作者l10nel (小失)
看板Translation
標題Re: [中英] 請教最佳翻譯!!
時間Mon Nov 7 14:16:45 2011
句子 A WWII conscript, SM was wounded in a bombing raid. 中,句首以逗號分開的
成份 A WWII conscript 究竟是不是主詞 SM 的同位語?如果不是,又是什麽?因為有
兩極看法引起我的好奇,於是從 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English
Language 的分析內容得到佐證線索,摘錄一部分原文如下,加上中文 [...] 評論:
(p997, 14.9)
When the verbless clause is reduced to its minimum of a single complement or
adverbial, it may not be easy to distinguish it from an appositive
construction (cf 17.65ff), a nonrestrictive postmodifier (cf 17.48f), or an
adverbial which is a direct constituent of the main clause. [無動詞子句一旦減
化到剩下單一的補充結構或副詞修飾語時,有時會被誤認為是同位語或其他結構,不易分
辨。] The initial prepositional phrase below is an adverbial of the sentence:
Of humble parentage, he began his working life in a shoe factory.
It might be regarded as an adverbial realized by a verbless clause consisting
of just a complement, because its analysis is directly parallel to nominal or
verbless clauses like:
A man of humble parentage, ... ~Born of humble parentage,...
[上面的 Of humble parentage 是一個形成自無動詞子句的副詞修飾語,是一個補充結構
,它和名詞結構 A man of humble parentage 或無動詞子句 Born of humble
parentage 有直接而相應的文法分析。]
Similarly, if the final noun phrase below had been placed next to the subject
we would have recognized it as full apposition:
[下面句子句尾的修飾語 an artifice of green-black liquescent marble 如果搬到緊
接主詞後,就成了同位語。]
The river lay in its crescent loop entirely without movement, an artifice
of green-black liquescent marble.
As it is, we could regard it as a verbless clause functioning as an
adverbial. [留在句尾,它是一個無動詞子句,功能是作為副詞修飾語。] Indeed,
many instances of partial apposition with noun phrases (cf 17.66) could be
equally regarded as verbless clauses, eg:
Judge Clement Turpin, now a federal appeals court judge, is being
considered for appointment to the US Supreme Court.
[同樣地,以上句子中,主詞後的第二個名詞是同位語,或可視為無動詞子句。]
(pp1314-1315, 17.84)
An attribution appositive is to be distinguished from a verbless adverbial
clause. Verbless adverbial clauses (cf 14.9) often occur initially and are
characteristically interpreted as concessive or causal:
[我們必須區分屬性型的同位語和作副詞修飾語的無動詞子句。後者經常出現在句首,提
供讓步或因果關係的語義。]
An even-tempered man, Paul nevertheless became extremely angry when he
heard what had happened. [1]
The heir to a fortune, her friend did not care about passing examinations.
[2]
The verbless clause in [1] is interpreted as concessive: 'Though he was an
even-tempered man'. ... The verbless clause in [2], on the other hand, is
Interpreted as causal: 'Since she was the heir to a fortune'. [以上兩例句中,
句首以逗點隔開的成份都是無動詞子句。] These constructions differ from
identification apposition (cf 17.77) in that, when they occur initially, the
second noun phrase is the subject of the sentence.
[區分無動詞子句和指名型同位語的一個方式:無動詞子句出現在句首時,其後的(即第
二個)名詞片語是句子的主詞。相較之下,在含有同位語的句子裡,句首的第一個名詞片
語是主詞,後面才是同位語(非主詞)。]
However, the verbless adverbial clause can occur after the subject and is
then, like apposition, marked off by intonation or punctuation:
[無動詞子句也可以移到主詞後,和同位語一樣用標點隔開,如以下的 the heir to a
fortune 或 a notorious burglar。]
Her friend, the heir to a fortune, did not care about passing
examinations. [2a]
Bob Rand, a notorious burglar, found it easy to force open the lock. [3]
In such cases, the lexical content of the sentence suggests the more probable
interpretation. [這時,該結構算是子句還是同位語,視句子的字義而定。] For
example, in [4], 'a blatant liar' can be interpreted as a (verbless)
adverbial causal clause, since it is reasonable to ascribe the expulsion to
Pall's being a blatant liar: [以下的 a blatant liar 因為提供主句的原因,算作無
動詞子句。]
Ron Pall, a blatant liar, was expelled from the group. [4]
In [4a], on the other hand, 'a blatant liar' would normally be understood as
a case of apposition: [以下的 a blatant liar 算作同位語。]
Ron Pall, a blatant liar, used to be in my class at school. [4a]
In [4a], there is no motivation for assuming that Pall's presence in the
class had anything to do with his being a blatant liar.
