很少有人认真总结全部英语中修辞手法的运用方式,下面这篇文章可以说是收藏级帖子,值得同学收 1.Simile 明喻 明喻是将具有共性的不同事物作对比.这种共性存在于人们的心里,而不是事物的自然属性。标志词常用 like, as, seem, as if, as though, similar to, such as等. 例如: 1.He was like a cock who thought the sun had risen to hear him crow. 2.I wandered lonely as a cloud. 3.Einstein only had a blanket on, as if he had just walked out of a fairy tale. 2.Metaphor 隐喻,暗喻 隐喻是简缩了的明喻,是将某一事物的名称用于另一事物,通过比较形成。 例如: 1.Hope is a good breakfast, but it is a bad supper. 2.Some books are to be tasted, others swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested. 3.Metonymy 借喻,转喻 借喻不直接说出所要说的事物,而使用另一个与之相关的事物名称. I.以容器代替内容,例如: 1.The kettle boils. 水开了. 2.The room sat silent. 全屋人安静地坐着. II.以资料.工具代替事物的名称,例如: Lend me your ears, please. 请听我说. III.以作者代替作品,例如: a complete Shakespeare 莎士比亚全集 VI.以具体事物代替抽象概念,例如: I had the muscle, and they made money out of it. 我有力气,他们就用我的力气赚钱. 4.Synecdoche 提喻 提喻用部分代替全体,或用全体代替部分,或特殊代替一般. 例如: 1.There are about 100 hands working in his factory.(部分代整体) 他的厂里约有100名工人. 2.He is the Newton of this century.(特殊代一般) 他是本世纪的牛顿. 3.The fox goes very well with your cap.(整体代部分) 这狐皮围脖与你的帽子很相配. 5.Synaesthesia 通感,联觉,移觉 这种修辞法是以视.听.触.嗅.味等感觉直接描写事物.通感就是把不同感官的感觉沟通起来,借联想引起感觉转移,“以感觉写感觉”。 通感技巧的运用,能突破语言的局限,丰富表情达意的审美情趣,起到增强文采的艺术效果。比如:欣赏建筑的重复与变化的样式会联想到音乐的重复与变化的节奏;闻到酸的东西会联想到尖锐的物体;听到飘渺轻柔的音乐会联想到薄薄的半透明的纱子;又比如朱自清《荷塘月色》里的“ 微风过处送来缕缕清香,仿佛远处高楼上渺茫的歌声似的”。 例如: 1.The birds sat upon a tree and poured forth their lily like voice.(用视觉形容听觉,鸟落在树上,由它发出的声音联想到百合花) 鸟儿落在树上,倾泻出百合花似的声音. 2.Taste the music of Mozart.(用嗅觉形容听觉) 品尝Mozart的音乐. 6.Personification 拟人 拟人是把生命赋予无生命的事物. 例如: 1.The night gently lays her hand at our fevered heads.(把夜拟人化) 2.I was very happy and could hear the birds singing in the woods.(把鸟拟人化) 7.Hyperbole 夸张 夸张是以言过其实的说法表达强调的目的.它可以加强语势,增加表达效果. 例如: 1.I beg a thousand pardons. 2.Love you. You are the whole world to me, and the moon and the stars. 3.When she heard the bad news, a river of tears poured out. 8.Parallelism 排比, 平行 这种修辞法是把两个或两个以上的结构大体相同或相似,意思相关,语气一致的短语.句子排列成串,形成一个整体. 例如: 1.No one can be perfectly free till all are free; no one can be perfectly moral till all are moral; no one can be perfectly happy till all are happy. 2.In the days when all these things are to be answered for, I summon you and yours, to the last of your bad race, to answer for them. In the days when all these things are to be answered for, I summon your brother, the worst of your bad race, to answer for them separately. 9.Euphemism 委婉,婉辞法 婉辞法指用委婉,文雅的方法表达粗恶,避讳的话. 例如: 1.He is out visiting the necessary. 他出去方便一下. 2.His relation with his wife has not been fortunate. 他与妻子关系不融洽. 3.Deng Xiaoping passed away in 1997. (去世) 10.Allegory 讽喻,比方(原意“寓言”) 建立在假借过去或别处的事例与对象之上,传达暗示,影射或者讥讽现世各种现象的含义。 英文解释:an expressive style that uses fictional characters and events to describe some subject by suggestive resemblances; an extended metaphor 摘自英语专业《大学英语教程》一书。 这是一种源于希腊文的修辞法,意为"换个方式的说法".它是一种形象的描述,具有双重性,表层含义与真正意味的是两回事. 例如: 1.Make the hay while the sun shines. 表层含义:趁着出太阳的时候晒草 真正意味:趁热打铁 2.It's time to turn plough into sword. 表层含义:是时候把犁变成剑 11.Irony 反语 反语指用相反意义的词来表达意思的作文方式.如在指责过失.错误时,用赞同过失的说法,而在表扬时,则近乎责难的说法. 例如: 1.It would be a fine thing indeed not knowing what time it was in the morning. 早上没有时间观念还真是一件好事啊(真实含义是应该明确早上的时间观念) 2"Of course, you only carry large notes, no small change on you. "the waiter said to the beggar. 12.Pun 双关 双关就是用一个词在句子中的双重含义,借题发挥.作出多种解释,旁敲侧击,从而达到意想不到的幽默.滑稽效果.它主要以相似的词形.词意和谐音的方式出现. 例如: 1.She is too low for a high praise, too brown for a fair praise and too little for a great praise. 2.An ambassador is an honest man who lies abroad for the good of his country. 3.If we don't hang together, we shall hang separately. 13.Parody 仿拟 这是一种模仿名言.警句.谚语,改动其中部分词语,从而使其产生新意的修辞. 例如: 1.Rome was not built in a day, nor in a year. 2.A friend in need is a friend to be avoided. 3.If you give a girl an inch nowadays she will make address of it. 14.Rhetorical question 修辞疑问(反问) 它与疑问句的不同在于它并不以得到答复为目的,而是以疑问为手段,取得修辞上的效果,其特点是:肯定问句表示强烈否定,而否定问句表示强烈的肯定.它的答案往往是不言而喻的. 例如: 1.How was it possible to walk for an hour through the woods and see nothing worth of note? 2.Shall we allow those untruths to go unanswered? 15.Antithesis 对照,对比,对偶 这种修辞指将意义完全相反的语句排在一起对比的一种修辞方法. 例如: 1.Not that I loved Caeser less but that I loved Romemore. 2.You are staying; I am going. 3.Give me liberty, or give me death. 16.Paradox 隽语 这是一种貌似矛盾,但包含一定哲理的意味深长的说法,是一种矛盾修辞法. 例如: 1.More haste, less speed.欲速则不达 2.The child is the father to the man.(童年时代可决定人之未来)三岁看大,四岁看老。 17.Oxymoron 反意法,逆喻 这也是一种矛盾修辞法,用两种不相调和的特征形容一个事物,以不协调的搭配使读者领悟句中微妙的含义. 例如: 1.No light, but rather darkness visible.没有光亮,黑暗却清晰可见 2.The state of this house is cheerless welcome. 18.Climax 渐进法,层进法 这种修辞是将一系列词语按照意念的大小.轻重.深浅.高低等逐层渐进,最后达到顶点.可以增强语势,逐渐加深读者印象. 例如: 1.I am sorry, I am so sorry, I am so extremely sorry. 2.Eye had not seen nor ear heard, and nothing had touched his heart of stone. 19.Anticlimax 渐降法 与climax相反的一种修辞法,将一系列词语由大到小,由强到弱地排列. 例如: 1.On his breast he wears his decorations, at his side a sword, on his feet a pair of boots. 2.The duties of a soldier are to protect his country and peel potatoes.
这是我的一篇旧文,刚在科学网又看到相关讨论,所以把我这篇文章在珍珠湾存档 九驳民科c_y_lo 已有 1547 次阅读 2012-5-31 14:34 | 个人分类: 物理 | 系统分类: 观点评述 | 关键词:民科 推荐到群组 英文版: EXPOSE MINKE C_Y_LO A recent article commemorated C.N. Yang's great discovery of the Yang-Mills gauge theory . However, a netizen named c_y_lo vehemently fired back. C_y_lo, who normally assaults Einstein's General Theory of Relativity on some Chinese message board, declares that C.N. Yang is "at most a foot note " in the history of sciences and the Yang-Mills theory is simply wrong. Foaming at his mouth, c_y_Lo writes :“ Pauli ... criticized this gauge theory as useless because of no mass is involved with Fermions . ” Apparently, c_y_lo did not understand Pauli's critical question posed to Yang. The question was not concerning the masses of the fermions, but those of the gauge bosons. Anyone with rudimentary education in physics can see that the Lagrangian in Yang's paper consists of a Dirac field with mass m and the gauage field B. See, Yang's paper, at http://www.thphys.uni-heidelberg.de/~maniatis/LectureAdv/yang-mills.pdf Thus, Yang-Mills is a theory of massive fermions. This is plainly obvious, because Yang and Mills were looking at the