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

At ten o’clock we returned home. When got to the door, it was obvious something was wrong. I push the door and it opened. Obviously, some had broken in. As soon as I saw this I ran downstairs to the management office. Naturally, they were very surprised. They came back with me. Very cautiously, we entered the flat but whoever had broken in had already gone.

I push the door and it opened 這句的opened 為什麼不是被動式即
I push the door and it was opened?

這是作文書的example 句子

2006-11-20 09:52:40 · 6 個解答 · 發問者 ? 7 in 社會與文化 語言

6 個解答

因為 OPEN 一字可以是 vt, 也可以是 vi, 及 adj

When the shop is open (adj), you can see that the door opens. (vi)
You don't have to open the door yourself. (vt)


2006-11-20 15:05:27 補充:
I pushED the door and it opened. 或者 I pushed the door and it was opened. 都是正確的, 但既然前面已說明了是有人去 '推' 的, 就不必於下文多此一舉說: 於是門 '被' 推開了.

2006-11-20 15:07:32 補充:
seems to be better if: 「When I got to the door, it was obvious something was wrong. I pushed the door and it opened. Obviously, someone had broken in.」

2006-11-20 16:30:12 補充:
回應 Bel: 其實如果可以說 someone opened a door, 已說明了可以將之反過來說 the door was opened by someone. 只不過是因為 「沒有必要」這樣做而已. 其他例子:the bell rings (vi)someone rings the bell (vt) = the bell is RUNG by someone [但無必要如此做, 不是不可以這樣說]

2006-11-20 16:34:05 補充:
**** webpage example **** http://www.studywell.org/articles/dooropened.htm

2006-11-20 17:25:53 補充:
hahatse 的補充十分有意思, 看問題不可以只看文法而忽略了作者選擇用語時的原意的. ... 但 I push the door and it opened of itself 為可不寫成 「I pushED the door and it opened ITSELF.」?

2006-11-20 19:18:59 補充:
or 「I pushED the door and it opened BY ITSELF.」?

2006-11-21 22:18:42 補充:
gj: 多謝你為 hahatse 解答了我問他/她關於 it opened itself 和 it opened by itself 的問題, 也多謝你將各人先前提過的重點重新整理好, 很美觀的再說了一次. 本人唯一想重申的是, it was opened 在文法上是對的, 只是按文章的上文下理而言不應使用.

2006-11-22 09:20:47 補充:
gj: (1) 學懂 undermine一字? 我到現時都未懂, 甚麼叫做一個人可以undermine香港人的英水能力. 你結尾的一句你自己收回罷. Please don t get personal. (http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/?qid=7006101604871&others=1) (2) 我之前重申的是第一個補充, 大家應該都看得明 (2006-11-20 15:05).

2006-11-22 09:21:01 補充:
(3) it opened (verb 自動打開了), it had been opened (verb 已經被打開了), 或 it was open (adj 已是打開了的) --- 不同意以上三個中文翻譯的絕對性. 我的理解是, [a] it opened (vi) 是強調門開了, 但不強調誰推的, [不一定是指自動!]; [b] it had been opened BEFORE I came back! [past perfect 用來強調一件事在另一事之前已發生; [c] it was open (adj) 是強調門是處於開啟的狀態.

2006-11-22 09:21:14 補充:
(4) 我想我一直都沒有說過 the door was opened 是好的句子, 一直的意思都是說, 文法上的對, 不等於是文理上的對, 希望有心人小心細讀本人的整段文字.

2006-11-22 09:22:27 補充:
改正: 我到現時都未懂, 甚麼叫做一個人可以undermine香港人的英語能力.

2006-11-22 09:31:12 補充:
補充 (3): it had been opened 及 it was opened 都是被動式的表達 門被打開了, 分別是 past perfect 及 simple past 的問題.WASITREAL: 希望你多問問學校的英文老師意見, 再問問外藉導師, 這就可以減少被我或任何其他人的解答錯漏引起誤會.

2006-11-22 16:42:17 補充:
gj: 我到目前為止就真是不明白, 為何你可以說這麼多說話, 都不正面回答一次, 解釋一下, 為何當時有人說 someone shoud not undermine hk people s english competency, 是一句沒有問題的說話. 不是我想一再提, 而是你的言行令我有疑惑, 有興趣的朋友, 也可到我曾提過的連結研究一下當日他與另一個nukxxx 君的解說和回應方式...

2006-11-22 16:46:04 補充:
我舉的 When the shop is open, you can see that the door opens. 的確不是好的句字. 我是用來解釋grammar而寫的, 用來就對比作形容詞和動詞 (vi) 時的分別.

2006-11-22 16:50:33 補充:
「如果你要「堅持」門是主人翁打開的話....」??? 我不明你說的是甚麼堅持, 你第一次作的修改不就是 I pushed the door and it opened 嗎? 不明你為何要後加上it was opened 及 it had been opened 再加以多說.....

2006-11-22 16:53:30 補充:
WASITREAL, 相信你的外藉老師不會是錯誤解說的人罷. 又希望你看得清各人的觀點.

2006-11-22 17:00:12 補充:
summarize previous points as follows:I pushed the door and it opened. (best choice)I pushed the door and it was opened. (grammar correct but not good choice -- I dont know why it s wrong to say that.)

2006-11-22 17:00:23 補充:
I pushed the door and found that it had been opened [by someone who had left already] (also correct, meaning clear)

2006-11-22 18:04:57 補充:
中文意思, 希望減少誤會:我一推門, 門就開了[不用開鎖, hahatse提醒大家的]. (opened)我一推門, 門就被(我)推開了. (was opened, by me 是多餘的)我一推門, 發現門曾被開過. (had been opened)

2006-11-22 18:06:34 補充:
三句文法都對, 意思, 讀者自己判斷.

2006-12-01 09:33:53 補充:
如我有意告訴發問者應選was opened,或was opened較好,我同意是錯,但我不是這樣做,如句子是I pushed the door & found that all the windows were opened,我才會堅持就一定要寫 were open, 因為這是明顯的logical mistake. (if only you were willing to point out your own mistakes made elsewhere) END OF STORY!

2006-11-20 10:02:05 · answer #1 · answered by K 7 · 0 0

我的名字is raymond li
我有網站可以賺錢和創業。
www.money128.biz和www.fast - beauty.6289.us
我還有美容產品可以免費試用詳情
請發送電子郵件給我。
sai80002003@yahoo.com.hk
感謝你。

2009-01-01 20:07:02 補充:
我的名字is raymond li
我有網站可以賺錢和創業。
www.money128.biz和www.fast - beauty.6289.us
我還有美容產品可以免費試用詳情
請發送電子郵件給我。
sai80002003@yahoo.com.hk
感謝你。

2008-12-21 16:33:34 · answer #2 · answered by raymond l 1 · 0 0

At ten o’clock we returned home. When we got to the door, it was obvious (that) something was wrong. I pushed* the door and it opened. Obviously, someone had broken in. As soon as I saw this I ran downstairs to the management office. Naturally, they were very surprised. They came back with me. Very cautiously, we entered the flat but whoever had broken in had already gone.
(* 整篇文章都是過去式, 很明顯這裏應該是 pushed 而非 push.)
I opened the door = 我打開了門 (我把門打開了)
The door was opened by me = 那扇門是我打開的
如果我們說 I pushed the door 只是說「我推了那扇門」, 本身並不含是想「打開」的意思. 當然, 靠推或拉來打開的門可以這樣說, 但多數會用 I pushed the door open.
例子裏的「I pushed the door and it opened.」就是說「我把門推了一推, 它便(自動)打開了.」也即是表示那扇門是未閂好或者個鎖壞了, 所以在沒有扭動門把的情況下門也「自動」打開了.
I pushed the door and it was opened 是錯的. 若果要說「門是(已被)打開了的」就應該用 adjective 的 open (代表「未關好」或「未上鎖」), 例如: "the door was open" 「那扇門是(已被)打開了的.」 但 "was opened" 用了 opened 則是 verb form 了.
如果說成 I pushed the door and (found that) it had already been opened (by someone) 還說得過去, 但意思則變成 「門已經被(某人)打開了」.
另外, 是 the door opened by itself, 不是 of itself. 至於 the door opened itself 也是錯的, 難道你要說「那扇門自己打開自己」嗎? 最簡單還是說 the door opened 「那扇門打開了」.

2006-11-21 23:11:16 補充:
多謝你為 hahatse 解答了我問他/她關於 it opened itself 和 it opened by itself 的問題我不認識 hahatse, 但相信他/她有自己解答的能力, 不用我代勞. 也多謝你將各人先前提過的重點重新整理好, 很美觀的再說了一次.還可以吧? 沒有「模稜兩可」地補充再補充吧? 也沒有把其他答案的錯處也當成正確吧?

2006-11-21 23:11:51 補充:
本人唯一想重申的是, it was opened 在文法上是對的, 只是按文章的上文下理而言不應使用.你意思是你先前所寫的「沒有必要」嗎? 看來你學懂 undermine 之後, 下一步要研究一下「時間性」tense 的問題了, 那麼或許你便會明白為何在該句中 was opened (verb 被打開了) 是「錯」; 而 opened (verb 自動打開了), had been opened (verb 已經被打開了), 或 was open (adj 已是打開了的) 才是對吧...

2006-11-21 23:12:28 補充:
> 「在文法上是對的, 只是按文章的上文下理而言不應使用.」這真是一個好「解釋」(I open the door 也是這情況嗎?), 但還是少點用吧, 好像有點死雞的(火羅)味...

2006-11-22 15:30:37 補充:
>(1) 學懂 undermine一字? 我到現時都未懂是嗎? 原來你用的字本身是不懂解釋/用法的!? 失覺! 失覺! 但我看你行為上對於這個字已是相當熟悉的了, 繼續努力吧!!啊, 還有, 就算怎也好, 你也不應該時常在別的問題內拿出來發問啊!? 倒不如你自己開條問題問這個字, 讓一些不會「不厭其煩」的人給你解答吧.

2006-11-22 15:31:05 補充:
>(2) 我之前重申的是第一個補充, 大家應該都看得明 (2006-11-20 15:05). 你指你第一個補充的 "多此一舉" 嗎? 確實和你其它的 "沒有必要" "不應使用" 沒有一個字相同. 大家都看明了, 亦見識到閣下的中文詞彙如何豐富了, 哈哈~

2006-11-22 15:31:33 補充:
>(3) it opened... 不同意以上三個中文翻譯的絕對性... 我的理解是...那麼你的理解是錯的了. 真的難為你還叫人 "不可以只看文法而忽略了作者選擇用語時的原意". 這麼簡淺的文章你也搞不懂, 很明顯是說該扇門是(不應該地)在未關好的狀態, 所以一推便開 pushed... opened; 難道你家的大門「正常」是會「一推便開」的嗎? 若果是的話, 那麼你推開了門為何又要落去管理處找人了? 有甚麼「不妥」嗎? 像你那樣拿著一句句子來反覆死拗, 很明顯忽略(或不懂)作者原意的是閣下啊~

2006-11-22 15:32:05 補充:
>(4) 我想我一直都沒有說過 the door was opened 是好的句子, 一直的意思都是說, 文法上的對, 不等於是文理上的對, 希望有心人小心細讀本人的整段文字. 亦沒有人說你曾說過「是好的句子」,你說的是「正確」啊! 而問題的重點就在它不是正確的...至於「文法上的對, 不等於是文理上的對」這樣的說話你也可以「三幅被」一說再說, 真是鐵蓋也給你撐爛! 看來你的標準是「文法 文理」皆錯才算得上是「錯」, 又或者這只是適用於你個人而言??

2006-11-22 15:32:29 補充:
>補充 (3): it had been opened 及 it was opened 都是被動式的表達 門被打開了, 分別是 past perfect 及 simple past 的問題.甚麼「問題」? 如果你要「堅持」門是主人翁打開的話那麼你還是去日本寫歷史書吧. 否則, 看得懂原文的也可了解門是「之前」已被人開了; 而既然描述主人翁推門時用 simple past, 要說門在「再」「之前」被開過就當然要用 past perfect 來, 這點你還不懂啊!?

2006-11-22 15:33:16 補充:
>WASITREAL: 希望你多問問學校的英文老師意見, 再問問外藉導師, 這就可以減少被我或任何其他人的解答錯漏引起誤會. 唉, 希望 wasitreal25 的老師不會也是扮有料實際只懂得「死拗」及「耍太極」吧! 真的要問的話, 可以考慮給他看看這句有何不妥: When the shop is open (adj), you can see that the door opens. (vi). 如果他跟你說甚麼「文法對..但...」, 你還是問問其他人吧...

2006-11-23 01:52:03 補充:
16:42 浪費篇幅 16:46 掩飾過錯 16:50 詐傻扮懵 16:53 拉關係 17:00 不明所以亦照跟! 17:00 重覆別人的觀點 18:04 再重覆; 拉攏他人 18:06 把責任推給讀者

2006-12-01 00:34:44 補充:
"I pushed the door and it was opened" is *definitely* wrong. This is not a personal opinion. This is a fact. For those who can't understand why, read the article again.

2006-11-21 16:22:34 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

若你有留音你文章的全句”I push the door and it opened”,若前後文看,你可以推想到這句的意思是:”我只是把門推一下,它就自動打開”(即這門不是你繼續推而開,是因為已經被破壞,故可以自動開),因此句中不用被動式,或許若詳細寫這句英文你會明白更多:”I push the door and it opened of itself”

2006-11-21 18:26:43 補充:
給你一個例子:The door opened of itself 意思就是”門自行開啟”

2006-11-20 12:18:35 · answer #4 · answered by HaHa 7 · 0 0

首先, 這句子應該是I pushed the door and it opened,
全段都是過去式, 沒理由push就寫成現在式。

所有(也只有)及物動詞transitive verbs可以變成被動式。
Open可以是形容詞, 名詞, 及物動詞和不及物動詞(intransitive verb)。
所以Open是可以寫成被動式的,
不過通常用在要強調「被誰打開了」中的「誰」時才用。
例如要強調門是被「我」打開, 會說:
The door was opened by me.

如果單單指門開了, 而不強調是誰開的話,
都不會用被動式, 所以這句的翻譯應該是
「我推門, 然後它打開了」。

同樣, start也可以變成被動式:
The game was started by the president.
(強調是總統開始這個遊戲, 不是其他人)

不能用作被動式的, 都是不及物動詞,
例如 happen, dive, disappear….

2006-11-20 11:47:56 · answer #5 · answered by xinxin 3 · 0 0

這是中英文不同的一個例子.

中文是"門被推開了". "被"是被動式, 所以許多人以為英文也要相應地"is opened".

但其實許多英文動詞是沒有被動式的, "open"是一例. 其他如"start"也是沒有"is started", 只有"start / starts / started".

2006-11-20 10:12:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers