★★ 看看英語報紙及外媒怎麼報導服貿 ---文法修辭糾錯篇★★
[1] Voice of America (VOA):
"The students said the deal would endanger Taiwanese jobs and increase Beijing's growing influence."
---第二行的 "increase" 和 "growing" 實屬冗贅 (redundancy); 用"increase Beijing's influence over..." 更好。influence 後面加個 over 解釋會更清楚「對什麼所造成的影響」。
如BBC的報導所言：
Opposition supporters occupy parliament to protest at cross-Strait services trade agreement, which they say would allow the mainland excessive influence over the Taiwanese economy by freeing up direct investment rules. Parliament has not yet ratified it.
[2] The Taipei Times
“The KMT caucus has breached a previously reached inter-party consensus that the pact — WHICH experts said could severely affect local industries — must be reviewed clause-by-clause in the Legislative Yuan, WHICH has infuriated the public, the opposition said..."
---這段話裡的兩個which 都已經被用大寫標示, 第一個which緊跟修飾前面的 pact 沒有問題; 但第二的 which的修飾不明, 容易直指前方的 Legislative Yuan 立法院讓人們生氣, 但作者恐怕要傳達的是KMT破壞兩黨共識這件事讓人民生氣。這也是為什麼經濟學人 (The Economist) 以及 The New York Times (紐約時報) 給editors的寫作準則裡面都強調: 不用 which 指代一個句子。
[3] CNN iReport (一位高雄的教師所寫):
Some of the protesters broke into the meeting room of the Legislative Yuan not only to show great anger but to remind the authority that "the Congress belongs to the people" and a politician should speak the voice of his people.
---最後一句的 and 後面應該要加上不宜省略的 "that": 應該寫成
to remind the authority (1) that "the Congress belongs to the people" and (2) that a politician should speak the voice of his/her people."
----remind 兩件事 (1) + (2)
[4] CNN iReport
Some sit still, others sing, still others share their significant observation on the issue.
---observation 不適合用 significant 形容; 此處可改寫成
insightful / first-hand observations; 在此處每個人有不同的觀察，observation 加 s
Search