菲律賓謀殺我漁民事件，英文稿請大家校正

螢幕花到 wrote:
直接看專業的吧
http://english.cntv.cn/program/newshour/20130514/104713.shtml
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Taiwanese+protest+killing+fisherman+Philippines+coast+guard/8375761/story.html
新聞報導上的用詞比我們用的正式多了也很多範例可以看
例如"A total of", "on the boat" vs "in the boat", 什麼時候用"Philippines"跟"Philippine", coastguards vs "Coast Guard"...

RR wrote:
謝謝各位，我盡力修改，並加上『菲律賓政府無法提出小漁船率先衝撞軍艦的證據』
『小漁船上並未找出任何擦撞痕跡』的說法。

RR wrote:
我們身分證上都是中華民國，閣下哪位？

janchun wrote:
30年前以此為傲30...(恕刪)

螢幕花到 wrote:
直接看專業的吧
http://english.cntv.cn/program/newshour/20130

RR wrote:
在下不才，雖埋首於工作總還有點愛國心與同仇敵愾，以平日工作練出來的破英文先行撰文一篇講述真相。
請英文好的大大協助校稿後，希望大家努力把真相傳出去。
如有擅長日文德文法文的熱心大大也請多幫忙，謝謝各位～...(恕刪)

TimSmith wrote:
嘿,"花到"兄,樓主...(恕刪)

there were total 52 bullet holes found in the Taiwan fishing boat.,

1. there were "a" total
2. there were a total "of"
3. there were a total of 52 bullet holes found "on" the "Taiwanese" fishing boat.

these evidences, bullet holes proved that the Philippines coastguards did commit
manslaughter, it was a definitely murder...

1. 人家明明就沒錯你偏要把this proves (the fact that 52 bullet holes were found on the boat proves that it was an overkill)誤解成"這個證據", 我無話可說
2. these evidences - 文法上解釋沒錯(these的確是複數, evidences也的確是evidence的複數)但是用法不恰當, 為什麼要把52個彈孔每個都當成獨立的證物? 在語境上來說這樣是畫蛇添足, 當然你硬要用人家還是會懂
3. these evidences, bullet holes - 不懂, 讀不通, 既然說證據就是彈孔為什麼還要再提一次彈孔?
4. Philippines coastguards (我的理解釋The Philippines是指國家, 相當於Taiwan, 而用來描述coastguard的時候該用Philippine, 相當於Taiwanese)
5. did commit manslaughter, it was a definitely murder - 你把本意(菲律賓海巡不是誤殺而是謀殺)都改掉了並且互相矛盾




====================================================================

this = 單數.,these = 複數, 52是複數..所以一定要用 these

prove 是動詞,要把它當名詞...也可以,只是沒有用 evidences 這個名詞來得直接...
prove的名詞是proof
coastguard(s).,因為不只一位海巡人員涉入.,最好加個 S 在後...