作者foffy (呼噜)
标题Re: [请益] 此句话的含意
时间Sat Jun 10 22:27:47 2017
我不是法律专业，一定会有人翻得比我好，以下个人浅见供参考！
1.
if that's what it's ultimately controlling
= if the language of the statute is what it's ultimately controlling
-> 如果制定法的条文才是最终影响有权解释的关键？
-> 如果它才是最终影响有权解释的关键？
if that's 应该要翻成 如果它是 加一个「才」字比较符合整句语意
2.
then lawyers also make appeals to considerations of what made good policy
-> 接着律师会对先例所考量过的执行原则提出上诉
make appeal 我觉得应该是上诉
写成made 是指先例发生的事 不是律师现在做的事
what made good policy, 跟 in the past 是同一个时间点
--
另外第二行ora 是 or a (很容易看错ＸＤ)
※ 引述《humbler (兽人H)》之铭言：
: If it's an area where there's been litigation in the past,lawyers will
: think about, when courts considered this issue, ora similar issue in the
: past,what did they say about this issue?How did they interpret the language
: of the statute,if that's what it's ultimately controlling?What do the
: precedents say?And then lawyers also make appeals to considerations of what
: made good policy.
: 这段话中有两句话的意思我不太懂，
: 想请问各位高手我这样解释对不对：
: 1.
: if that's what it's ultimately controlling?
: (这解释是否是最终掌控的关键呢？)
: 2.
: then lawyer also make appeals to considerations of what made good policy.
: (然後律师也会开始诉诸考虑好的诉讼策略)
: what made good policy 这句意思我不懂，还有为什麽要用made过去式，而不是现在式呢？
: 麻烦各位指点，谢谢
--
Welcome to visit
Random Enlgish Everyday on Facebook!
http://bit.ly/2kG8Qla
--
※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc), 来自: 123.193.43.145
※ 文章网址: https://webptt.com/cn.aspx?n=bbs/Eng-Class/M.1497104874.A.447.html
※ 编辑: foffy (123.193.43.145), 06/10/2017 22:41:17
1F：推 humbler: 谢谢你!!! 06/11 09:01
2F：→ humbler: 想再请教一下，第二句的good policy是什麽意思? 06/11 09:02
3F：→ foffy: 觉得是指可行原则(先例中) 06/11 12:31
4F：推 humbler: 不好意思，我还是想不通，为什麽这边会冒出上诉 06/11 20:27
5F：→ foffy: 还是你要提供前後段落做判别呢？ 06/11 22:43
6F：推 humbler: 谢谢你特地回复我，我看了前後段跟这段对话没有相连 06/12 22:51
7F：→ humbler: 我想我还要思考一下，这边的considerations的用法 06/12 22:52
8F：→ humbler: 因为considerations法律用语上叫做约因(对价) 06/12 22:53
9F：→ humbler: 想说会不会在这边该这麽解释 06/12 22:53
10F：→ humbler: 此外，可以请教下good policy可行原则这是法律用语吗？ 06/12 22:54