【After Winning Majority in LegCo: Beijing's Crackdown May Trigger International Intervention】
***感謝Hong Kong Columns - Translated,將我早前撰寫『議會過半想像:以「#國際攬炒」反制「臨立會2.0」』長文(https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.313299448762570/2887650867994069/)翻譯成英文,鼓勵國際社會關注立會選舉一旦過半的沙盤推演,在最惡劣形勢下的制衡策略。***
中文精簡版本:https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.564294826996363/2888641404561682/
Hongkongers have experienced our revolution for over half a year. They no longer take a consequentialist view to the effectiveness of their movement as they did years ago, or waste time second-guessing the intentions and background of fellow activists. Following the defensive battles at CUHK and PolyU, November’s District Council election saw a great victory of unity. More marvellous is the union between peaceful and “valiant” protesters.
In the process of resisting tyranny, the people have realised that one cannot prioritize one strategy over another. This is also how the common goal of “35+” came into being—the hope that we will win over half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo) this September, such that the political spectrum that represents the majority of Hongkongers is able to gain control of legislative decisions. The political clout of Hongkongers will increase if 35 or more seats are successfully secured on our side. It is certainly one vital step to achieve the five demands within the system.
The possibility of realizing legislative majority
Technically it is not unrealistic to win a majority even under the current undemocratic system. Back in the 2016 LegCo election, we already won 30 seats. In addition to the District Council (First) functional constituency seat that is already in the pocket of the pan-democrats, as long as the candidates in Kowloon East and New Territories West do not start infighting again, we could safely secure 33 seats based on the number of pan-dem votes in 2016.
The other 3 seats required to achieve a majority depend on democrats’ breakthrough among the functional constituencies by dispersing the resources of the Liaison Office. They also count on whether the turnout this September could exceed 71.2% — that of last year’s District Council elections. Some of the factors that could affect the turnout include: will the epidemic persist into the summer? Will there be potential violent repression of protests in the 2 weeks preceding the election? Will Hong Kong-US relations be affected by the downturn of the global economy?
Therefore, the ambition of “35+” is to be prioritised by the resistance as both a means and an end. I have already expressed my support for an intra-party primary at the coordination meeting. In the meantime, it is pleasing to see the ongoing debates reaching a consensus of maximising the seats among geographical constituencies in the upcoming election.
Whilst enthusiastic coordination, we should also assess the post-election landscape and gauge Beijing’s reactions: if we do not reach 35 seats, Hong Kong will be subject to tighter control and more severe repression by China; but if the democratic parties successfully form a majority in LegCo, CCP’s fears of a “constitutional crisis” would become imminent. Hence, the key questions are how the Pan-Democrats should deal with the volatile political situation in Hong Kong and how they are going to meet Beijing’s charge head-on.
Watching out for Beijing’s dismissal of LegCo after reaching majority
To take back control of LegCo such that it faithfully reflects the majority’s principles and needs is the definition of a healthy democracy. Recently, however, DAB’s Tam Yiu-chung has warned that the plan of the Pan-Dems to “usurp power” in the LegCo would only lead to Beijing’s forceful disqualification of certain members or the interpretation of the Basic Law. This proves that winning a majority in LegCo is not only a popular conception but also a realistic challenge that would get on the nerves of Beijing. Could Beijing accept a President James To in LegCo? These unknown variables must be addressed upon achieving a majority.
While there is no telltale sign as to Beijing’s exact strategy, we are already familiar with the way CCP manipulated the Basic Law in the past 4 years. Having experienced three waves of disqualifications in LegCo, twice kicked out of LegCo with my team, and thrice locked up in jail, I have no false hopes of an easy compromise from Beijing: they would not let Pan-Dems control LegCo for half a year and wait (as is the proper procedure) until after having negatived the Budget to dissolve the legislature, and thereby giving them an easy victory in the re-elections. The greater the Pan-Dems threaten Beijing’s rule in Hong Kong, the more likely that it will trigger Beijing’s repression.
