1705243400
1705243401
语言会通过边界限制的手段，将“the rumor that Mary likes him”这样的复杂名词短语牢牢捆住，使其中的每个单词都无法脱身。这对听者来说是一种福利，因为剖析器知道说话者无法移动这个短语中的任何单词，所以它就可以轻松地跳过这个短语，而不必在其中寻找语迹。但是，听者的福利变成了说话者的负担，因为他们不得不为此添加一个多余的代词，例如“That’s the guy that you heard the rumor that Mary likes him”。
1705243402
1705243403
虽然句法剖析非常重要，但它仅仅是理解句子的第一步。我们不妨试着剖析一下这段真实的对话：
1705243404
1705243405
P: The grand jury thing has its, uh, uh, uh—view of this they might, uh. Suppose we have a grand jury proceeding. Would that, would that, what would that do to the Ervin thing? Would it go right ahead anyway?
1705243406
1705243407
总统： 大陪审团在这个事情上有……呃……他们可能的看法，假如我们让大陪审团启动调查程序。它会不会、会不会对欧文的事有所影响？它会不会一直继续下去？
1705243408
1705243409
1705243410
1705243411
D: Probably.
1705243412
1705243413
1705243414
1705243415
迪恩： 有可能。
1705243416
1705243417
1705243418
1705243419
P: But then on that score, though, we have—let me just, uh, run by that, that—You do that on a grand jury, we could then have a much better cause in terms of saying, “Look, this is a grand jury, in which, uh, the prosecutor—” How about a special prosecutor? We could use Petersen, or use another one. You see he is probably suspect. Would you call in another prosecutor?
1705243420
1705243421
1705243422
1705243423
总统： 不过在这一点上，尽管我们——让我这样说——让你对大陪审团这样做，但我们可以有更好的理由这样说：“看，这是大陪审团，呃，在里面，检查官——”一个特别检察官怎么样？我们可以用彼得森，或者其他人。你知道的，他也许不可靠。你会不会找其他的检察官？
1705243424
1705243425
1705243426
1705243427
D: I’d like to have Petersen on our side, advising us [laughs] frankly.
1705243428
1705243429
1705243430
1705243431
迪恩： 我倒想让彼得森站在我们这边，坦诚地给我们点意见[笑声]。
1705243432
1705243433
1705243434
1705243435
P: Frankly. Well, Petersen is honest. Is anybody about to be question him, are they?
1705243436
1705243437
1705243438
1705243439
总统： 坦率地说，呃，彼得森是可靠的。会有人质询他吗?
1705243440
1705243441
1705243442
1705243443
D: No, no, but he’ll get a barrage when, uh, these Watergate hearings start.
1705243444
1705243445
1705243446
1705243447
迪恩： 不会、不会，但他将受到言论的轰炸，呃，在水门事件听证会开始之后。
1705243448
1705243449
[
上一页 ]
[ :1.7052434e+09 ]
[
下一页 ]