[單字] mom and dad

看板Eng-Class作者 (爆炸ing)時間10年前 (2015/11/08 13:09), 編輯推噓9(9推 0噓 44→)
留言53則, 9人參與, 最新討論串1/1
請問英文高手 國一英文翻譯中文寫"爸、媽，我在這裡" 學生寫Dad and Mom, 全班都錯 學校老師說一定要寫Mom and dad. 老師的理由是說女生的地位比男生高，還說要分數的話， 你去找五個老外，進行錄音回答都是dad and mom的話，就給分數 我google "Mom and dad" 只有找到習慣用法的說詞 謝謝說明 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 220.133.184.93 ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Eng-Class/M.1446959376.A.9F9.html
→
11/08 13:49, , 1F
還真的想不到比更習慣用法更深入的解釋
11/08 13:49, 1F
→
11/08 13:57, , 2F
也許跟發聲的生理過程(口腔怎麼動的)有關 使得Mom
11/08 13:57, 2F
→
11/08 13:58, , 3F
and dad就是比倒過來還要順
11/08 13:58, 3F
推
11/08 13:58, , 4F
借此一問，這類詞有沒有錯誤的程度之分？因為我沒有在英語
11/08 13:58, 4F
→
11/08 13:59, , 5F
環境生活過，Dad and Mom對我來說只是稍不順而已，但即使
11/08 13:59, 5F
→
11/08 14:00, , 6F
我非英語母語者，我也不會說gentlemen and ladies.後者對
11/08 14:00, 6F
→
11/08 14:00, , 7F
我來說是錯誤的，但Dad and Mom就還好，是可以接受的
11/08 14:00, 7F
→
11/08 14:05, , 8F
至少對我的中文來說有程度之分:女士先生我可以接受
11/08 14:05, 8F
→
11/08 14:06, , 9F
"母父"就無法
11/08 14:06, 9F
→
11/08 15:03, , 10F
這種用法叫freezes 一般情況是不能顛倒 用"Mom and dad"的
11/08 15:03, 10F
→
11/08 15:03, , 11F
原因也的確是因為母親在英語中的地位比較高 要深入了解可
11/08 15:03, 11F
→
11/08 15:03, , 12F
以看鏈結裡的討論 裡面有語言學角度的參考資料
11/08 15:03, 12F
→
11/08 15:03, , 13F
11/08 15:03, 13F
→
11/08 15:03, , 14F
像樓上的例子 父母換成母父文法上沒問題 不過硬是要用母父
11/08 15:03, 14F
→
11/08 15:03, , 15F
只是鑽牛角尖罷了 學成的外語也只會不倫不類
11/08 15:03, 15F
推
11/08 15:18, , 16F
我問過這問題 只是習慣罷了
11/08 15:18, 16F
→
11/08 15:30, , 18F
motas所說的參考資料: 作者給的解釋也只是"We belie
11/08 15:30, 18F
→
11/08 15:32, , 19F
-ve that mothers are special"這樣一句(攤手)
11/08 15:32, 19F
→
11/08 16:03, , 20F
我願意幫你找我五個外國朋友幫你錄音說dad and mom
11/08 16:03, 20F
→
11/08 16:03, , 21F
這跟本沒有對錯 換個順序文法還是正確的 英文不是
11/08 16:03, 21F
→
11/08 16:03, , 22F
數學的排列組合 而且假如如果英文像數學這麼有邏輯
11/08 16:03, 22F
→
11/08 16:03, , 23F
性 沒有這麼多例外的話 學生也不會學的這麼辛苦了
11/08 16:03, 23F
推
11/08 17:02, , 24F
我是覺得沒錯，但是 awkward
11/08 17:02, 24F
推
11/08 19:36, , 25F
ladies and gentlemen
11/08 19:36, 25F
推
11/09 01:21, , 26F
Scripts 有首歌mv開頭就用mom and dad
11/09 01:21, 26F
→
11/09 01:44, , 27F
it is the matter of grammatical correctness instea
11/09 01:44, 27F
→
11/09 01:44, , 28F
d of mere awkwardness
11/09 01:44, 28F
→
11/09 03:44, , 29F
Grammar is not the only thing that makes up a language
11/09 03:44, 29F
→
11/09 03:44, , 30F
. If you're going that way, you might as well start
11/09 03:44, 30F
→
11/09 03:44, , 31F
saying "wrong or right" instead of "right or wrong",
11/09 03:44, 31F
→
11/09 03:44, , 32F
"there and here" instead of "here and there", "no or
11/09 03:44, 32F
→
11/09 03:44, , 33F
yes" instead of "yes or no", etc.
11/09 03:44, 33F
→
11/09 03:44, , 34F
Grammatically correct? Yes.
11/09 03:44, 34F
→
11/09 03:44, , 35F
Do people speak like that? No.
11/09 03:44, 35F
→
11/09 03:44, , 36F
The teacher should have explained it better instead of
11/09 03:44, 36F
→
11/09 03:44, , 37F
simply calling it "wrong", but being stubborn is
11/09 03:44, 37F
→
11/09 03:44, , 38F
not any better.
11/09 03:44, 38F
推
11/09 09:49, , 39F
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously. allen老兄，你告
11/09 09:49, 39F
→
11/09 09:49, , 40F
訴我這句合不合文法。
11/09 09:49, 40F
推
11/09 17:20, , 41F
我鼻塞，唸 m & m 鼻腔滿滿都好痛苦。
11/09 17:20, 41F
推
11/10 14:48, , 42F
if the question to this is strictly asking for gra
11/10 14:48, 42F
→
11/10 14:48, , 43F
mmar then it is correct. I completely agree with y
11/10 14:48, 43F
→
11/10 14:48, , 44F
ou that language is not just about being correct g
11/10 14:48, 44F
→
11/10 14:48, , 45F
rammatically.
11/10 14:48, 45F
→
11/10 14:50, , 46F
plus, if you want to play the game of logic, there
11/10 14:50, 46F
→
11/10 14:50, , 47F
is no such a thing like "maybe" so yes, your sent
11/10 14:50, 47F
→
11/10 14:50, , 48F
ence grammatically correct but it's not sound and
11/10 14:50, 48F
→
11/10 14:50, , 49F
therefore not correct. if you want to know the de
11/10 14:50, 49F
→
11/10 14:50, , 50F
finition of sound then please take a few philosoph
11/10 14:50, 50F
→
11/10 14:50, , 51F
y courses
11/10 14:50, 51F
→
11/10 19:30, , 52F
我還真的沒遇過講明"只考慮文法"的題目
11/10 19:30, 52F
推
11/10 20:53, , 53F
我也沒遇過…語言學考題例外
11/10 20:53, 53F
‣ 更多 tenmay 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1MFjaGdv (Eng-Class)