Since the disqualification and arrest of lawmakers have already become “normalised”, one can even imagine the police stepping into the LegCo building to force Pan-Dems into voting. Neither is it beyond our imagination to expect the CCP to kick out all 70 lawmakers in a fit of rage and replace them with a provisional LegCo “2.0” [HKCT note: The first was from 25 Jan 1997 to 30 Jun 1998]. To depend on a majority that could lead to a chapter of a “new testament” for One Country, Two Systems is perhaps what many elites long for, but they are overly optimistic:for a ticket to the promised land will not be available at the Chief Executive election campaign a year and a half later.
Admittedly, the Pan-Dems cannot unilaterally initiate “Laam-chaau” [HKCT note: mostly translated into “scorched-earth” mentality or “mutual destruction”; some even translated into “If I burn, you burn with us”]. The most they can do is to force a standstill of the government, and not for long the LegCo will have been eliminated from the equation to make the wheels turn again. It all leaves the plan of “Negativing the motion → Dissolving LegCo → Re-election after re-election → the stepping down of Carrie Lam” merely as overly positive speculation, probably resulting from their overestimate of CCP's capacity for rational calculation. The Pan-Dems must guard their frontlines and recognise what the biggest threat from Hong Kong to China could be. In this case, should LegCo sessions be disrupted or suspended, the Pan-Dems would have to be well prepared to surmount the expected obstacles and prevent the disqualification crisis 4 years ago—a Catch-22 indeed.
Productive tension from global intervention: Using Laam-chaau against the CCP
What aggravates the CCP the most is the potential threat to Hong Kong’s unique status as the one and only “separate customs territory”. Any miscalculation will compromise its role as the Chinese economy’s “white gloves”. Imagine if CCP were to disqualify all 70 elected lawmakers and convene a meeting north of the Shenzhen River to pass a resolution to Hong Kong’s affairs (much like the Provisional Legislative Council “1.0" in 1997), how great will the shock be in a world with an effective Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act? However hard it is to predict the future one thing is certain: With the US presidential election just around the corner, blows to the separation of powers would not be tolerated, and the West would necessarily effect countermeasures against the Hong Kong government.
Beijing has been relying upon Hong Kong to navigate the international community for decades. While clamping down on the political freedom of the cosmopolitan city, Beijing desires to maintain the financial centre’s economic freedom. Hence, we started lobbying for the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act four years ago, and today we are determined to promote “Laam-chaau” on an international scale.
The will of the voters must be reflected in an election. If a “35+” legislature were to be dismissed and replaced, such flagrant violation of democracy would assuredly cause a greater backlash than the infamous extradition bill. Knowing what the reality ahead of us could be, we have to combine our election and international strategies to oppose the placement of a 35+ LegCo with an “Emergency Legislative Council 2.0”, to advance an international “Laam-chaau” to Hong Kong’s status as “separate customs territory”. Only then will we stand a chance to resist the regime and to realise the five demands.
Adjusting our mindset: Overcoming the “constitutional crisis” to reach a resolution
Upon the realization of the “35+” LegCo, it is expected that the CCP will launch a devastating counterattack. The Pan-Dems should not expect LegCo to run normally; neither can the lawmakers realise their governing blueprints they have for Hong Kong. Rather, candidates will be able to compete against one another with visions of a liberated Hong Kong through popular vote. Bringing this point up has nothing to do with undermining the common goal of reaching a majority in LegCo, but rather channels the battle of LegCo to positive use upon the rule of law’s death and a “constitutional crisis” ahead. Knowing that Hongkongers have nothing to fall back on, all Pan-Dems should not miss the only way to the realization of “35+”.
Thus, be they partisans, nonpartisans, incumbent politicians, amateur politicians, or the civil society as a whole – if we stay in the political discourse of 2016 and continue to perpetuate old stereotypes, that is to deal with the divisions on the pan-democratic camp by favouring the most “local” faction; to consider only resource allocation and self-aggrandizement as the purpose of a LegCo campaign; to ignore how potential lawmakers are fitted to what specific roles; to turn a blind eye to the journey of resistance since last summer (extending indefinitely into the future)—They would lead as astray and cost us lose a precious opportunity for change by winning a 35+ majority.
The extent to which the pan-democrats can stay united in light of the political atmosphere since last summer is another problem that our side must to address. Before the watershed moment of 12th June 2019, many democratic delegates were trapped in the mentality of needing to “preserve people’s livelihood”, “be content of what we have accomplished”, and other strategies that favours stability. As the government refuses to heed to the five demands, whether the democrats, especially those in the functional constituencies, have the political will to go all-in is the real difficult question that confronts us in the upcoming LegCo election.
All in all, if “35+” cannot be realised, it is unsurprising to see LegCo being more heavily suppressed in the next 4 years; even if "35+" is achieved, it is questionable whether the pan-democrats are able to weather multiple attacks, verbal or physical, from the regime (judging from its power in the last four years) and utilise the international Laam-chaau strategy against the displacement of LegCo. Adhering to the motto of “we fight on, each in his own way”, I can only hope that Hongkongers in elections, street confrontations and international front can reconcile with each other, so that we may collectively compel the government to yield to our demands in the next six months. It is only by reaching a resolution before a real constitutional crisis that we can combat the institutional violence of the regime and not be devoured by it.
https://hkcolumn.blogspot.com/2020/04/joshua-wong-after-winning-majority-in.html?fbclid=IwAR216gf53pG_j9JOpDfr2GItvjLfrFSekKTPzoEs3-s9KBqvPEwz865P8vw
同時也有2部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過3萬的網紅Eric's English Lounge,也在其Youtube影片中提到,期待的政治英文影片第二集出爐了!!! 今天探討的是三位政治大咖的英文口語。再次聲明,此影片的目的不在於比較英文能力,而是提供學習者英文口語的實際操作和可以注意的小細節。對我而言,英文是一種工具,我並不覺得台灣的政治人物一定需要擁有驚人的外語能力。以下是影片中提到的一些資訊,請看完再發表評論: ...
「cause and effect中文」的推薦目錄:
- 關於cause and effect中文 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於cause and effect中文 在 Charles Mok 莫乃光 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於cause and effect中文 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於cause and effect中文 在 Eric's English Lounge Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於cause and effect中文 在 Laowu老吳 Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於cause and effect中文 在 中文句型【因果句】Cause & Effect Sentence in Chinese 十大 ... 的評價
- 關於cause and effect中文 在 Community Guidelines strike basics on YouTube 的評價
cause and effect中文 在 Charles Mok 莫乃光 Facebook 的精選貼文
【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】
// 當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權,暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來,這已清晰可見。僅說無諾,何能「止暴制亂」?
// Where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.
https://www.facebook.com/…/a.455221741311…/1474268236073377/
【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】(Scroll for English)
1. 近日,警隊的行為就如國際特赦組織所言越見低劣。[1] 這皆因政府漠視其專家提供的建議,並以歇斯底里、毫無章法可言的策略回應持續的動盪。
2. 五個月來,政府持續容許以下情況發生,對警政問題及根本的政治危機藥石亂投:
a. 阻礙救護人員前往現場拯救傷者;[2]
b. 偏頗地處理強姦或酷刑對待被拘留人士的指控;[3]
c. 肆無忌憚地濫用武力;[4]
d. 以諸多藉口為警察的失控或報復行為辯解。[5]
3. 法政匯思強烈譴責警隊濫用武力,及其本末倒置、往往為社區添煩添亂的驅散示威者行動。警方在十一月十一日於香港中文大學(「中大」)、香港理工大學及香港大學等驅散非法集結及/或堵路行為的行動,指稱的事實根據惹人非議。[6] 在撰寫此聲明之時,警方甚至以催淚彈及橡膠子彈回應中大校長的善意,與學生發生激烈衝突,造成最少60人受傷及多人被捕。[7]
4. 歸根究底,現有的制度未能公正地調查涉及警務人員的刑事指控,乃是警民衝突的源頭。樂觀地看,這可能只是個別調查人員的疏忽;悲觀地看,這反映一種互相包庇的文化,可能已由員佐級警員到警務處處長、保安局局長甚至特首,滲透警隊及政府上下。無論是哪一個情況,這種警察橫行無忌的觀感已經令公眾對負責調查大部分罪行的警察的信任蕩然無存。這個缺口一開,刑事司法制度剩下非常有限的能力,處理失職警員。
5. 法政匯思繼續呼籲香港政府成立獨立調查委員會,調查包括六月份以來政府的治安管理手段。除了將肇事者繩之於法外,更重要的是全面檢閱香港警隊以達至結構上的改革。至今,特區政府對於這個明顯又實際的選擇不屑一顧,堅持讓一個缺乏監察權力的獨立監察警方處理投訴委員會(「監警會」)[8] 去調查警察投訴及內部調查科。這正正就是問題根源所在。
6. 監警會委派的國際專家組就這個問題發表《進展報告》。國際專家組與政府持相反意見。他們批評監警會在結構上欠缺全面調查權力,對監警會這一個輕型、監管式的體制是否能夠做出決定性的貢獻表示懷疑,更指出下一步的可能性諸如「委派一個享有所需權力的獨立調查機構以作更深程度及更廣泛的調查」,意味著一個獨立調查委員會。[9]
7. 對於近數星期暴力頻頻,政府沒有採取任何行動,只是堅拒示威者的訴求(包括成立獨立調查委員會),更稱他們為「人民的敵人」。[10] 警員們多月來非人化地濫稱示威者為「曱甴」。[11]
8. 法政匯思絕對不認同法外制裁。此立場於七月二十五日之聲明已表明。然而,當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權,暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來,這已清晰可見。僅說無諾,何能「止暴制亂」?
法政匯思
2019年11月15日
(PDF: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)
1. Police conduct has seen, in the words of Amnesty International, ‘another shocking low’ [1] in recent days as the Government ignored constructive feedback by its own experts and hysterically responded to the ongoing unrest without any rational strategy.
2. In particular, these allegations point to a wanton failure on the part of the Government to properly approach policing and the underlying political crisis, now in its 5th month:
a. Obstructing rescuers and ambulances from accessing the injured; [2]
b. Unfair handling of allegations of rape and torture in custody; [3]
c. Unapologetic excesses in its use of force; [4] and
d. Evasive defence of police officers acting impulsively or in retaliation. [5]
3. The Progressive Lawyers Group (the ‘PLG’) vehemently condemns the Police regarding their excessive use of force and dispersal operations which often create the chaos sought to be quelled. On 11 November, the police conducted operations in, amongst others, the Chinese University of Hong Kong (‘CUHK’), the Polytechnic University of Hong Kong and the University of Hong Kong to disperse unlawful assemblies and/or obstruction of traffic, [6] the factual basis of which has been doubted by many. As at the drafting of this Statement, as riot police responded to an olive branch by the CUHK Vice-Chancellor with tear gas and rubber bullets, severe clashes between students and riot police at CUHK are ongoing with at least 60 injured and dozens arrested. [7]
4. Nonetheless, the crux of the problem remains in the institutional failure to investigate criminal allegations involving police officers impartially. At best, it could be an omission by individual police officers in their execution of duty. At worst, it could be a culture that acquiesces and conceals wrongdoings affecting grassroot constables, the Commissioner of Police, the Secretary for Security and the Chief Executive alike. Whichever the case may be, this perception of impunity breaches the trust and confidence the public reposes in the police who are tasked with investigating most offences. With this link broken, there remains very limited recourse in the criminal justice system against rogue officers.
5. The PLG continues to call on the Hong Kong Government to appoint a Commission of Inquiry regarding, amongst others, the current approach to policing social unrest since June. Bringing wrongdoers to justice aside, the more important task is a holistic review on the Police Force and a roadmap to structural reforms. So far, the Government brushed aside this obvious and pragmatic option, insisting upon an inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Council (‘IPCC’) [8] whose (lack of) oversight over the Complaints Against Police Office (‘CAPO’) is the very issue at the heart of the current saga.
6. Curiously, the International Expert Panel of the IPCC appointed for advice on that very inquiry seems to hold a contrary view. In their Position Statement Report of Progress, the experts pointed out ‘structural limitations in the scope and powers of the IPCC Inquiry’ and noted that ‘it remains to be seen whether a light touch, oversight body like the IPCC, can make sufficient progress to produce any decisive contribution…’ It also identified a possible next step such as ‘a deeper more comprehensive inquiry in a number of respects by an independent body with requisite powers’, alluding to a Commission of Inquiry. [9]
7. In response to the extraordinary brutalities these few weeks, the Government did nothing but maintain that it will not yield to the protesters’ demands (including an independent Commission of Inquiry) and call them ‘enemies of the people’. [10] It has not helped that the police have for months been blatantly using such a dehumanising term as ‘cockroaches’ to refer to protesters [11].
8. The PLG stands by our Statement on 25 July 2019 and does not encourage citizens to take justice into their own hands. However, it is obvious by now that where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.
The Progressive Lawyers Group
15 November 2019
(PDF version: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)
cause and effect中文 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的最佳貼文
[時事英文] 期待的政治英文影片第二集出爐了!!! 今天探討的是三位政治大咖的英文口語。再次聲明,此影片的目的不在於比較英文能力,而是提供學習者英文口語的實際操作和可以注意的小細節。對我而言,英文是一種工具,我並不覺得台灣的政治人物一定需要擁有驚人的外語能力。以下是影片中提到的一些資訊,請看完再發表評論:
★★★★★★★★★★★★
英文口說評估指標
• 是否到達溝通目的
• 考量語境/當下場景
• 詞彙資源
• 文法範圍和正確度
• 連貫性和流暢度還有發音
★★★★★★★★★★★★
韓國瑜(1957年6月17日-),中華民國政治人物,中國國民黨,現任高雄市市長,中華民國陸軍軍官學校專修學生班40期、東吳大學英國語文學系文學學士、國立政治大學東亞研究所法學碩士。
最先去搜尋的是ICRT全英文的專訪,但是大部分影片和錄音檔都被刪除,只留下一些片段: https://youtu.be/zDYhd7XiSUQ?t=12 (Vid 1)
•prosperious - prosperous Kaohsiung
•We will hire the English teacher so that we can save money-cause, effect relationship?
•good overall English pronunciation and fluency but spoke in short phrases
https://youtu.be/3helP_n9jY8?t=481 (Vid 2)
•唸稿子的時候有適當的停頓, 英文語調也有上下的起伏
•met--made, we have made the impossible possible
•in everyone eyes--in everyone’s eyes
•longing for better tomorrow --longing for a better tomorrow
•整體上來說沒有什麼問題
•很難去評估真正的英文口說能力,畢竟是念稿子
•從詞彙量而言,至少足夠回應一般生活類問題
•因為句子還蠻短的,所以沒有什麼語法錯誤
•口音是一定有的,但是算標準,可以聽得懂
•流暢度沒有大問題,但是連貫性可以增加
•對我而言,英文是一種工具, 並不覺得台灣的政治人物一定需要
★★★★★★★★★★★★
郭台銘(英文名:Terry Gou,1950年10月18日-),中華民國企業家,新北板橋人,籍貫山西省晉城縣,臺灣省立板橋中學初中部、中國海事專科學校(今臺北海洋科技大學)航運管理科畢業,是鴻海科技集團(富士康)和鴻海精密的董事長兼總經理。以個人資產705億美元名列富比士億萬富翁列表中的第7大富豪,同時也是臺灣首富。2019年4月17日,郭台銘宣布投入中國國民黨的2020年中華民國總統選舉黨內初選。
郭台銘 - 企業領袖高峰會演講 APEC CEO Summit 2013: https://youtu.be/c733wqJup_I?t=175
•聽完他的對答覺得講得很好
•應該已經在商業界上運用英文三十幾年了
•1985就建立在美國一家分公司
•因為是商業場合,講的話算官方但直接
•以流暢度來說,會給高的評分
•英文詞彙上應用專業術語 (e.g., key components, technology integration)
•不熟悉字型的變化 morphology/word form--manufacture, manufacturing, manufacturer --we emerged as an electronics manufacturer; we innovation designer --no be verb; we are use all component and integration --we utilize component integration testing?, etc.)
•發音也蠻多問題的
•猜測他應該是有在練英文口說
•應該沒有太多寫作上的需求
•猜測他學習英文的方式是蠻自然的
•沒有花額外的時間在學習文法,刻意的去修正自己的錯誤
•學習英文的只是為了工作需求
•說話有連貫性也有技巧,但是無法精準表達意思
•在特定場景的口說上應該是沒有問題,因為重複性高而且大概可以猜出他會講什麼
•說實話,表現超出預料
★★★★★★★★★★★★
柯文哲(1959年8月6日-),中華民國著名外科醫師、無黨籍政治人物。現任臺北市市長。國立臺灣大學醫學院臨床醫學研究所博士畢業,曾任臺大醫院急診部醫師、臺大醫院創傷醫學部主任、臺大醫學院教授,2014年宣布參選臺北市市長選舉,並以「在野大聯盟」為號召,同年當選臺北市第15任直轄市市長,成為臺北市改制直轄市後首位無黨籍市長。2018年,參選臺北市市長並成功連任。
https://youtu.be/ffIxQ27jUdQ?t=159
•首先媒體對柯市長太嚴格了
•常講英文的時候是為了開玩笑「柯式幽默」
•在這個影片當中他確實有看稿子
•and da today
•today (stress on the second syllable )
•medical (stress on first syllable)
•metary -- military
• problems cause by L1 interference
•從語音結構上來看,中文是一種「音節計時語言(syllable-timed language)及「聲調語言」(tone language),每個字由一個音節構成,唸起來各音節輕重相當且時間大致等長,而且每個字有自己的聲調;但英語是一種「重音計時語言」(stress-timed language)及「語調語言」(intonation language),每個字的音節數不一,由各音節是否有重音來決定其輕重、長短與音階高低,而重音落於何處也會決定其語意之不同。
-campus.cavesbooks.com.tw
•One of the most noticeable features of English is that some of its syllables are strong while many others are weak” (Roach, 2000, p81). English stress pattern is manifested through syllable length, loudness and pitch. In other words, stressed syllables are longer, louder and higher pitched than unstressed ones. Sometimes one word that is stressed differently may have different grammatical functions and meanings, for example, the homographs “record” (verb) and “record” (noun). “Record” has the stress on second syllable when it is a verb, and it has stress on the first when it is a noun. The shift of the stress even makes a noticeable difference to the sound of the vowels, for instance, “e” in noun “REcord” is pronounced as /e/, but /ɪ/ in verb “reCORD”.
-http://ec-concord.ied.edu.hk
•coal values -- core values
•freedom, tolerance, rule of law
•用詞大致上是正確的雖然還是有字形上(word form)的問題
•expensive -- expense
•每個句子都很短,但還是有溝通的功能
•蠻多文法的問題
•個人認為是有知識和魅力的一位候選人
•聽他用英文演講一段時間真的有困擾,因為沒重音,很難辨識重點
•講話沒有太多語調和節奏,在英文發音裡面是一個非常重要的環節
•會導致聽者需要完全專注他每一個字才能辨識他在說什麼
•不覺得每一個政治人物都需要英文,有專業和可靠的翻譯輔助,就覺得不會是一種困擾
•英文是一種工具,多一種工具就多一種選擇,但這種工具用不好時也有可能會造成一些誤解
★★★★★★★★★★★★
在此提供我的「心智圖詞彙攻略」課程,希望對大家的語言學習有幫助: https://bit.ly/2QgajQw
還有Howard老師《會走路的翻譯機,神級英文學習攻略本》的傳送門 http://bit.ly/2DfGrhH
浩爾口筆譯 ft. 創譯兄弟
★★★★★★★★★★★★
同時也再次感謝炙瞳夢 RED FILM幾位大導演和貓哥的友情協助,幫我們拍攝和剪接出如此精彩的影片!
