[討論] 版上外交大師怎麼看英交通部長發言
我記得這個版上包括版主在內有很多外交大師
對外交語言瞭若指掌
那請問一下大師們如何看英方對這次柯市長失言的回應:
I’m sorry. We learn something new each day. I had no idea a gift like this
could be seen as anything other than positive: In the UK a watch is precious
- because nothing is more important than time.
我很抱歉。我們每天都學到新的知識。我之前完全不知道這樣一個禮物會有其它非正面的
看法。在英國,一個懷錶禮物是珍貴的,因為我們都知道時間的重要性
The gift came from the House of Lords – which is only accessible to members
of the UK’s upper parliament. It is a very unique item.
這禮物來自於英國上議院,必須為議員身分才可取得。是一份特殊的物品。
It was a huge honour to meet Mayor Ko. We look forward to working with him
and his team in Taipei.
我很榮幸此次能與柯市長會面。我們期待與他及他的市府團隊有更多的交流合作。
根據先前大師們的教訓 國際場合上講出來的話都是外交語言 絕不像表面那麼簡單 一定都有更深的意涵 當然柯P沒當過官的不懂才會亂講
不知道版主在內的外交高手們怎麼解讀這段聲明?
(個人斗膽幫忙翻譯:柯先生你不懂這份禮物的價值,還敬酒不吃吃罰酒,老娘學到
不用對你們太好,送的東西不要拉倒,以後也別想收了,偷酸一下你不懂時間的重要性,
再聯絡掰掰。)
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 1.174.138.119
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/DummyHistory/M.1422338792.A.AD1.html
→
01/27 14:24, , 1F
01/27 14:24, 1F
呃...請問你怎麼知道我要看怎樣的答案 又怎麼知道八卦版就有我要的答案?
去八卦版問哪有什麼意思 那裏只會照字面解讀 這裡有趣多了
→
01/27 14:35, , 2F
01/27 14:35, 2F
→
01/27 14:38, , 3F
01/27 14:38, 3F
推
01/27 14:39, , 4F
01/27 14:39, 4F
→
01/27 14:39, , 5F
01/27 14:39, 5F
推
01/27 14:52, , 6F
01/27 14:52, 6F
→
01/27 14:53, , 7F
01/27 14:53, 7F
→
01/27 14:53, , 8F
01/27 14:53, 8F
→
01/27 14:53, , 9F
01/27 14:53, 9F
→
01/27 14:56, , 10F
01/27 14:56, 10F
我真的不是很懂欸 八卦版到底有什麼魔力 一定會有滿足所有人需要的答案
推
01/27 15:02, , 11F
01/27 15:02, 11F
→
01/27 15:02, , 12F
01/27 15:02, 12F
→
01/27 15:02, , 13F
01/27 15:02, 13F
→
01/27 15:02, , 14F
01/27 15:02, 14F
推
01/27 15:04, , 15F
01/27 15:04, 15F
→
01/27 15:05, , 16F
01/27 15:05, 16F
→
01/27 15:07, , 17F
01/27 15:07, 17F
→
01/27 15:08, , 18F
01/27 15:08, 18F
→
01/27 15:09, , 19F
01/27 15:09, 19F
推
01/27 15:12, , 20F
01/27 15:12, 20F
推
01/27 15:16, , 21F
01/27 15:16, 21F
推
01/27 15:18, , 22F
01/27 15:18, 22F
→
01/27 15:22, , 23F
01/27 15:22, 23F
→
01/27 15:22, , 24F
01/27 15:22, 24F
推 這就是我想要看到的分析 女爵背後代表什麼利益 檯面下又有怎樣的政治角力?
推
01/27 15:30, , 25F
01/27 15:30, 25F
→
01/27 16:09, , 26F
01/27 16:09, 26F
的確 英國人從清朝就吃過中國禮俗的悶虧 更何況現在全球化資訊這麼流通
要說英國人從沒做過功課 出訪的官員連這點中國禮俗常識都沒有 實在有點離譜
→
01/27 16:29, , 27F
01/27 16:29, 27F
→
01/27 16:30, , 28F
01/27 16:30, 28F
→
01/27 16:33, , 29F
01/27 16:33, 29F
→
01/27 16:34, , 30F
01/27 16:34, 30F
推
01/27 16:41, , 31F
01/27 16:41, 31F
推
01/27 16:42, , 32F
01/27 16:42, 32F
→
01/27 16:43, , 33F
01/27 16:43, 33F
→
01/27 16:44, , 34F
01/27 16:44, 34F
推
01/27 16:46, , 35F
01/27 16:46, 35F
→
01/27 16:46, , 36F
01/27 16:46, 36F
→
01/27 16:46, , 37F
01/27 16:46, 37F
→
01/27 16:55, , 38F
01/27 16:55, 38F
為什麼?本版只許版主討論雙橡園升旗 不許版眾討論送錶爭議?
根據外交解讀的不同 也可以架空推論未來的走向啊
推
01/27 17:32, , 39F
01/27 17:32, 39F
→
01/27 17:39, , 40F
01/27 17:39, 40F
推
01/27 17:58, , 41F
01/27 17:58, 41F
→
01/27 17:59, , 42F
01/27 17:59, 42F
→
01/27 17:59, , 43F
01/27 17:59, 43F
→
01/27 18:37, , 44F
01/27 18:37, 44F
→
01/27 18:38, , 45F
01/27 18:38, 45F
推
01/27 18:57, , 46F
01/27 18:57, 46F
→
01/27 18:58, , 47F
01/27 18:58, 47F
→
01/27 18:58, , 48F
01/27 18:58, 48F
→
01/27 18:59, , 49F
01/27 18:59, 49F
→
01/27 19:02, , 50F
01/27 19:02, 50F
推
01/27 19:41, , 51F
01/27 19:41, 51F
推
01/27 19:44, , 52F
01/27 19:44, 52F
哈哈 數字版取暖不成我應該去政黑版才對XD
不過這裡的人怎麼都這麼在意他版啊0.0
※ 編輯: FenixShou (118.171.234.105), 01/27/2015 20:14:15
→
01/27 20:49, , 53F
01/27 20:49, 53F
推
01/27 21:00, , 54F
01/27 21:00, 54F
→
01/27 21:27, , 55F
01/27 21:27, 55F
→
01/27 21:30, , 56F
01/27 21:30, 56F
→
01/27 21:30, , 57F
01/27 21:30, 57F
→
01/27 21:31, , 58F
01/27 21:31, 58F
→
01/27 21:37, , 59F
01/27 21:37, 59F
推
01/27 21:49, , 60F
01/27 21:49, 60F
推
01/27 22:48, , 61F
01/27 22:48, 61F
推
01/27 23:17, , 62F
01/27 23:17, 62F
→
01/27 23:19, , 63F
01/27 23:19, 63F
→
01/27 23:19, , 64F
01/27 23:19, 64F
推
01/28 00:32, , 65F
01/28 00:32, 65F
推
01/28 00:53, , 66F
01/28 00:53, 66F
→
01/28 00:53, , 67F
01/28 00:53, 67F
推
01/28 01:17, , 68F
01/28 01:17, 68F
→
01/28 01:19, , 69F
01/28 01:19, 69F
→
01/28 01:21, , 70F
01/28 01:21, 70F
推
01/28 01:29, , 71F
01/28 01:29, 71F
推
01/28 10:11, , 72F
01/28 10:11, 72F
推
01/28 10:22, , 73F
01/28 10:22, 73F
推
01/28 10:37, , 74F
01/28 10:37, 74F
→
01/28 20:43, , 75F
01/28 20:43, 75F
→
01/28 20:44, , 76F
01/28 20:44, 76F
→
01/28 20:45, , 77F
01/28 20:45, 77F
推
01/29 03:19, , 78F
01/29 03:19, 78F
推
01/29 13:06, , 79F
01/29 13:06, 79F
→
02/04 14:20, , 80F
02/04 14:20, 80F
→
02/04 14:22, , 81F
02/04 14:22, 81F
→
02/04 14:22, , 82F
02/04 14:22, 82F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文:
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 2 篇):