[請益] 這話應該用限定還是非限定用法比較好?
"Two heads are better than one," is a well-known saying which means that
problems can be easily solved by two or more people working together.
本句的which之前沒有逗號，使用的是限定用法，但此which的先行詞saying所指涉的對象
應該已經很明確，
就是”Two heads are better than one.”這句話，
此處若使用非限定用法/補述用法來對a well-know saying加以補充是否比用限定用法來
的適當呢?，
不知道為何此處沒有使用補述用法呢? 請問大家的看法為何?
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 223.138.91.119
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Eng-Class/M.1442665493.A.D12.html
→
09/19 20:39, , 1F
09/19 20:39, 1F
好無言喔 逗號的用法 在這裡不是用來分隔的啦
你要不要去複習一下 關代的限定語非限定用法
※ 編輯: tucson (223.138.91.119), 09/19/2015 20:48:44
→
09/19 21:04, , 2F
09/19 21:04, 2F
這位鄉民 補述用法跟句子的長短以及累不累贅 完全沒有關係喔
※ 編輯: tucson (223.138.91.119), 09/19/2015 22:39:18
→
09/19 22:45, , 3F
09/19 22:45, 3F
→
09/19 22:46, , 4F
09/19 22:46, 4F
應該沒有所謂的限不限定都差不多隊的講法喔
限不限定 其實是差很多的
※ 編輯: tucson (223.138.91.119), 09/19/2015 23:04:57
推
09/19 23:12, , 5F
09/19 23:12, 5F
→
09/19 23:14, , 6F
09/19 23:14, 6F
→
09/19 23:15, , 7F
09/19 23:15, 7F
推
09/19 23:16, , 8F
09/19 23:16, 8F
→
09/19 23:17, , 9F
09/19 23:17, 9F
→
09/19 23:17, , 10F
09/19 23:17, 10F
→
09/19 23:18, , 11F
09/19 23:18, 11F
→
09/19 23:18, , 12F
09/19 23:18, 12F
→
09/19 23:21, , 13F
09/19 23:21, 13F
→
09/19 23:21, , 14F
09/19 23:21, 14F
→
09/19 23:25, , 15F
09/19 23:25, 15F
→
09/19 23:25, , 16F
09/19 23:25, 16F
補述與非補述 在各大原文文法書中都有講到
這哪算是台灣英文用法 = =
※ 編輯: tucson (223.138.91.119), 09/20/2015 01:01:53
→
09/20 01:22, , 17F
09/20 01:22, 17F
推
09/20 12:00, , 18F
09/20 12:00, 18F
→
09/20 12:02, , 19F
09/20 12:02, 19F
→
09/20 12:03, , 20F
09/20 12:03, 20F
→
09/20 12:05, , 21F
09/20 12:05, 21F
→
09/20 12:06, , 22F
09/20 12:06, 22F
→
09/20 12:08, , 23F
09/20 12:08, 23F
推
09/20 12:18, , 24F
09/20 12:18, 24F
→
09/20 20:22, , 25F
09/20 20:22, 25F