★★★★★★★★★★★★
cause and effect中文 在 Eric's English Lounge Youtube 的最佳解答
期待的政治英文影片第二集出爐了!!! 今天探討的是三位政治大咖的英文口語。再次聲明,此影片的目的不在於比較英文能力,而是提供學習者英文口語的實際操作和可以注意的小細節。對我而言,英文是一種工具,我並不覺得台灣的政治人物一定需要擁有驚人的外語能力。以下是影片中提到的一些資訊,請看完再發表評論:
關於韓市長的「晶晶體」: http://bit.ly/2kENRVv
★★★★★★★★★★★★
英文口語評估指標
• 是否到達溝通目的
• 考量語境/當下場景
• 詞彙資源
• 文法範圍和正確度
• 連貫性和流暢度還有發音
★★★★★★★★★★★★
韓國瑜(1957年6月17日-),中華民國政治人物,中國國民黨,現任高雄市市長,中華民國陸軍軍官學校專修學生班40期、東吳大學英國語文學系文學學士、國立政治大學東亞研究所法學碩士。
EDIT: New Sample (08.21.2019): https://youtu.be/1xrcXcZvAko?t=148 (請先看完我們的分析)
最先去搜尋的是ICRT全英文的專訪,但是大部分影片和錄音檔都被刪除,只留下一些片段: https://youtu.be/zDYhd7XiSUQ?t=12 (Vid 1)
•prosperious -- prosperous Kaohsiung
•We will hire the English teacher so that we can save money -- cause, effect relationship?
•intelligible English pronunciation but spoke in short phrases
https://youtu.be/3helP_n9jY8?t=481 (Vid 2)
•唸稿子的時候有適當的停頓, 英文語調也有上下的起伏
•met--made, we have made the impossible possible
•in everyone eyes--in everyone’s eyes
•longing for better tomorrow --longing for a better tomorrow
•整體上來說沒有什麼問題...
•很難去評估真正的英文口語能力,畢竟是念稿子
•從詞彙量而言,至少足夠回應一般生活類問題
•因為句子還蠻短的,所以沒有什麼語法錯誤
•口音是一定有的,但是算標準,可以聽得懂
•短句的流暢度沒有大問題,但是連貫性可以增加
★★★★★★★★★★★★
郭台銘(英文名:Terry Gou,1950年10月18日-),中華民國企業家,新北板橋人,籍貫山西省晉城縣,臺灣省立板橋中學初中部、中國海事專科學校(今臺北海洋科技大學)航運管理科畢業,是鴻海科技集團(富士康)和鴻海精密的董事長兼總經理。以個人資產705億美元名列富比士億萬富翁列表中的第7大富豪,同時也是臺灣首富。2019年4月17日,郭台銘宣布投入中國國民黨的2020年中華民國總統選舉黨內初選。
郭台銘 - 企業領袖高峰會演講 APEC CEO Summit 2013: https://youtu.be/c733wqJup_I?t=175
•聽完他的對答覺得講得很好
•應該已經在商業界上運用英文三十幾年了
•1985就建立在美國一家分公司
•因為是商業場合,講的話算官方但直接
•以流暢度來說,會給高的評分
•英文詞彙上應用專業術語 (e.g., key components, technology integration)
•不熟悉字型的變化 morphology/word form--manufacture, manufacturing, manufacturer --we emerged as an electronics manufacturer; we innovation designer --no be verb; we are use all component and integration --we utilize component integration testing?, etc.)
•發音也蠻多問題的
•猜測他應該是有在練英文口語
•應該沒有太多寫作上的需求
•猜測他學習英文的方式是蠻自然的
•沒有花額外的時間在學習文法,刻意的去修正自己的錯誤
•學習英文的只是為了工作需求
•說話有連貫性也有技巧,但是無法精準表達意思
•在特定場景的口說上應該是沒有問題,因為重複性高而且大概可以猜出他會講什麼
•說實話,表現超出預料
★★★★★★★★★★★★
柯文哲(1959年8月6日-),中華民國著名外科醫師、無黨籍政治人物。現任臺北市市長。國立臺灣大學醫學院臨床醫學研究所博士畢業,曾任臺大醫院急診部醫師、臺大醫院創傷醫學部主任、臺大醫學院教授,2014年宣布參選臺北市市長選舉,並以「在野大聯盟」為號召,同年當選臺北市第15任直轄市市長,成為臺北市改制直轄市後首位無黨籍市長。2018年,參選臺北市市長並成功連任。
https://youtu.be/ffIxQ27jUdQ?t=159
•首先媒體對柯市長太嚴格了
•常講英文的時候是為了開玩笑「柯式幽默」
•在這個影片當中他確實有看稿子
•and da today
•today (stress on the second syllable )
•medical (stress on first syllable)
•metary -- military
• problems cause by L1 interference
•從語音結構上來看,中文是一種「音節計時語言(syllable-timed language)及「聲調語言」(tone language),每個字由一個音節構成,唸起來各音節輕重相當且時間大致等長,而且每個字有自己的聲調;但英語是一種「重音計時語言」(stress-timed language)及「語調語言」(intonation language),每個字的音節數不一,由各音節是否有重音來決定其輕重、長短與音階高低,而重音落於何處也會決定其語意之不同。
-campus.cavesbooks.com.tw
•One of the most noticeable features of English is that some of its syllables are strong while many others are weak” (Roach, 2000, p81). English stress pattern is manifested through syllable length, loudness and pitch. In other words, stressed syllables are longer, louder and higher pitched than unstressed ones. Sometimes one word that is stressed differently may have different grammatical functions and meanings, for example, the homographs “record” (verb) and “record” (noun). “Record” has the stress on second syllable when it is a verb, and it has stress on the first when it is a noun. The shift of the stress even makes a noticeable difference to the sound of the vowels, for instance, “e” in noun “REcord” is pronounced as /e/, but /ɪ/ in verb “reCORD”.
