總網頁瀏覽量

2013年6月1日 星期六

用點思考學英文


由於亞苦愈來愈衰,最近仲限制文章字元,咁即係趕絶我地呢d齋寫(英文)字冇相嘅人,我會積極考慮搬屋!搬去邊度好請網友留言給點意見,謝謝!

這篇文章相當長,會分五集上載,大家請慢慢看!任何留言或Like請於最後那篇文章才發表,多謝合作!

首先說一件事,生果報昨天以半廣告形式報導OALD8的雙解版問世,當中說到第八版比上一版多了一千個新詞,這令我想起之前狐狸先生跟我說的一番話。現在所有的六大學習型字典的內容你都可以在網上找到,有些字典的網上內容,甚至比光碟更updated,例如MED便是。但是不說不知,有些網上字典的內容卻比光碟舊很多,例如LDOCE的網上內容便仍是十年前第四版的。不過,狐狸先生告訴我,其實他們網上還有另一收費版本,內容比LDOCE5更多,可以說是LDOCE5.1版。這個版本我也不知怎樣收費,它主要給那些已買了第五版的人看的。LDOCE5的光碟上有個pin code,你可憑此登記,連結到收費網頁,裡面有很多新字片語,它們多是跟科技網絡有關的流行詞,例如befriendstaycation smartphoneQR Code等,不讓OALD8專美。不過要留意的是這些新詞並不包括我近年提供給他的幾十個生字,那些應該要等到二年後的第六版才能見到了。

說完開場白,現在轉入正題,今天我們又來看古大師兩個近期的錯誤。先看一段答問:

問:小說、劇集中的對話,常常有 literally一字,字典的解釋則似和對話內容不合。這個字究竟是怎樣用的?
答:我不知道讀者說的literally用於什麼場合,確實是什麼意思。但literalliterally是指「嚴格按照字面意思」,所以「直譯」叫literal translation。英文常用literally一字,表示「所言並無誇大」,例如:(1There were literally hundreds of thousands of protesters(抗議者以十萬計,絕無誇張)。(2I am literally penniless(我的的確確一文不名)。

我預科時的文科班,連我一共四人入了港大,但其中一個在開學後的一個星期便退了學,去了當見習警察督察,三十年過去了,現在他至少也應該是個警司了。他在預科時曾經對經濟科老師說過一句話:「咁唔識妳唔好嚟教吖嘛!」我覺得這句說話套用在古大師身上最適合,唔知人地問乜你學乜人出嚟寫專欄教英文o者?我說這句刻薄話是有原因的,蓋literally這個用法其實在非正式場合十分普遍,若你不知讀者想問什麼,那你的英文口語便還有很大的進步空間了。

其實讀者在提問中已有提示,只是我們的古大師「時運高,看不到」而已。讀者說:小說、劇集中的對話,常常有literally一字。若古大師是醒目的話,便知讀者問的是informal English。不過唔清楚唔緊要,可以查字典,而因為這用法太出名,幾乎本本字典有對此作出解釋,就連狐狸先生也曾在電郵中跟我提及。著名的詞典學家Robert Allen(我很喜歡他的作品)便曾在Oxford Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage說到:

Few words have the capacity to cause such mirth (as literally). (p. 402)

我們來看看一些大型字典怎樣評論這個字的用法:

In its standard use literally means ‘in a literal sense, as opposed to a non-literal or exaggerated sense’, as for example in I told him I never wanted to see him again, but I didn’t expect him to take it literally. In recent years an extended use of literally (and also literal) has become very common, where literally (or literal) is used deliberately in non-literal contexts, for added effect, as in they bought the car and literally ran it into the ground. This use can lead to unintentional humorous effects (we were literally killing ourselves laughing) and is not acceptable in formal contexts, though it is widespread. (Oxford Dictionary of English)

The use of literally as an intensifier is common, esp in informal contexts. In some cases, it provides emphasis without adding to the meaning: the house was literally only five minutes walk away. Often, however, its use results in absurdity: the news was literally an eye-opener to me. It is therefore best avoided in formal contexts. (Collins English Dictionary)

Since the early 20th century, LITERALLY has been widely used as an intensifier meaning "in effect, virtually", a sense that contradicts earlier meaning "actually, without exaggeration": The senator was literally buried alive in the Iowa primaries. The parties were literally trading horses in an effort to reach compromise. The use is often criticized; nevertheless, it appears in all but the most carefully edited writing. Although this use of LITERALLY irritates some, it probably neither distorts nor enhances of the intended meaning of the sentences in which it occurs. The same might often be said of the use of LITERALLY in its earlier sense "actually": The garrison was literally wiped out; no one survived. (Random House Unabridged Dictionary)

古大師說literally是「嚴格按照字面的意思,所言並無誇大!」 然而,這只是literally的其中一個意思,但在非正式場合裡或在口語中,literally跟這個意思恰恰相反,它的作用是以誇張的形式去表達一件事情。我們在上述的usage notes可以見到,儘管這個用法不為所有人認同,但無可否認這用法相當普遍,學英文的人是一定要知的,否則易招笑柄!古大師除了口語唔掂外,這裏亦再一次揭示他很少查字典,經常以為自己所知的已經足夠答讀者!所以我成日話睇戰爭書冇用,你除咗識soldier呢個字之外,很多口語上的用法都是想當然,講出來隨時笑死老外!一不離二,古大師當然唔會只錯一條問題咁叻仔,現在看看他的第二個低級錯誤:

問:I did not know his intention to withdraw from People Power(我不知道他有意退出人民力量)這一句,字典說應改為intention of withdrawing,對嗎?
答:我不知道讀者說的是哪本字典,但兩個說法其實都正確。謹再舉一例:I don't have the slightest intention of going/ to go there(我完全無意去那裏)。

又唔知?我經常說學英文也要加點思考,但對此古大師顯然頗為缺乏!這個答問其實有兩個層面,分別是讀者的例子和古大師的例子。先說讀者那句,古大師認為intention後面跟of + verb ing formto + infinitive都可以,這是正確的。但他沒作解釋,那便等我來告訴大家為什麼是這樣。

不過,先旨聲明,我現在查證每一個英文用法時,我並不將自己局限於六大學習型字典中,因為這樣很容易出錯。我現時研究英文通常還會輔以其他大型字典如Merriam Webster Unabridged DictionaryAmerican Heritage DictionaryRandom House Unabridged Dictionary, Oxford Dictionary of EnglishShorter Oxford English DictionaryCollins English Dictionary和另外五、六本我認為可信度較高的語法書,務求盡量做到自己的分析客觀而中肯!我們現在來看讀者那句為什麼是對的:

I did not know his intention to withdraw from People Power.

這句句子的組成結構是: verb + intention + to infinitive,在這裏動詞是know。語法書Cobuild Usage有這樣的解說:

When someone intends to do something, you can talk about their intention to do it, or their intention of doing it.

e.g. My opponent has declared his intention to petition the Election Court.

e.g. They announced their intention of cutting down all the trees.

我們再看另一句例句:

< span=""> to divide its Indian Empire into two dominions — Current Biography> (MWUD)<>

這裏我們要留意動詞,Cobuild usage這二句例句中用了兩個verbs,均是解「宣佈」,但如書中所說卻可跟兩種不同的句式。要證明句式的不同不是因為動詞的轉換(由declare變成announce),我們再找來一句有announce的例句作反證(即第三句)。於是,我們看見動詞announce後面除了可以接 of + verb ing form外,還可接 to + infinitive

另外,Cobuild Usage還說:

You can say that 'it's someone's intention to do' something.

e.g. It is our intention to be the number one distributor of health products. (LDOCE5)

這裏的句式是It + verb to be + intention + to do,所以當intention前面是it + verb to be,動詞後面只能用to-infinitive,我看過的例句也支持這說法,這算是第二種句式。之前讀者提問的那一句動詞是know,可以歸類為第一種句型,所以intention後面接of + ingto + infinitive都是正確的。

現在說第二個層面(即古大師所舉的例句)和第三種句型。

古大師說不知讀者的說法出自那本字典,這個我可以告訴他是出自朗文當代,古大師明顯是沒有查字典就隨便答人。朗文當代在第五版中有相關的語法資料,但是經過删減,我們來看看足本的第四版怎樣說:

Do not say 'have no intention to do something' or 'not have the slightest intention to do something'. Say have no intention of doing something or not have the slightest intention of doing something: He had no intention of paying me the money. (LDOCE4)

好了,現在的問題是,古大師(在他的例句中)說of doingto do兩個句型皆可,但朗文卻說只有前者是對的,那究竟孰是孰非?