結論:回到 A WWII conscript,它的形式和意義來自表原因(說明導致他受傷的處境)
的副詞子句 As (he was) a WWII conscript 或無動詞子句 Being a WWII conscript 省
略 Being,它出現在句首而非在以逗號隔開的句中位置,它是第一個名詞片語而非第二個
,而且不是主詞。這些原因都說明 A WWII conscript 是一個無動詞子句減化的結果,雖
具有名詞的形式致使極易和同位語混淆,但從意義和位置(句法分析)等各個角度來看仍
不是同位語。
如果把它搬到主詞後:
SM, a WWII conscript, was wounded in a bombing raid.
那麽可以分析為同位語,或因它明顯「提供環境原因」而仍舊分析為無動詞子句減化後的
副詞修飾詞。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 76.198.133.1
1F:推 chingfen:推一下...[這是原始問題]再跟Mizuk變成同位語? 11/07 15:47
2F:→ chingfen:其實我沒把問題寫清楚...= = (腦海中是把a...放人名後面) 11/07 15:49
3F:→ chingfen:有爭議的應該是a WWII...放在句首時 11/07 15:50
4F:推 chingfen:但是a WWII...放在句首時,人名不就變成同位語? 11/07 15:52
5F:→ chingfen: (都用逗點隔開) 11/07 15:52
6F:→ l10nel:1) A WWII conscript, SM was... 僅一個逗號,人名是主詞 11/07 16:35
7F:→ l10nel:這裡沒有同位語 11/07 16:35
8F:→ l10nel:2) A WWII conscript, SM, was ... 主詞,同位語,... 11/07 16:37
9F:→ l10nel:3) SM, a WWII conscript, was ... 主詞,同位語,... 11/07 16:38
10F:→ l10nel:在這句中譯英的語境下,可以寫成1或3,不能寫成2,2意思 11/07 16:40
11F:→ l10nel:變成:某名二次大戰軍人怎樣怎樣了,這人名叫SM。 11/07 16:45
12F:推 spacedunce5:what's a nominal clause? =?= appositional clause 11/07 18:45
13F:→ l10nel:舉凡名詞片語所能出現處,如果能代之以子句,該類子句統稱 11/07 19:28
14F:→ l10nel:nominal clause,具有名詞功能的子句,比如,以下that子句 11/07 19:30
15F:→ l10nel:I think that you are right. 11/07 19:31
16F:推 chingfen:感謝...XD 11/07 19:36
17F:推 spacedunce5:那文中A man of humble parents為何是名詞子句? 11/07 20:57
18F:→ spacedunce5: age 11/07 20:58
19F:推 MariaChen:先推詳盡文法釋疑。spacedeuce5,我想「A man of humble 11/08 04:32
20F:→ l10nel:說實在我也不知為什麼這算是nominal clause,作者沒詳述。 11/08 04:33
21F:→ l10nel:原先我只打算引用17.84那一段,因為論據已足,但又看到14.9 11/08 04:34
22F:→ l10nel:提出警語,才把它提出來。 11/08 04:35
23F:→ l10nel:順便一提:此書第17章"名詞片語"以整整22頁的篇幅專門討論 11/08 04:38
24F:→ l10nel:同位語,從意義、形式角度歸類並羅列同位語各種可能的樣式 11/08 04:39
25F:→ l10nel:整個看過後,也並未發現任何支持A WWII conscript, SM was 11/08 04:44
26F:→ l10nel:wounded...此句含有同位語的例句和分析。 11/08 04:45
27F:→ MariaChen:parentage」可視為當作「副詞修飾語」(作用」的「名詞 11/08 05:03
28F:推 MariaChen:片語」,但其附屬性質似無動詞子句或省略從屬連接詞之子 11/08 05:08
29F:→ MariaChen:句,故算「名詞子句」,因其作用使然。這我目前看法。 11/08 05:10
30F:→ l10nel:樓上這個思路我想正是作者想表達的,但是他提到的名詞子句 11/08 05:26
31F:→ l10nel:又立刻舉a man of humble parentage,雖似在説a man... 11/08 05:28
32F:→ l10nel:就是名詞子句,但這個結構和該書專論名詞子句的篇章中所 11/08 05:29
33F:→ l10nel:列舉的好幾大項名詞子句類型又似乎不合,因此我才有同s大的 11/08 05:29
34F:→ l10nel:困惑。 11/08 05:30
35F:→ MariaChen:啊我發現把 spacedunce5 ID 打錯,心裡只有賭,抱歉! 11/08 07:31
36F:→ l10nel:因為你心想他怎會是個dunce 11/08 08:38
37F:推 spacedunce5:感謝樓上的愛戴(?);MC是說作者說文解釋嗎?只有名 11/08 09:39
38F:→ spacedunce5:詞片語,又是個子句,故為名詞子句? 11/08 09:39
39F:推 MariaChen:是,看來是名詞片語但作省了一堆東西的從屬子句。 11/11 00:35
40F:→ MariaChen:樓上多打一「作」字。 11/11 00:35