-http://ec-concord.ied.edu.hk
•coal values -- core values
•freedom, tolerance, rule of law
•用詞大致上是正確的雖然還是有字形上(word form)的問題
•expensive -- expense
•每個句子都很短,但還是有溝通的功能
•蠻多文法的問題
•個人認為是有知識和魅力的一位候選人
•聽他用英文演講一段時間真的有困擾,因為沒重音,很難辨識重點
•講話沒有太多語調和節奏,在英文發音裡面是一個非常重要的環節
•會導致聽者需要完全專注他每一個字才能辨識他在說什麼
•不覺得每一個政治人物都需要英文,有專業和可靠的翻譯輔助,就覺得不會是一種困擾
•英文是一種工具,多一種工具就多一種選擇,但這種工具用不好時也有可能會造成一些誤解
★★★★★★★★★★★★
在此提供我的「心智圖詞彙攻略」課程: https://bit.ly/2teELDq
英文學習專頁: https://www.facebook.com/ericsenglishlounge/
還有Howard老師《會走路的翻譯機,神級英文學習攻略本》的傳送門 http://bit.ly/2DfGrhH
★★★★★★★★★★★★
同時也再次感謝炙瞳夢 RED FILM幾位大導演和貓哥的友情協助,幫我們拍攝和剪接出如此精彩的影片!
★★★★★★★★★★★★
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12d3b/12d3bd089c18ebbc6d3fcd81d446fa5a6a46a220" alt="post-title"
cause and effect中文 在 Laowu老吳 Youtube 的最佳貼文
Until Dawn is designed to be replayed multiple times. Each play through will last about 10 hours in length and the game mechanics utilize a new in-game system called the "Butterfly Effect" in which any choice of action by the player may cause minor or major unforeseen consequences later on...
《直到黎明》是款以典型美國青少年恐怖片為主題的恐怖冒險遊戲,邀請好萊塢電影編劇與電視藝人參與製作。故事敘述 8 名青少年在某位朋友神秘死去 1 年後,來到一處偏遠的深山,卻遭遇到未知的死亡威脅。在電力中斷、手機不通的孤立狀態下,用盡一切手段苦撐至黎明到來。
**LIKE & SHARE 如果你喜歡這個系列;D
Part 2 (上):http://youtu.be/Ga-yabJBTbA
關注我的Youtube : http://goo.gl/3TVkJT
關注老吳FB: http://goo.gl/c0a2DW
Part 1開始開清單Playlist : https://goo.gl/yOjhLO
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7af41/7af414beb855c20b5d5f8bc7985474d398bc83be" alt="post-title"
cause and effect中文 在 Community Guidelines strike basics on YouTube 的推薦與評價
... русский, српски, українська, עברית, اردو, العربية, हिन्दी, বাংলা, ไทย, 中文(简体), 中文(繁體), 日本語, 한국어, English. ... <看更多>
cause and effect中文 在 中文句型【因果句】Cause & Effect Sentence in Chinese 十大 ... 的推薦與評價
For more details, please visit http://www.mygiantpanda.com/因果句, yīn guǒ jù , Cause and Effect Sentences in Chinese关联词:因为… ... <看更多>