我們先看古大師因何無視朗文的語法警告,我相信只有兩個原因:一是他沒查過字典,二是查咗但扮唔知,因為先前解釋provide sth to sb時他明明用了LDOCE來做擋箭牌,現在斷不能又說朗文的東西不可信(雖然這樣的事他經常做)!為了求真,我們再找第三方證人,Cobuild Usage又提到:

You can say that someone has no intention of doing something.

e.g. She had no intention of spending the rest of her life as a waitress.

You do not say that someone 'has no intention to do' something. (Cobuild Usage)

其實所有學習型字典都只會給have + no/every/not slightest + intention + of doing sth這句式,就算你查較大型的詞典或Cobuild Wordbank中的例句所得到的答案都是一樣,而我找到的唯一例外是這個:

He wants to keep the business within the UK and has no intention to expand to overseas markets. Glasgow Herald (2001)

這是從Collins English Dictionary (online)找到的句子。 我的解釋是:這句蘇格蘭的英文不算標準用法,我們總不能期望所有native speakers都用對英文,100人中有5個人用錯了是正常的現象,正如我說過BBC也有人將everydayadverbial用。總結上述有關intention的用法有三:

(1) 一般動詞後可說intention of doing sthintention to do sth

(2) verb to be之後說intention to do sth

(3) has/have之後說intention of doing sth

結束之前,說一單新聞。昨天星島日報報導香港人的商業英語大倒退,有網友希望我能評論一下。我不是這方面專家,只說說自己的幾點謬見!首先,菲律賓人的英文口音雖然不正,但他們用英語的能力出奇地好,這點可以從香港的賓妹身上看到。很久以前,我就在想為什麼教育學者不去研究一下因何賓妹的英文講得比香港的大學生還要流利,借鑑一下也好嘛,但沒人想到這樣做,明顯教育當局這班人是食塞米的大飯桶!第二點是我不太相信這個調查結果:菲律賓人的英文比新加玻人還要好,台灣人在一年間躍升三十多位。我現在的老闆就是新加玻人,他們的英文雖然也有口音和文法錯誤,但我相信星州人的英文遠在賓賓之上,而且以商業活動來說,菲律賓根本無法跟新加玻相比。

最後說說香港,老實講,退步是意料中事,這個我在網誌中已說過九億幾次,只有一些埋沒良知或嚴重弱智的人才會認為不是!中學生英文差,大學生和在職人仕自然也差,這是理所當然的事!其實職場需要到的英文是相對簡單的,就像我上一篇網誌中提到的「工作層次」那樣,學好語法便成!奈何現在香港連教英文那批人都唔掂,看看古大師便知,你又怎能要求本地職場有良好的英語呢?像昨天,我前下屬彈了一句不知所云的英文給我,說是他老婆上司寫給她的,不知應怎樣回答,而那個上司是一個經理!

香港的企業現在不重視英語,部份原因是回歸以後,真正有外藉僱員的跨國企業少了,人們說英文的機會也少了。莫說一般員工,很多大公司的高層英文水平也一樣水皮,那總體商業英語又怎會好呢?聽說最近還有個弱智人仕高呼學英文不應只以實用為大前提,而是要學莎翁名著和字源,我認為香港遲早會死在有這類思維的人手上!要改善香港人的英語水平,改變社會/公司對員工英語水平的要求至為重要,也是我們必需走的第一歩!

我的網誌雖然冇BB相,冇貓貓狗狗,冇講護膚美容,但若你看完覺得我教的東西還可以的,請按一下Like,算是對作者努力的一點鼓勵,謝謝了!