isospin symmetry of proton-neutron at the time. Pauli's question to Yang was: "What is the mass of this field B?" Pauli was asking about mass or the absence of it of the bosonic force field B, not the mass m of the fermion field. When Yang first presented the Yang-Mills theory to a group of physicists, including Pauli, the latter repeatedly asked Yang the same question, and Yang had to stop the presentation at one point. Many years later, C. N. Yang posed a hypothetical: "What if Pauli lived till the 1960s or 1970s?" Since then, the Yang-Mills theory has become the foundation of modern physics and is still an active area of research. Gauge invariance is now the fundamental principle underlying the Standard Model. That old episode with Pauli proved the true genius of Yang. There is little dispute that Yang's contribution to human understanding of nature is at a fundamental level unsurpassed by anyone. It is natural that lesser minds could not and cannot understand the greater ones. Quantum Chromodynamics ("QCD") is a straight application of Yang-Mills SU(3)_c gauge theory. QCD is an exact Yang-Mills theory with massless gluons as the gauge bosons. Despite this common knowledge, c_y_lo states: " Since gluon interacts with Quarks which have masses. Therefore, gauge symmetry must be broken, and this is verified by experiments. The 2008 Nobel Prized for Physics is given to such verification. " C_y_lo's misguided statement shows his cluelessness. There is no flavor gauge symmetry. The QCD gauge symmetry is in the color space of each quark flavor. The 2008 Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of a new quark flavor, which has to do with weak interactions. In other words, c_y_lo could not even understand what the Nobel Prize was about. Pseudo-scientists(*) like C-y-Lo are usually harmless, as society rarely pays any attention to their frivolous ideas. Nevertheless, with the advent of the internet, many gullible people on the web may be attracted to such fakers, and their unfounded attacks on established sciences may weaken the foundation of our civilization. In view of the new situation, once the C-y-Lo types crossed their line and meddle with true sciences, they must be exposed and discredited, so as to maintain the dignity and reputation of the sciences on the internet and beyond. *The Chinese for such people is "minke". Read more: 继续涮民科:Expose "Minke" C_Y_Lo - 岳东晓的日志 - 贝壳村 中文版 最近我写了一篇题为《 杨振宁的规范场理论是人类文明的一个里程碑》的文章,主要是介绍了杨振宁 1954 年的那篇论文( http://www.thphys.uni-heidelberg.de/~maniatis/LectureAdv/yang-mills.pdf ),以及由此所开创的 YANG-MILLS 规范场理论在弱相互作用和强相互作用理论的发展与运用,从历史角度总结了杨的伟大贡献。 一位名为 c_y_lo 的却回应到:“ An article based on ignorant!... after 500 years, Yang is position in the history of sciences is at most a foot note!" 先不说他的 broken English ,其断言非常的狂妄。然而,接下来他的说法却露出马脚。 c_y_lo 写道:“ Pauli did it earlier than Yang, Mills, Shaw; and criticized this gauge theory as useless because of no mass is involved with Fermions. Currently a physical gauge theory is not gauge invariant. ”(注一) 以上所引用的陈述说明三点( 1 ) c_y_lo 根本看不懂杨振宁的论文; :(2) c_y_lo 根本不懂 PAULI 提出的质量问题;( 3 ) c_y_lo 没有基本逻辑。论证如下。 ( 1 )在上述杨的论文中的方程 11 里面有 gamma_u ,那叫 Dirac 矩阵,所以这是描述自旋 1/2 的 fermion ,那个 m 就是 fermion 的质量。可见, c_y_lo说杨理论中 FERMION 没有质量纯属一窍不通。众所周知,在现有的理论中费米子(如电子、夸克)等的质量是自由参数,须由实验确定,而不是来自理论。 ( 2 ) PAULI 提出的质量问题是指传递作用力的规范波色子的质量,而不是费米子的质量。在 YANG-MILLS 方程中规范场不能有质量项,这样的项破坏规范不变性。 ( 3 )众所周知,在弱电理论中,通过对称自发破缺机制,使弱作用的规范粒子获得了质量(也就与实验得到了吻合);具体说 SU(2)xU(1) 的 YANG-MILLS 规范场加上自发对称破缺构成了弱电理论。然而,弱电理论需要对称破缺机制不等于所有 YANG-MILLS 的场都需要破缺。具体而言,强相互作用的 QCD (量子色动力学)就是一个精确的 YANG-MILLS 规范场,其规范粒子 gluon 质量为 0 ,不存在规范对称的破缺。 c_y_lo 不但不能理解本博的耐心解释,而且继续妄言到: "The gauge symmetry is broken. This is necessary because fermions have different masses." “ It is well known that QCD is not gauge invariant. ” 这显然是愚蠢的。规范不变性与费米子的质量没有关系。众所周知, QCD 是严格的 Yang-Mills 规范场 . 破缺的是 chiral symmetry 。为什么 c_y_lo 会这么认为“ QCD is not gauge invariant ”? c_y_lo 写道:“ Since gluon interacts with Quarks which have masses. Therefore, gauge symmetry must be broken, and this is verified by experiments. The 2008 Nobel Prized for Physics is given to such verification. ” 首先,所谓因为费米子(如夸克)有质量,所以规范对称必须破缺完全是基本概念错误。如上所述,费米子质量项在 YANG-MILLS 方程中是固有的一项。那不过是普通的、有质量的 DIRAC 场,加上规范场部分。 QCD 是一个精确的 YANG-MILLS 理论,这中间的 C ,代表颜色。这个颜色与所谓的“味道”是两个完全不同的概念。味道指不同质量的夸克(如上夸克、下夸克等等六种)。在 QCD 的拉格朗日中,对 n 的求和就是对味道的求和 ,m_n 是不同味夸克的质量, n=1 到 6 。 夸克味道之间根本不存在规范对称性,根本不存在“味力”。 每种味道的夸克都有三种颜色, QCD 规范对称性是在每种味道夸克的颜色空间,颜色空间的规范场产生 QCD 中的色力。 2008 年的诺贝尔奖,奖励的是发现了新的夸克味道,其理论基础是关于夸克的弱作用,导致不同味道夸克的混合。 可见,此 c_y_lo 连诺贝尔奖内容是什么都一窍不通,更不用提规范场概念,却狂妄地对杨振宁这样的巨人指手画脚,完全是民科( 注二) 。 民科的伪科学对社会是有害的。科学来不得虚假,批驳民科是维护科学的尊严。 注一:传说 PAULI 通过一个六维的 KK 理论( KK 理论为 5 维)得出了类似的方程。把空间维数增加可以得出很多新理论。然而, 5 维 KK 理论本身就是一个死胡同。目前没有任何高维理论得出任何真正的物理。何况 PAULI 的所谓六维理论不过是几封信里提到,不足为信。 注二:根据网上的定义:【 《 表示民间靠兴趣自己研发,大多背离科学规律,挑战公认的经典,比如质疑相对论,进化论等,并不懈的与公理斗争,略带贬义。】
早上看到《 “不要说你不是“道德家” 》,觉得文章提出关于意图判断的问题很有趣。在法律上,很多案子,特别是刑事案件的定性需要进行意图(intent)的判断。某些民事责任中“意图”也是一个要素。例如,欺诈的成立需要的一个要素就是欺骗意图。意图是人的主观心理活动,很难直接证明,而是通过间接证据进行推断。 上述文章中提到诺博效应,其 原始文献参见链接 ,这个所谓效应可以用一个例子说明。有两个调查问题: (1) 一个公司的CEO得到报告,某个项目能带来利润,同时会破坏环境,CEO说我不管是否破坏环境,只管能否能获利,于是项目进行、环境也被破坏。请问: 该CEO是否意图破坏环境? (2) 一个公司的CEO得到报告,某个项目能带来利润,同时会改善环境,CEO说我不管是否改善环境,只管能否能获利,于是项目进行、环境也被改善。请问: 该CEO是否意图改善环境? 不出所料,大部分被调查对象对第一个问题的答案是肯定,而对第二个问题的答案是否定的。 这个实验的主持者 JOSHUA KNOBE 的结论是【人们更愿意把他们认为是负面的附带作用看成是故意造成】( seem considerably more willing to say that a side-effect was brought about intentionally when they regard that side-effect as bad than when they regard it as good. ) 如果把上面(1)(2)两个问题抽象出来,可以表示成下列问题: i. P 知道 A 会给 B 导致附带效果 C;ii. P 说不在乎 B,并决定进行 A。 请问: P 是否意图给B带来C ? 上面 P 可以用CEO替代,A用项目替代,B用环境替代,C可以用“改善”或者“破坏”替代。 从这个抽象来看,上面(1)(2)两个测试的结果应该是相同的。由于 P 的目的是进行A,而且清楚地表明不在乎B,理论上应该结论,P 没有给B带来C的主观目的性 (not purposely). 但是上面问题忽略了 P 对C的道德判断,我们如果加入对C的好坏判断,以及不应该做坏事的 隐含规则 ,测试问题就抽象为 i. P 知道 A 会给 B 导致附带效果 C;ii. C 是正面或者负面;iii. 原则:如果C是负面,则P 知道不应该做; iv. P 说不在乎 B,并决定进行 A。 请问: P 是否意图给B带来C ? 在这个抽象下,很显然,当我们把C从”保护”变成“破坏”时,问题不再能进行等价变换,因为上面的 ii 由 正面变成了负面, 原则 iii. 被启动,P的行为变成蓄意违背原则 iii. 因此,诺博效应其实是一个逻辑谬误。 在法律上,根据给出的上述事实,我们一般不能用 “intentionally" 来给CEO破坏环境的行为定性。因为 intentionally 是指以造成结果为目的,与 purposely 是同义词。 这里,破坏环境并不是CEO的目的。 在法律上我们将明知后果却仍然造成后果的情况定性为”willfully" 或者 "knowingly"。但是否”intentional",一般是由陪审团裁定。上面的调查表明,明知故犯干坏事,很容易被定为“intentional".