English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
所有分類

以下宣言(The Declaration)指開羅宣言

The Declaration "was little read and had no binding effect on the signatories – history was moving too fast for such declarations to be heeded (Payne 246)."

The Declaration‘s absence of the leaders’ presence and signatories shows Churchill and Roosevelt expressed no greater interest on the document thus “Washington legally defended its involvement with Taiwan [Formosa] on the grounds that the Cairo Declaration had merely expressed the intent of the WWII Allies (Garver 50).”

幫我翻譯成國語謝謝

2005-03-27 00:26:35 · 6 個解答 · 發問者 changchih 7 in 社會與文化 語言

6 個解答

宣言“很少人讀﹐而且對於簽字國沒有約束力 -歷史前進的速度太快﹐使得這類的宣言被忽略 (Payne, 第246頁)

宣言缺少領導者的在場和簽約國顯示了丘吉爾和羅斯福並不重視這個文件﹐因此“華府合法的為它介入台灣事務辯護﹐認為開羅宣言僅是表達了二戰同盟國的意圖 (Garver, 第五十頁)”

2005-03-27 01:51:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

請問,這兩段英文,是來自同一篇論文中的引述?,或是在同一篇文章中的兩段文句?或是隸屬在兩本書中?
否則,為何上下兩句對於signatories隱含意義的認知有天壤之別?
若是將兩句隸屬不同書本的文辭,斷章出來連貫翻譯,其翻譯之困難度是很高的。

2005-06-07 12:24:51 · answer #2 · answered by 莊羊 7 · 0 0

公告 "是一點點閱讀和有沒有在簽約者上的裝訂效果-歷史正在移動太為如此的公告齋戒被注意到 (佩恩 246 世)."

公告的缺少領袖的出現和簽約者出示邱吉爾和羅斯福沒有如此表達了在文件上的更大的興趣”華盛頓基於開羅公告已經只表達 WWII 盟友 (Garver 50) 的意圖理由用台灣〔台灣〕合法地防護了它的牽涉.”

好像怪怪滴

2005-03-27 04:51:35 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

原: The Declaration "was little read and had no binding effect on the signatories – history was moving too fast for such declarations to be heeded (Payne 246)." The Declaration‘s absence of the leaders’ presence and signatories shows Churchill and Roosevelt expressed no greater interest on the document thus “Washington legally defended its involvement with Taiwan [Formosa] on the grounds that the Cairo Declaration had merely expressed the intent of the WWII Allies (Garver 50).”譯: 公告 "是一點點閱讀和有沒有在簽約者上的裝訂效果-歷史正在移動太為如此的公告齋戒被注意到 (佩恩 246 世)."    公告的缺少領袖的出現和簽約者出示邱吉爾和羅斯福沒有如此表達了在文件上的更大的興趣”華盛頓基於開羅公告已經只表達 WWII 盟友 (Garver 50) 的意圖理由用台灣〔台灣〕合法地防護了它的牽涉.”

2005-03-27 02:25:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

我也是翻成大概這樣沒差啦

2005-03-27 01:52:32 · answer #5 · answered by changchih 7 · 0 0

聲明"不是一點讀和有約束作用在簽字者歷史移動太快速使這樣聲明被注意的.V (Payne 246) 。"

Declaration..s 缺乏leaders.. 存在和簽字者展示Churchill 和羅斯福沒有表達更加巨大的興趣在文件..Washington 法律上因而保衛了它的介入與臺灣[ 福摩薩] 根據開羅聲明僅僅表達了WWII 盟友(Garver 50 的) 意向。..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
正不正確我不知道

2005-03-27 06:44:13 補充:
很抱歉,我覺得翻得怪怪的

2005-03-27 01:38:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers