 為 虛詞，以你句子為例，可先看 "It is Boy Scouts' task to help
elderly people cross the street." 這句只是加上 "They were Boy Scouts."
的確，it 是虛主詞，後面詳述。
:→ zofloya:這是好英文嗎? whose something is/was to + V不是更簡潔 01/20
00:30
簡潔雖好，若兩種表達法含義不同，就不單是簡潔問題，而是何種表達法才對的問題。
:=======================================================================
:作者: tijj (my two cents) 看板: Eng-Class 標題: Re: [文法] whose的用法
:時間: Fri Jan 20 10:42:10 2012
:※ 引述《msbaker (honey)》之銘言：
:: 請教一題關於whose的用法:
:: They were the Boy Scouts _____ to help eldery people cross the street.
:→ dunchee:這種表達方式。有無"it"的差別是在整體意思上的差異: 01/20
:→ dunchee:.... the Boy Scouts whose job is to help ... ->這意思 01/20
:→ dunchee:相當於(不是整句，是the Boy Scouts...之後部份) -> 01/20
:→ dunchee:"The Boy Scouts' job is to help elderly people ...." 01/20
:→ dunchee: ... task ... 01/20
:→ dunchee:(有沒有看出來? 這有些像是在講"Boy Scouts"只有一個task 01/20
:→ dunchee:(沒別的?) 然後他們單一的task就是... 01/20
:→ dunchee: 前頭的 ...was to .... 01/20
:→ dunchee:有 it : the Boy Scouts whose task it was to help ... 01/20
:→ dunchee:相當於(不是整句，是the Boy Scouts...之後部份) -> 01/20
:→ dunchee:"To help help eldery people cross the street" 這件事 01/20
:→ dunchee:was their task (這有些像是在說 ... 比如某人問說 xxxx 01/20
:→ dunchee:這task屬於誰管的/做的，然後你回答說這某A (xxxx只是他做 01/20
:→ dunchee:的多項事情的其中一個) 或是看這串: 01/20
:→ dunchee:https://tinyurl.com/6t4ntfa 如果你注意讀下篇(LearnEng 01/20
:→ dunchee:寫的第1部份的例子，講的都是單一一人的task(他的task就是 01/20
:→ dunchee:那項，沒別的) 01/20
:→ dunchee:換句話說題目句子使用了 whose task was to ... 那麼整體 01/20
:→ dunchee:意思上其實是有瑕疵的 01/20
:→ dunchee:套用前頭link裡頭人講的，這變成"to help ....cross the 01/20
:→ dunchee:street 是他們的"complete role" 01/20
:→ dunchee:(換句話說，沒別的。他們的日行一善不是只有這一項吧... 01/20
的確，這正是 it 在此的作用。後面就這點做整理。
:這裡的it可以省略, 是否為非限定或限定,並不是差在有無it (或有無comma).
這裡的 it 不可省略，雖然 it 有無和關係子句限定/非限定無關。後有詳述。
:“Boy Scouts”本身意義就很明確了, 有沒有it都是非限定用法. 因為這世界上
:應該沒有只負責扶年長者過馬路的單一任務童子軍. 至少我以前當任時,不存在這種.
「童子軍意思明確，故為非限定」對了。
進入正題。先不扯到關係子句，先從以下三個句子的表達法，看看不同形式，對於「童子
軍的工作」和「扶人過馬路」兩件事情，有什麼重要的含義：
（1） The Boy Scouts' job is to help elderly people cross the street.
意義：童子軍的工作即是/主要是扶老人過馬路。
（隱含：A's job is B 這句型，通常意味著是 B 是唯一工作，若非唯一，至少也是主要
工作。）
=> 因此，這句的表達方式不通，因為我們知道，童子軍的工作顯然不只是扶人過馬路，
其主要工作也不是這個。
（2） To help elderly people cross the street is the Boy Scouts' job.
意義：扶老人過馬路是童子軍的工作/該做的事。
（重點：是童軍該做的，不是他人該做的。隱含：前面的「唯一工作」的含義不見了。）
=> 根據我們對童子軍的認識，這句話沒問題。
（3） It is the Boy Scouts' job to help elderly people cross the street.
意義：扶老人過馬路是童子軍的工作/該做的事。（或：童子軍的一項工作，是扶老人過
馬路。）
（隱含：這句話意義大抵和（2）一樣，是採用所謂「外置」(extraposition)手段，將較
長較重的不定詞主詞置後，以虛主詞 it 代替原位。2 和 3 的細微差異，此處不提了，
和本文主題無關。）
結論：（1）因帶有「唯一工作」暗示，不通。其他的（2）和（3）皆可。
接著加入 They are the Boy Scouts 這句話，試圖利用關係詞 whose 將兩句合併成一句
。
（2）+ whose:
?They are the Boy Scouts [to help elderly people cross the street is whose
job.]
結果形成難懂的句子，whose 和其相關的先行詞 Boy Scouts 距離太遠，不佳，甚至「不
合法」。
剩下的可能，（3）+ whose:
They are the Boy Scouts, whose job it is to help elderly people cross the
street.
意義：他們是童子軍。[他們的/童子軍的一項工作，是扶老人過馬路。]
（含義：重點僅在「他們是童子軍」， 第二部分只是附帶補充說明童子軍有什麼工作。
）
分析：
注意在這裡 whose 前通常要加逗號，因為從意義上看，這是非限定用法（補充用法），
為什麼是非限定？因為一提到童子軍，我們就知他們是什麼團體，不必靠「工作是扶人過
馬路」來確認童子軍。關係子句「工作是扶人過馬路」，只是補充、附帶說明童子軍的一
項工作，而非用來將「童子軍」這個團體區分、限定為「扶人過馬路」的那種和「不扶人
過馬路」的那種。後半句 [...] 整個刪去，也不影響主要子句「他們是童子軍」的基本
意義。
我們對童子軍的認定，告訴我們他們不區分成兩種，這語言外的知識，也告知我們此處的
關係子句是非限定的補充用法，因此按照補充用法的「傳統慣例」在 whose 前加逗號。
那麼，如何看待去掉逗號的同一句話：
They are the Boy Scouts whose job it is to help elderly people cross the
street.
答案：去掉逗號的版本也對。去掉逗號，仍不改變「童子軍只有一種，即會扶人過馬路的
那種」的事實，因此這裡的 whose 子句仍和有逗號者相同，不會因為去掉逗號就變成限
定用法，從所有童子軍當中挑選出「扶人過馬路的那種」。重點：「限定」的定義，就是
從一個大集合中挑選出一個較小的子集合。
這一點和傳統文法書規定的「沒有逗號就是限定用法」相牴觸，但根據一般母語者對英文
的實際使用，包括英語作家的寫法，有時候，表達非限定用法時並不加逗號，必須靠語意
來決定有無限定功能。
從語法+語意角度看，這一種不加逗號但語意為「非限定」的用法，有特別強調關係子句
內容的效果。因此，
They are the Boy Scouts whose job it is to help elderly people cross the
street.
這句話可說比加了逗號的版本多了一個敘述重點：
1. 他們是童子軍。
2. 童子軍的一項工作，是扶老人過馬路。
新近的、涵蓋較全的、基於語料事實、重語意的文法書，已經試圖破解傳統規範文法中的
「沒有逗號就是限定用法」迷思，這現象很值得注意，可以幫助你閱讀時重新思考關係子
句的「限定/補充」用法。
結論：
They were the Boy Scouts whose job it is to help elderly people cross the
street.
（1）此句 it 不可省。it 的有無決定有沒有「唯一工作」隱義。
（2）it 有無和關係子句是否是限定無關。
（3）前無逗號的關係子句不一定是限定，要視語意而定，逗號（或破折號）本身不再是
絕對標準。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 76.198.133.1
※ 編輯: l10nel 來自: 76.198.133.1 (10/19 13:57)
... <看更多>