[請益] 關於 The New York Times 的一個句子
The New York Times 的一個句子,
China could also decide to abandon its policy against the
first use of nuclear weapons in any conflict “because they
could not afford to go second,” Mr. Narang said.
每個單字都看得懂,理解上卻有疑問
這句話的意思到底是中國要放棄第一個使用核武的政策?
還是中國不要放棄第一個使用核武的政策?
句子的結構該如何解析?
感謝指導~~
全文出處 https://goo.gl/3lFpjv
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 210.69.128.66
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/TOEIC/M.1482916487.A.0BB.html
推
12/28 18:41, , 1F
12/28 18:41, 1F
推
12/28 18:51, , 2F
12/28 18:51, 2F
推
12/28 20:58, , 3F
12/28 20:58, 3F
推
12/28 21:55, , 4F
12/28 21:55, 4F
→
12/28 21:55, , 5F
12/28 21:55, 5F
→
12/28 21:55, , 6F
12/28 21:55, 6F
推
12/28 23:32, , 7F
12/28 23:32, 7F
→
12/28 23:32, , 8F
12/28 23:32, 8F
→
12/28 23:33, , 9F
12/28 23:33, 9F
→
12/29 01:01, , 10F
12/29 01:01, 10F
→
12/29 01:01, , 11F
12/29 01:01, 11F
→
12/29 01:02, , 12F
12/29 01:02, 12F
→
12/29 01:02, , 13F
12/29 01:02, 13F
→
12/29 01:02, , 14F
12/29 01:02, 14F
→
12/29 01:03, , 15F
12/29 01:03, 15F
→
12/29 01:03, , 16F
12/29 01:03, 16F
→
12/29 01:05, , 17F
12/29 01:05, 17F
→
12/29 01:05, , 18F
12/29 01:05, 18F
→
12/29 01:45, , 19F
12/29 01:45, 19F
→
12/29 01:45, , 20F
12/29 01:45, 20F
→
12/29 01:46, , 21F
12/29 01:46, 21F
→
12/29 09:59, , 22F
12/29 09:59, 22F
討論串 (同標題文章)