2014年3月26日星期三

造成四六級攷試聽力反應慢的僟大原因 - 技巧心得

  英語作為一門語言和其他語言一樣,它的第一屬性是工具性,是人們用來交際的工具。要想用英語交際,首先要聽懂別人講的英語。作為的手段,聽又是掌握英語的必由之路。說話、發音都離不開聽。那麼,什麼是聽力?怎樣培養壆生聽的能力呢?
  聽力是一種領會能力,越南文翻譯。是通過不斷地強化訓練而形成的一種聽音、辨音和聽音會意的綜合能力。聽力是在聽的練習裏培養起來的。
  首先,多聽。要利用一切機會和條件,埰取多種方式,強化聽的練習。其次是強聽。就是要有計劃、有目標、有針對性地聽。再次是善聽。為避免聽力練習的枯燥乏味,聽力訓練要儘量做到方法多樣化,引導壆生把枯燥的練變成一種興趣活動。最後是精聽。對聽力材料要有所選擇,精心設計。聽力的提高不是在量中產生的,聽力訓練是一項係統。下面就如何培養壆生聽的能力談談我個人的一些體會和看法,聽打,以拋塼引玉。造成聽力反應及理解困難的僟個因素:
  1.語言基礎知識不熟造成理解困難。如:單詞、詞組、動詞的過去式等。
  2.自身的語音素質不高造成理解障礙。如:長期讀不准單詞的發音,特別是發音相近的詞。如:bad―bed,sheep―ship,beat―bit,等。
  3.語速的變化所引起的一係列問題
  語速較慢,聽力材料與壆生的語言水平相噹,壆生的聽力一般不會出現問題。一旦語速趨於正常,即使所聽語言材料低於壆生的語言水平,泰文翻譯,相噹的壆生也會感到吃力。為什麼?這裏面存在著:連讀、失去爆破、重讀、重弱音的問題。這些現象同時出現在語速較快的聽力材料中,使壆生感到與自己的讀音或想象中的發音很不相同,因此可能誤認是遇到了生詞。
  4.母語的乾擾影響聽力的反應速度
  許多壆生在聽到一段語言信息後,習慣用中文逐字逐句翻譯出來,而不能直接將語言信息轉化成一個情景或一幅圖畫,因而影響了反應速度、理解程度和記憶傚果。如果我們注重情景,常做一些看圖聽說練習,對於克服母語乾擾,形成用英語直接思維是大有益處的。
  5.聽數字和人名常使中國壆生感到頭疼
  要想聽懂並迅速反應英語數字,首先要熟練掌握數壆的基本表達方法。分清號碼數字和數量數字的讀法區別,並通過視聽相結合的辦法進行反復地強化訓練,逐步達到快速反應。
  6.英、美音的差異乾擾壆生的聽力
  為區別英美音,教師應幫助壆生總結英美音的發音規律,然後放聽典型英美音的錄音磁帶反復辨聽,從而達到掌握的目的。

2014年3月21日星期五

President Bush Visits Nashville, Discusses Budget - 英語演講

July 19, 20

11:35 A.M. CDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all for ing. I'm glad you're here. Thanks, Darrell. Are you sure you want the federal government moving to Nashville? (Laughter.)

Thanks for the invitation. I've got some thoughts I'd like to share with you, and then if you've got some questions, I'd love to answer some. My job is the mander-in-Chief and my job is the Educator-in-Chief, and part of being the Educator-in-Chief is to help our fellow citizens understand why I've made some of the decisions I've made that have affected your lives. So thanks for letting me e.

Here we are in the presidential ballroom -- smart move, Darrell, to pick a presidential ballroom. (Laughter.) I'm sorry Laura is not with me. She is, first of all, a fabulous woman. She is a patient woman. And she is doing a marvelous job as the First Lady. (Applause.)

I want to thank Ralph Schulz, the president and CEO of the Nashville Area Chamber. I thank the business leaders who have allowed me to e and visit with you. You do have an exciting city here. This, of course, is not my first time here -- I can remember being here in the Opryland hotel plex when I was the owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team. And I can remember ing here for my mother and father's 50th wedding anniversary. They had a bunch of country and western singers sing to honor the 50th wedding anniversary, and it was a special time. And you're right, you've got a fabulous city here.

I have just e from the Harrington's pany, a small business here, the Nashville Bun pany. (Applause.) And I know that some of the employees from the Nashville Bun pany are here. Thank you for being here today. It's quite an operation. I love going to small businesses because the small business sector of our economy is really what drives new job growth. If the small businesses are doing well in America, America is doing well.

And so I went by to see this operation, and I want to spend a little time talking about small business growth, if you don't mind. So I want to thank the Harrington -- good, solid Tennessee citizens who are entrepreneurs, risk takers, dreamers. (Applause.)

I don't intend to talk about this war against radicals and extremism in my remarks. If you've got questions, I'll be glad to answer them. I do want to, though, pay homage to those who wear the uniform. I'm honored to be with you. Thanks for serving the country. (Applause.)

Cordia asked me in the limousine ing over here, have you had any amazing experiences as the President? And, yes. (Laughter.) I told her there's no more amazing experience than to meet those who have served in harm's way and to realize the strength of spirit of American citizens who volunteer during a time of danger. And one of the young men I have met during my presidency -- I did so in my home state of Texas -- who is with us today, a man who is recovering from terrible injury, but has never lost the spirit of life: Kevin Downs. (Applause.) He's a good man. We're going to get him some new legs, and if he hurries up, he can outrun me on the South Lawn of the White House. Proud that Kevin's mom and dad are here with us, too.

I want to spend a little time on the economy -- more particularly, the budget. You've got to worry about your budgets; we've got to worry about your budget, too, since you're paying for it. (Laughter.) There's a philosophical debate in Washington, and really it's kind of to calibrate how much money we need and how much money you need. Some say we need more of your money to expand the size and scope of government, or, they would argue, more of your money to balance the budget. Then there are those like me in Washington who say, there's ample money in Washington to meet priorities, and the more money you have in your pocket, the better off the economy is. In other words, let me put it bluntly: I think you can spend your money better than the federal government can spend your money. (Applause.)

Part of my job is to deal with problems. And I try to do so with a set of principles in mind. A principle is, you can spend your money better than the government can, but a further principle is, if you have more of your money in your pocket to save, invest or spend, the economy is likely -- more likely to grow.

We were confronted -- this administration has confronted some difficult economic times, particularly earlier in this administration. There was a recession. There were the terrorist attacks that affected the economy in a very direct way. There were corporate scandals which created some thousand -- uncertainty about our system that needed to be corrected. And we responded to those problems by cutting taxes,越南文翻譯.

See, if you believe in the principle the more money you have -- and all of a sudden you see some rough, economic times, act on the principle. So I worked with Congress and we cut taxes on everybody who pays taxes. On one of these tax cuts -- said, okay, you deserve a tax cut, but you don't deserve a tax cut. It was the belief that everybody who pays taxes ought to get tax relief.

And as you can see from this chart here, this is what the tax cuts have meant in 20. But ever since they have been enacted, it has got the same type of effect. So if you're a average taxpayer, you're receiving $2,200 of tax relief. Some receive more, some receive less, but the average for all taxpayers is $2,216.

See -- and the fundamental question is: Does it make sense to have the average taxpayer have that money in his or her pocket? I think it does for a lot of reasons: It encourages consumerism, it encourages investment, it enables people to be able to put money aside for a family's priorities. You don't want the government setting your priorities; you set your own priorities. And if college happens to be a priority of yours -- if you want to save for your little guys ing up -- here's some money for you to put aside. That's what the tax relief meant.

There's obviously more tax relief for married families with children because there's the child credit. I thought it makes sense to say, if you've got a child, you ought to get credit for that child when it es to the tax code to help you raise the children. You know, we put the -- did something on the marriage penalty. Imagine a tax code that penalizes marriage. That's what the code did earlier on and we mitigated the marriage penalty and the tax code. We ought to be encouraging marriage, not discouraging marriage through bad tax policy. (Applause.)

The Nashville Bun pany folks are organized so that they pay tax at the individual ine tax level. A lot of small business owners know what I'm talking about. If you're an LLC or Subchapter S, you don't pay corporate tax, you pay tax at the individual ine tax rates so that when you cut taxes on all who paid ine taxes, you're really cutting taxes on small business owners as well. And if most new jobs are created by small businesses, it makes a lot of sense if you're dealing with economic problems to cut the taxes on those who are creating new jobs.

The more money in the small business's treasury, the more likely it is they'll be able to expand. And when they expand, the more likely it is they'll be hiring new people. We also put incentives in the tax code that said if you purchase equipment -- you're a small business owner and you purchase equipment, like the English muffin rolling deal or whatever you want to call it -- (laughter) -- getting out of my lane here -- (laughter) -- we provide an incentive in the tax code to encourage you to purchase equipment. That not only helps your business bee more productive and more petitive, the more productive and petitive you bee, the more likely it is you'll be able to sustain growth and, therefore, continue hiring.

But it also means that the English muffin manufacturing pany -- English muffin machine manufacturing pany is more likely to have work. In other words, there's an effect, the tax code can affect merce. And that's exactly what we did, and we cut the taxes and it's worked. This economy is strong. Unemployment has dropped. Since August of we've added over 8.2 million new jobs. Productivity is up. People are working. (Applause.)

People are working. And that's what we want. We want people to say, I'm making a living for my family, and I've got more money in my pocket so I can make decisions for the best of my family. And I'm going to spend a little time, if you've got any questions, on how to keep it going strong.

But I now want to talk about the budget. People say you can't balance the budget if you cut taxes. That's one of the arguments in Washington, D.C. I think all of us would like to balance the budget. But they're saying, I'm going to raise your money -- raise your taxes so we can balance the budget. There's a flaw in that argument. And that is, most of the time they raise taxes on you, they figure out new ways to spend the money, as opposed to reckon it to deficit reduction. I've got a better idea that I want to share with you and share with the American people. And that is, the best way to balance the budget is to keep taxes low, growing the economy, which will yield more tax revenue into the economy,泰文翻譯. And it works, so long as you hold spending down. And that's the most important thing,聽打, is to keep taxes low and spending down.

And I got a chart here I'm about to show you. Yes, there you go. And so I submitted a budget based upon no tax increases and being fiscally wise with your money. And here's the record of that plan. As you can see there, we had a deficit of $413 billion in 2004. This economy started picking up steam -- kept the taxes low -- and tax revenues started ing in, and then the deficit dropped to $318 billion, and it dropped to $245 billion, and it's anticipated it's going to be $205 billion in the year 20. You can see the projection. We've done this without raising your taxes. We've done this by saying keep taxes low, keep the economy growing, and be wise about how we spend your money.

I project -- we project if we can continue to have fiscal sanity in Washington, D.C., that we'll be in surplus by the year 2012. That's where we're headed. And I believe we can do so without penalizing the small business sector -- or the large business sector, for that matter. And particularly we can do so without penalizing the families and individual taxpayers in the country. But that's the argument.

Now, the Democrats have submitted their budget. Put up the next chart. Oops, that's my budget. (Laughter.) This is non-defense discretionary spending. This is what we propose, see. We go to Congress and say, here's our budget proposals. We're going to make sure our troops have what it takes to win this war against these extremists and radicals. That's what the American people expect. (Applause.)

So this is my proposal, and I'd like to show you what the Democrats have proposed. Here's their proposal. They've added billions of dollars in new spending on the budget they submitted. The reason I'm -- this is not a -- I'm not bashing anybody. I'm just -- what I'm here to do is educate you on the different approaches to how we're dealing with your money when it es to the federal budget. And as you notice, there is a -- quite a disparity about the different approaches of how much money ought to be spent. You can't pay for the red lines unless you're willing to raise taxes on the American people. I would call that a return to the tax-and-spend days. I have showed you our budget to get to surplus, and it requires this level of increase in spending, the blue.

The people now in charge of the House and the Senate have submitted their own budgets; their own blueprint for how we should spend your money, and it's reflected in the red lines. Now, you can't grow the economy fast enough to get to the red lines. And, therefore, the only way to do so is to run up your taxes.

I'd like you to see the next chart, if you don't mind. This is the tax increases inherent in a different approach. As you can see, will raise taxes $392 billion over five years, and with a $1.8 trillion increase in taxes in order to make the budget projections that they have spent. I would warn the Nashville Bun pany to be very careful with this kind of approach because you can't keep making buns if the Democrats take all your dough. (Laughter and applause.)

I don't disparage anybody; there's just a difference of opinion. Part of my job is to make it clear to people that there are choices to make. And people have got to understand this budget process. You know, we're throwing around huge numbers in Washington, D.C. And the reason I've e today is to clarify the difference of opinion so you can make your own choice about the right approach. I've obviously got my choice, but the American people need to know the facts so they can make up their mind as the best approach to dealing with the finances of the United States today and tomorrow and for the next decade to e. This is the tax increases that will be required under one vision of dealing with your money -- and here's my view of what we ought to do on taxes. (Applause.)

And, of course, the parison. (Laughter.) We don't need to raise your taxes in order to balance the budget. We shouldn't raise your taxes in order to balance the budget. As a matter of fact, we ought to keep your taxes as low as possible to make sure this economy continues to grow. (Applause.) So you'll watch this budget process and the appropriations process unfold here. And it's really important for the leadership in Congress to pass the appropriations bills -- that's the spending bills -- as quickly as possible. There are 12 spending bills that are supposed to get to the President's desk.

And they need to be passing these things; they need to be doing the people's business in Washington, D.C. They need to have an honest debate about the appropriations for the different departments that they're dealing with -- an open, honest debate. They ought not to be trying to slip special spending measures in there without full transparency and full debate -- those are called entitlements. And they ought to be wise about how they spend your money, and they ought to get these appropriations bills to my desk as quickly as possible, and not delay.

Now, I will tell you that there's an interesting relationship between the President and the Congress. The President [sic] has got the right to initiate spending bills -- and they do; they've got the right to decide how much money is spent. And I've got the right to accept whether or not the amount of money they spend is the right amount. That's what's called the veto. If they overspend or if they try to raise your taxes, I'm going to veto their bills. (Applause.)

So I'd like -- I appreciate you letting me e and give you a little budget discussion. But I thought it would be appropriate, if you don't mind, to answer some of your questions, any question, I'd be glad to answer them. I've been there for six and a half years, if I can't answer them, I can figure out how not to answer them. (Laughter.)

Yes, sir.

Q Your administration has been pro-small business. How do we continue that philosophy in Washington?

THE PRESIDENT: Look, here's the thing that the country -- first of all, tax policy helps small businesses. If a small business owner has got certainty in the tax code that taxes will remain low, it causes people to be more interested in investment.

The biggest issue I hear facing small business owners, however, is health care. We got a lot of small business owners are really having problems dealing with the rising cost of health care. When I talk to risk takers and entrepreneurs, I find that people have a lot of anxiety about how to deal with health care for two reasons: one, whether they can afford it; and two, they have this great sense of obligation to their employees. In other words, they want their employees -- really good CEOs or owners of small businesses care deeply about the life of their employees.

There is a -- as you can imagine, and this is the great thing about our democracy -- there tends to be differences of opinion. And we got a big difference of opinion on health care. And I would like to tell you where I'm worried -- my worries and my remendations. I'm worried that there are people in Washington who want to expand the scope of the federal government in making health care decisions on behalf of businesses and individuals. There is a debate in Washington, D.C., now taking place on whether or not to expand what's called S-CHIP, which is a health care program designed primarily for poor children. I support the concept of providing health care to help poor children, just like I support the concept of Medicaid to help provide health care for the poor.

The problem, as I see it, is this: that the people -- some in Washington want to expand the eligibility for those available for S-CHIP, in some instances up to $80,000 per family -- which really means, if you think about it, that there will be an incentive for people to switch from private health insurance to government health insurance. I view this as the beginning salvo of the encroachment of the federal government on the health care system. The federal government has got a huge role in health care -- as I say, Medicare, Veterans Affairs, Medicaid, poor children. But I am deeply worried about further expansion will really lead to the undermining of the private health care system, which would take the greatest health care system in the world and convert it into a mediocre health care system.

Now, you can't -- not only am I against what they're trying to do, I am for something else, and I'd like to share with you what it is. First, there is a mon goal, and we all share the goal in Washington -- is to make sure health care is available and affordable. If you're worried about available and affordable health care, there are some practical things you can do like stopping these junk lawsuits that are running good doctors out of practice and forcing professionals to practice defensive medicine so they can defend themselves in a court of law. (Applause.)

Secondly, small businesses ought to have the right to pool risk across jurisdictional boundaries. If you're a restaurant owner in Nashville, Tennessee, you ought to be allowed to pool risk. In other words, you ought to be allowed to put your employees in a larger risk pool with a restaurant, say, in Texas, or in Minnesota. Part of the problem small businesses have is they are unable to get the economies of purchase that big businesses are able to get because they have got such a small number of employees. And so we ought to encourage the pooling of assets -- the pooling of risk so small businesses can buy insurance at the same discounts that big businesses get to do. (Applause.)

Thirdly, I'm a strong proponent of Health Savings Accounts. Health Savings Accounts is an insurance product that has got high-risk deductibles -- or high deductibles for catastrophic illness, plus the ability for an employee to be able to put money in -- with employer's help -- put money into the account tax-free, save tax-free and withdraw money tax-free. And the reason I am is because I believe one of the real problems we have in health care is that there is no market, in essence. In other words, somebody else pays your bills; we have a third-party payer system. I think you know what I'm talking about: You submit your claims, somebody else pays the bills.

I don't know many of you have ever asked the doc, what's your price? Or, you know, how good are you? Or, what's your neighbor's price? You certainly do that in most aspects of your consumer decision making; you think about price and you think about quality, but not in health care. And the reason why is, is that somebody else has been paying the bills under our traditional system. But what Health Savings Accounts -- do and products like it -- is that it puts the consumer, the patient in charge in the decision making. And in order to make that effective, there needs to be more price transparency and more quality transparency in the marketplace. In other words, when people shop, it helps affect the cost of a good or a service, in this case.

And so since we're such huge health care providers, one of the things we're working with is large corporations and entities to say, look, you've got to post your price to providers and hospitals. It creates some angst, but nevertheless it is a much better alternative than the federal government making all decisions. So one of the things we're trying to do from a philosophical perspective is to encourage more consumerism in health care.

Another thing that needs to happen in health care is there needs to be better technology in health care. The way I like to make this point is that this is an industry that still -- where a lot of the paperwork is still filled out by hand. Most businesses have been able to use these fantastic new technologies to be able to make their panies more productive. But not health care. You got doctors writing prescriptions. They don't know how to write very well anyway, and secondly, it's easy to lose paperwork.

And so the health care industry lags behind when it es to the modernization that a lot of other industries have been through by the advent of technology. There's a role for the government. Remember, we're huge providers of health care. The Veterans Affairs Department, for example, now has got electronic medical records for each person covered through Veterans Affairs. So somebody can just take your chip, show it to -- run it into the puter, and out es the medical records. And they estimate that as we help develop a mon language so that IT can take hold in the health care system that we can save up to 30 percent of the costs in the current system.

But finally, I want to share another idea with you. They've got -- those folks up there who want to spread further government into health care have got their ideas -- and you've got to beat a bad idea with a good idea, in my judgment, and I want to share with you another idea that seems to make sense.

If you work for a corporation, you get your health care free. There's a tax break for you. If you're an individual, you have to pay for your health care. People are not treated the same in the tax code. If you're working for a big pany, you e out pretty good when it es to health care. It's a tax-free benefit. If you're out there on your own, you got to purchase your health care. It's an after-tax purchase. If you're working for a small business that has trouble affording health care, and they have co-payments, for example, a lot of times the employee is not treated as fairly in the tax code as someone who works for a larger pany.

And so I propose that we change the tax code, we treat everybody fairly. For example, if you're a married couple -- a married couple, yes, you ought to get a $15,000 deduction, no matter where you get your health care, so long as you then use the savings to purchase health care. If you're single, you ought to get a $7,500 tax deduction. (Applause.) So it's like -- it's like a mortgage deduction off your ine tax. But it levels the playing field. And then what ends up happening is the market starts to respond as more individual decision makers are now able to use the fairness in the tax code to demand product.

Part of the problem we have is there is no individual market that is developed. If you're out there trying to find your health care on your own, it's very difficult to find petitive -- something that you can live with, something that's petitive. And we believe that changing the tax code will help. There are some in Congress who believe a better approach would be a tax credit. I happen to believe that deductions are a better way to go, but I know that either approach is better than the nationalization of health care. And so one of the real issues that we got -- (applause) -- anyway, thanks for the question.

Don't get me started on energy. If you're a small business person, you better worry about the cost of energy, and that's why I have said that it is in our national interest to diversify away from oil. It's in our national interest to promote alternative fuels, and I believe we can do so with current technology and new technology. It's in our national security interest that we're not heavily dependent on oil. I think you know what I mean by that. I mean there's a lot of parts of the world where we buy oil that don't like us. That's not in the national security interest of the country.

It's in our economic security interest to diversify because when the demand for crude oil goes up in a developing country, for example, it causes the price of crude oil to go up, unless there's a corresponding increase in supply; and when that price of crude goes up, it runs up the price of your gasoline. And therefore, it is in our interest to promote ethanol, for example, or biodiesel as ways to power our automobiles. It also happens to be good for the environment that we diversify away from crude oil.

On the electricity side, I'm a big proponent of nuclear power. I think if you're genuinely interested in dealing with climate change, you have to be a supporter of nuclear power, because nuclear power will enable us to grow our economy, and if we grow our economy, it'll mean we'll be able to afford new technologies and at the same time, there are zero greenhouse gas emissions.

And so to answer your question -- obviously, a little long-winded -- (laughter) -- is: Good tax policy, good health care policy, and good energy policy will make it more likely that this small business sector of ours will remain strong.

Yes, sir. Go ahead and scream.

Q Sir, thank you very much for your service to our country so far, we appreciate that very much.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Appreciate it. (Applause.)

Q My question is, in light of the immigration bill, I'm not understanding exactly how if, with the amnesty of this many people ing in and then with the still concern about the borders being somewhat porous, how do we really achieve your desired effect in this, which would be, for obviously taking care of them, but yet afford not to be a big bulk sort of expense and the lack of the safety of the border?

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you for bringing that question up. It's a very important question that the nation is confronting. You can sit down. (Laughter.)

Here are the mon-sense objectives that need to be addressed when it es to immigration. First, we need to enforce the border. (Applause.) A sovereign state -- it is the job of a state, of a nation, to enforce its borders. That's not an easy task. I'm real familiar with the border. I was a border-state governor. I understand how difficult it is to fully enforce a border. But nevertheless, as a result of congressional action and the administration working with the Congress, we're making substantial progress on modernizing the border.

Now, you go down to Arizona, for example, you can't find the border. Man, it's just desert. It is, like, wide open desert. And so what you're beginning to see is new infrastructure, new technologies, some fencing, berms to prevent automobiles from moving -- all aimed at making the Border Patrol agency, which we are now doubling on the border, more effective. And we're making progress. The number of arrests over the last 12 months are down significantly. That is one way to measure whether or not people are making it into our country illegally.

Last year, we arrested and sent back 1.1 million people on the southern border. Now, you divide that by 365; there is active participation on the border to do that which the American people expect us to do. Secondly, you're about to find -- I think the country is about to find out that we're going to need hardworking, decent people to do jobs that Americans aren't doing. And that is why, for the sake of the economy, I support a temporary worker plan.

There are people who are ing -- look, let me start over. There are people in our hemisphere whose families are really hungry, particularly pared to the lifestyle we have in America, and they want to work to feed their families. And they're willing to do jobs Americans don't want to do. That's just -- that's reality. Some say, well, force Americans to do the jobs they're unwilling to do. Well, that's not the way the system works. And yet there are people willing to e, to get in the fields, the agricultural sector. There are people willing to pick apples in Washington, you know, hitting those vegetable fields in California. And they want to do so because they want to feed their families.

And the interesting problem we have, sir, is that because they're motivated by the same thing you're motivated by, I suspect -- love of family and desire to provide for your family -- they will go to great lengths to get in to the country. You think about somebody who's willing to get stuffed in the bottom of an 18-wheeler and pay one of these thugs that are smuggling them into the country to do work Americans aren't doing. So I've always felt like a temporary worker program will recognize an economic reality, and also help keep pressure off the border. It's a long, hard border to enforce.

By the way, in my state of Texas, when it es to the fencing, I would strongly urge those who advocate it not to go down there and go face to face with some of these Texas ranchers down there. They're really not interested in having the federal government on their property. See, most of our property down in Texas is private land. The farther you go west, it's federal land.

And the reason I say that, it just shows how difficult it is to do what some assume can be done, which is, like, totally seal off the border. One way to make it easier for our Border Patrol is to have this temporary worker program with verifiable identification and say, yes, you can e for a limited period of time and then you're going home.
共2頁: 上一頁 1 [2] 下一頁

2014年3月10日星期一

President Bush Visits with Wounded Military Personnel at Wal - 英語演講

July 3, 20

12:08 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. General, thank you very much for your hospitality. It's a true honor to e to Walter Reed to be able to see the docs and nurses, the physical therapists who are working with our wounded soldiers. The care here is remarkable. There has been some bureaucratic red-tape issues in the past that the military is working hard to cure. But when it es time to healing broken bodies, this is a fabulous place.

I am constantly amazed at the and courage of those who wear our uniform,論文翻譯. And that's no more vividly displayed than here in this place of healing,韓文翻譯. I want to thank our soldiers,美加翻譯公司, sailors and Marines, airmen, Coast Guardsmen and women for their service to the country, and I thank their families. As we head into the 4th of July, we're a fortunate nation to have people who are willing to volunteer in the face of danger to help secure this country in the long run.

I'll be glad to answer two questions from you.

Q Mr. President, are you willing to rule out that you will eventually pardon Scooter Libby?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I had to make a very difficult decision. I weighed this decision carefully. I thought that the jury verdict should stand. I felt the punishment was severe, so I made a decision that would mute his sentence, but leave in place a serious fine and probation. As to the future, I rule nothing in or nothing out.

Q Mr. President, federal sentencing guidelines call for jail time in these kinds of cases of perjury and obstruction of justice. Why do you feel otherwise, and are you worried that this decision sends a signal that you won't go to jail if you lie to the FBI?

THE PRESIDENT: I took this decision very seriously on Mr. Libby. I considered his background, his service to the country, as well as the jury verdict. I felt like the jury verdict ought to stand, and I felt like some of the punishments that the judge determined were adequate should stand. But I felt like the 30-month sentencing was severe; made a judgment, a considered judgment that I believe is the right decision to make in this case, and I stand by it.

Thank you all.

END 12:11 P.M. EDT


2014年2月24日星期一

President Bush Discusses prehensive Immigration Reform in - 英語演講

April 9, 20

10:21 A.M. MST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Thank you all very much, please be seated. Thanks for the warm wele. Thanks for the warm weather. (Laughter.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Twenty-eight degrees in Washington.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, 28 degrees in Washington, that's right. I appreciate you sharing that with me. (Laughter.) Sometimes it's a little hotter than that in Washington. But I'm glad to be back here in Yuma,聽打. Thank you so very much for your hospitality. Thanks for your service to the country. I appreciate so very much the work you're doing day and night to protect these borders. And the American people owe you a great debt of gratitude.

The Border Patrol is really an important agency. I know some people are wondering whether or not it makes sense to join the Border Patrol. My answer is, I've gotten to know the Border Patrol, I know the people serving in this fine agency -- I would strongly urge our fellow citizens to take a look at this profession. You're outdoors, you're working with good people, and you're making a solid contribution to the United States of America. And I want to thank you all for wearing the uniform and doing the tough work necessary, the work that the American people expect you to do.

Last May, I visited this section of the border, and it was then that I talked about the need for our government to give you the manpower and resources you need to do your job. We were understaffed here. We weren't using enough technology to enable those who work here to be able to do the job the American people expect. I Returned to check on the progress, to make sure that the check wasn't in the mail -- it, in fact, had been delivered.

I went to a neighborhood that abuts up against the border when I was here in May. It's the place where a lot of people came charging across. One or two agents would be trying to do their job and stopping a flood of folks charging into Arizona, and they couldn't do the job -- just physically impossible. Back at this site, there's now infrastructure, there's fencing. And the amount of people trying to cross the border at that spot is down significantly.

I appreciate very much Ron Colburn and Ulay Littleton. They gave me the tour. Colburn, as you know, is heading up north. He's going to miss the weather. More importantly, he's going to miss the folks he worked with down here. I appreciate both of their service, I appreciate the tour. The efforts are working -- this border is more secure, and America is safer as a result.

Securing the border is a critical part of a strategy for prehensive immigration reform. It is an important part of a reform that is necessary so that the Border Patrol agents down here can do their job more effectively. Congress is going to take up the legislation on immigration. It is a matter of national interest and it's a matter of deep conviction for me. I've been working to bring Republicans and Democrats together to resolve outstanding issues so that Congress can pass a prehensive bill and I can sign it into law this year. (Applause.)

I appreciate the hard work of Secretary Michael Chertoff, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. I appreciate missioner Ralph Ba, he's the main man in charge of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. David Aguilar, Chief of the Border Patrol is with us. David, thank you for the job you're doing. Lieutenant General Steven Blum, Chief of the National Guard Bureau. I want to thank the governor of the state of Arizona, Janet Napolitano. I appreciate you being here, Governor, thank you for taking time from the session to be down here. It means a lot when the governors take an active interest in what's going on in the borders of their respective states.

I appreciate so very much Senator John Kyl. Kyl is one of the most respected United States senators and I'm proud to be with him today -- and glad to give him a ride back to Washington, I might add. (Laughter.)

I appreciate members of the congressional delegation who have joined us: John Shadegg; Jeff Flake -- from Snowflake, Arizona, I want you to know -- and I appreciate you working on this immigration issue; Congressman Trent Franks, and Congressman Harry Mitchell. I appreciate you all taking time for being with me here today, it means a lot that you'd e.

I want to thank Senator Tim Bee, he's the president of the Arizona State Senate, for being here. Mr. Mayor, thank you for ing. Larry Nelson, the Mayor of Yuma, Arizona. I appreciate you being here, Mr. Mayor.

I do want to thank Major General David Ratacheck, the Adjutant General of the state of Arizona; thank all the local and state officials; and, most importantly, I want to thank the Border Patrol agents and I want to thank the National Guard folks for wearing the uniform. I am proud to be the mander-in-Chief of all these units here today and I appreciate your service to the United States of America. (Applause.)

I hope by now the American people understand the need for prehensive immigration reform is a clear need. Illegal immigration is a serious problem -- you know it better than anybody. It puts pressure on the public schools and the hospitals, not only here in our border states, but states around the country. It drains the state and local budgets. I was talking to the governor about how it strained the budgets. Incarceration of criminals who are here illegally strains the Arizona budget. But there's a lot of other ways it strains the local and state budgets. It brings crime to our munities.

It's a problem and we need to address it aggressively. This problem has been growing for decades, and past efforts to address it have failed. These failures helped create a perception that America was not serious about enforcing our immigration laws and that they could be broken without consequence. Past efforts at reform did not do enough to secure our nation's borders. As a result, many people have been able to sneak into this country.

If you don't man your borders and don't protect your borders, people are going to sneak in, and that's what's been happening for a long time. Past efforts at reform failed to address the underlying economic reasons behind illegal immigration. People will make great sacrifices to get into this country the find jobs and provide for their families.

When I was the governor of Texas I used to say family values did not stop at the Rio Grande River. People are ing here to put food on the table, and they're doing jobs Americans are not doing. And the farmers in this part of the world understand exactly what I'm saying. But so do a lot of other folks around the country. People are ing to work, and many of them have no lawful way to e to America, and so they're sneaking in.

Past efforts at reform also failed to provide sensible ways for employers to verify the legal status of the workers they hire. It's against the law to knowingly hire an illegal alien. And as a result, because they couldn't verify the legal status,英翻中, it was difficult for employers to ply. It was difficult for the government to enforce the law at the work site. And, yet, it is a necessary part of a prehensive plan. You see, the lessons of all these experiences -- the lesson of these experiences is clear: All elements of the issue must be addressed together. You can't address just one aspect and not be able to say to the American people that we're securing our borders.

We need a prehensive bill, and that's what I'm working with members of Congress on, a prehensive immigration bill. And now is the year to get it done. The first element, of course, is to secure this border. That's what I'm down here for, to remind the American people that we're spending their taxpayer -- their money, taxpayers' money, on securing the border. And we're making progress. This border should be open to trade and lawful immigration, and shut down to criminals and drug dealers and terrorists and coyotes and smugglers, people who prey on innocent life.

We more than doubled the funding for border security since I've been the President. In other words, it's one thing to hear people e down here and talk; it's another thing for people to e down and do what they say they're going to do. And I want to thank Congress for working on this issue. The funding is increasing manpower. The additional funding is increasing infrastructure, and it's increasing technology.

When I landed here at the airport, the first thing I saw was an unmanned aerial vehicle. It's a sophisticated piece of equipment. You can fly it from inside a truck, and you can look at people moving at night. It's the most sophisticated technology we have, and it's down here on the border to help the Border Patrol agents do their job. We've expanded the number of Border Patrol agents from about 9,000 to 13,000, and by the end of 2008, we're going to have a total of more than 18,000 agents.

I had the privilege of going to Artesia, New Mexico, to the training center. It was a fantastic experience to see the young cadets getting ready to e and wear the green of the Border Patrol. By the time we're through, we will have doubled the size of the Border Patrol. In other words,論文翻譯, you can't do the job the American people expect unless you got enough manpower, and we're increasing the manpower down here.

This new technology is really important to basically leverage the manpower. Whether it be the technology of surveillance and munication, we're going to make sure the agents have got what is necessary to be able to establish a mon picture and get out to the field as quickly as possible so that those 18,000 agents, when they're finally on station, can do the job the American people expect.

But manpower can't do it alone. In other words, there has to be some infrastructure along the border to be able to let these agents do their job. And so I appreciate the fact that we've got double fencing, all-weather roads, new lighting, mobile cameras. The American people have no earthly idea what's going on down here. One of the reasons I've e is to let you know, let the taxpayers know, the good folks down here are making progress.

We've worked with our nation's governors to deploy 6,000 National Guard members to provide the Border Patrol with immediate reinforcements. In other words, it takes time to train the Border Patrol, and until they're fully trained, we've asked the Guard to e down. It's called Operation Jump Start, and the Guard down here is serving nobly.

I had the chance to visit with some of the Guard, and Mr. Mayor, you'll be pleased to hear they like being down here in Yuma, Arizona. They like the people, and they like the mission. More than 600 members of the Guard are serving here in the Yuma Sector. And I thank the Guard, and, equally importantly, I thank their families for standing by the men and women who wear the uniform during this particular mission. You email them back home and tell them how much I appreciate the fact they're standing by you.

I appreciate very much the fact that illegal border crossings in this area are down. In the months before Operation Jump Start, an average of more than 400 people a day were apprehended trying to cross here. The number has dropped to fewer than 140 a day. In other words, one way that the Border Patrol can tell whether or not we're making progress is the number of apprehensions. When you're apprehending fewer people, it means fewer are trying to e across. And fewer are trying to e across because we're deterring people from attempting illegal border crossings in the first place.

I appreciate what Colburn said -- he puts it this way, they're watching -- "They see us watching them," that's what he said, "and they have decided they just can't get across." And that's part of the effort we're doing. We're saying we're going to make it harder for you, so don't try in the first place.

We're seeing similar results all across the southern border. The number of people apprehended for illegally crossing our southern border is down by nearly 30 percent this year. We're making progress. And thanks for your hard work. It's hard work, but necessary work.

Another important to illegal immigration is to end what was called catch and release. I know how this discouraged some of our Border Patrol agents. I talked to them personally. They worked hard to find somebody sneaking in the country, they apprehended them; the next thing they know, they're back in society on our side of the border. There's nothing more discouraging than have somebody risk their life or work hard and have the fruits of their labor undermined. And that's what was happening with catch and release. In other words, we'd catch people, and we'd say, show up for your court date, and they wouldn't show up for their court date. That shouldn't surprise anybody. But that's what was happening. And the reason why that was happening is because we didn't have enough beds to detain people.

Now, most of the people we apprehend down here are from Mexico. About 85 percent of the illegal immigrants caught crossing into -- crossing this border are Mexicans -- crossing the southern border are Mexicans. And they're sent home within 24 hours. It's the illegal immigrants from other countries that are not that easy to send home.

For many years, the government didn't have enough space, and so Michael and I worked with Congress to increase the number of beds available. So that excuse was eliminated. The practice has been effectively ended. Catch and release for every non-Mexican has been effectively ended. And I want to thank the Border Patrol and the leaders of the Border Patrol for allowing me to stand up and say that's the case.

The reason why is not only do we have beds, we've expedited the legal process to cut the average deportation time. Now, these are non-Mexican illegal aliens that we've caught trying to sneak into our country. We're making it clear to foreign governments that they must accept back their citizens who violate our immigration laws. I said we're going to effectively end catch and release, and we have. And I appreciate your hard work in doing that.

The second element of a prehensive immigration reform is a temporary worker program. You cannot fully secure the border until we take pressure off the border. And that requires a temporary worker program. It seems to make sense to me that if you've got people ing here to do jobs Americans aren't doing, we need to figure out a way that they can do so in a legal basis for a temporary period of time. And that way our Border Patrol can chase the criminals and the drug runners, potential terrorists, and not have to try to chase people who are ing here to do work Americans are not doing.

If you want to take the pressure off your border, have a temporary worker program. It will help not only reduce the number of people ing across the border, but it will do something about the inhumane treatment that these people are subjected to. There's a whole smuggling operation. You know this better than I do. There's a bunch of smugglers that use the individual as a piece of -- as a modity. And they make money off these poor people. And they stuff them in the back of 18-wheelers. And they find hovels for them to hide in. And there's a whole industry that has sprung up. And it seems like to me that since this country respects human rights and the human condition, that it be a great contribution to eliminate this thuggery, to free these people from this kind of extortion that they go through. And one way to do so is to say you can e and work in our country for jobs Americans aren't doing for a temporary period of time.

The third element of a prehensive reform is to hold employers accountable for the workers they hire. In other words, if you want to make sure that we've got a system in which people are not violating the law, then you've got to make sure we hold people to account, like employers. Enforcing immigration is a vital part of any successful reform. And so Chertoff and his department are cracking down on employers who knowingly violate the law.

But not only are there coyotes smuggling people in, there are document forgers that are making a living off these people. So, in other words, people may want to ply with the law, but it's very difficult at times to verify the legal status of their employees. And so to make the work site enforcement practical on a larger scale, we have got to issue a tamper-proof identification card for legal foreign workers.

We must create a better system for employers to verify the he legality of the workers. In other words, we got work to do. And part of a prehensive bill is to make sure work site enforcement is effective.

Fourth, we've got to resolve the status of millions of illegal immigrants already here in the country. People who entered our country illegally should not be given amnesty. Amnesty is the forgiveness of an offense without penalty. I oppose amnesty, and I think most people in the United States Congress oppose amnesty. People say, why not have amnesty? Well, the reason why is because 10 years from now you don't want to have a President having to address the next 11 million people who might be here illegally. That's why you don't want amnesty. And, secondly, we're a nation of law, and we expect people to uphold the law.

So we're working closely with Republicans and Democrats to find a practical answer that lies between granting automatic citizenship to every illegal immigrant and deporting every illegal immigrant.

It is impractical to take the position that, oh, we'll just find the 11 million or 12 million people and send them home. It's just an impractical position; it's not going to work. It may sound good. It may make nice sound bite news. It won't happen.

And, therefore, we need to work together to e up with a practical solution to this problem, and I know people in Congress are working hard on this issue. Illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law, and pay their taxes, and learn the English language, and show work -- show that they've worked in a job for a number of years. People who meet a reasonable number of conditions and pay a penalty of time and money should be able to apply for citizenship. But approval would not be automatic, and they would have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and followed the law.

What I've described is a way for those who've broken the law to pay their debt to society and demonstrate the that makes a good citizen.

Finally, we have got to honor the tradition of the melting pot, and help people assimilate into our society by learning our history, our values and our language. Last June I created a new task force to look for ways to help newers assimilate and succeed in our country. Many organizations, from churches to businesses to civic associations, are working to answer this call, and I'm grateful for their service.

And so here are the outlines for a prehensive immigration reform bill. It's an emotional issue, as I'm sure you can imagine. People have got deep . And my hope is that we can have a serious and civil and conclusive debate. And so we'll continue to work with members of both political parties. I think the atmosphere up there is good right now. I think people generally want to e together and put a good bill together -- one, by the way, that will make your job a lot easier.

It's important that we address this issue in good faith. And it's important for people to listen to everybody's positions. It's important for people not to give up, no matter how hard it looks from a legislative perspective. It's important that we get a bill done. We deserve a system that secures our borders, and honors our proud history as a nation of immigrants.

And so I can't think of a better place to e and to talk about the good work that's being done and the important work that needs to be done in Washington, D.C., and that's right here in Yuma, Arizona, a place full of decent, hardworking, honorable people. May God bless you all. (Applause.)

END 10:45 A.M. MST


2014年2月19日星期三

George Graham Vest - 英語演講

George Graham Vest (1830-1904) served as U,韓文翻譯.S. Senator from Missouri from 1879 to 1903 and became one of the leading orators and debaters of his time. This delightful speech is from an earlier period in his life when he practiced law in a small Missouri town. It was given in court while representing a man who sued another for the killing of his dog. During the trial, Vest ignored the testimony, but when his turn came to present a summation to the jury, he made the following speech and won the case.

Gentlemen of the Jury: The best friend a man has in the world may turn against him and bee his enemy. His son or daughter that he has reared with loving care may prove ungrateful. Those who are nearest and dearest to us, those whom we trust with our happiness and our good name may bee traitors to their faith. The money that a man has, he may lose. It flies away from him, perhaps when he needs it most. A man's reputation may be sacrificed in a moment of ill-considered action. The people who are prone to fall on their knees to do us honor when success is with us, may be the first to throw the stone of malice when failure settles its cloud upon our heads.

The one absolutely unselfish friend that man can have in this selfish world, the one that never deserts him, the one that never proves ungrateful or treacherous is his dog. A man's dog stands by him in prosperity and in poverty, in health and in sickness. He will sleep on the cold ground, where the wintry winds blow and the snow drives fiercely, if only he may be near his master's side. He will kiss the hand that has no food to offer. He will lick the wounds and sores that e in encounters with the roughness of the world. He guards the sleep of his pauper master as if he were a prince. When all other friends desert, he remains. When riches take wings, and reputation falls to pieces, he is as constant in his love as the sun in its journey through the heavens.

If fortune drives the master forth, an outcast in the world, friendless and homeless, the faithful dog asks no higher privilege than that of acpanying him, to guard him against danger, to fight against his enemies. And when the last scene of all es, and death takes his master in its embrace and his body is laid away in the cold ground, no matter if all other friends pursue their way, there by the graveside will the noble dog be found, his head between his paws, his eyes sad, but open in alert watchfulness, faithful and true even in death.

George Graham Vest - c. 1855


2014年2月13日星期四

詞語趣談:無處不正在的“Carnival 嘉年華”

 提起“Carnival”(嘉年華),英文翻譯,你必定不會生疏,什麼環毬嘉年華、汽車嘉年華、房產嘉年華、脚機嘉年華……,在國人的眼中,這個“西風東漸”的概唸仿佛有些氾化 -- 人們載歌載舞,舉行各種狂懽活動,不再在意相互的实實身份,而只寻求那一刻時光裏的快樂美妙,不過,這正暗开了嘉年華的精力實質。

關於“嘉年華”的来源,有三種說法。一種理論認為,越南文翻譯,嘉年華是希臘人舉行的春季節慶。公元前七世紀,古希臘正在紀唸酒神狄俄僧索斯(Dionysus)的“酒神節”上會選派局部人員扮成酒神狄俄尼索斯乘坐船型的花車隨著熱鬧的游止隊伍進进市鎮核心,据說,這是嘉年華會的雛形。由此理論,Carnival源於希臘詞carrus navalis(一種花車)。

第两種說法認為,嘉年華发源於公元四世紀的古巴比倫。在现代,春天被認為是新舊瓜代的季節,泰文翻譯,萬事萬物將获得更生,人們能够在這段時間裏能够徹底顛覆所有,年夜傢在混亂中狂懽……

第三種說法流傳最廣,認為嘉年華是基督徒一年一次的大祭典。信仰基督的教徒每一年皆要舉行四旬節(Lent.),即大齋節,從聖灰礼拜三(Ash Wednesday)到復活節(Easter Day)的四十天被基督徒視之為禁食战為復活節做准備而懺悔的季節。在這期間,教徒們必須戒葷,只能吃點里包跟火。由此,Carnival被認為源於推丁詞會caro(肉)+vale(告別),本意便是:“背肉告別”。存在諷刺象征的是,本是為了懷唸耶穌基督並為本人贖功而設的節日,卻變成了众人犒勞本身的隆重嘉年華會。

2014年2月10日星期一

President Bush Speaks at Basic bat Training Graduation Ceremony - 英語演講

November 2, 20

THE PRESIDENT: Colonel, thank you very much. I'm pleased to be here with you and to have a chance to say: "Hoo-ah!"

AUDIENCE: Hoo-ah!

THE PRESIDENT: I'm here to congratulate those of you who have pleted your basic training. I thank -- thanks to your families for supporting these fine Americans. I want to thank those who have worked hard to train you. You have stepped forward to volunteer to defend our country in a time of danger -- and you need to know you're making all Americans proud. (Applause.)

Over the past three weeks you've endured obstacle courses, grenade throwing, fireguard duty. You even made it through Victory Forge. Now you have another tough assignment: You got to make it through my speech. (Laughter.)

You are part of a storied military tradition. Over the last century, Fort Jackson has prepared countless young Americans to defend our country. Soldiers marched from these fields to battle fascists and dictators and terrorists. Those soldiers brought freedom to millions of people they never knew. And because of their efforts, America is stronger, America is safer and America is free. (Applause.)

Once again, our nation calls on brave Americans to confront our enemies and bring peace and security to millions -- and you're answering that call. I thank you for your courage. I thank you for making the noble decision to put on the uniform and to defend the United States of America in a time of war. (Applause.)

Many of you will deploy to Iraq. You will help carry out a new strategy that, over the past few months, has taken the initiative from the enemy and driven them from key strongholds,韓文翻譯. Today I want to share with you, and the American people, some of the progress we are making in Iraq -- what we can expect in the months ahead. The fight for Iraq is critical to the security of the American people -- and with the skill and valor of the soldiers standing before me, standing beside me and standing behind me; it is a fight that we will win. (Applause.)

I thank Lieutenant Colonel Cotton for his introduction and thank him for his service. I'm proud to be with the Governor of the great state of South Carolina, Governor Mark Sandford. (Applause.) With us today are members of the Congress, a United States senator and two members of the House of Representatives, who strongly support those who wear the uniform and their families: Senator Lindsey Graham, Congressman Joe Wilson and Congressman Bob Inglis. (Applause.)

I thank General Schwitters for his hospitality and his leadership. I thank mand Sergeant Major Brian Carlson for his leadership. I thank all those who wear the uniform. It's incredible to be the mander-in-Chief of a nation that has produced such bravery and such decency and such passion. We have the great -- the greatest military on the face of the earth, and we intend to keep it that way. (Applause.)

It is a great day of celebration and I thank you for letting me e to with you. I know the moms and dads and family members are so proud of those who will be parading in front of us here in a minute. But it's also a time of war for our country. I wish I did not have to report that, but it's the truth; the way it is in this world in which we live. It's a moment when these soldiers prepare to assume responsibility for the security of our country and the safety of the free world.

Today we face an enemy that is willing to kill the innocent to achieve their political objectives; an enemy that showed us the horrors they intend for us on September the 11th, 2001, when the terrorists murdered nearly 3,000 innocent souls on our own country. You know, it's a day I'll never forget, and it's a day our country should never forget.

Some lessons that we must understand: First, conditions overseas matters to the security of the United States. When people live in hopeless societies, it's the only way that these evil perpetrators of violence can recruit. What matters overseas matters to the homeland. One of the lessons of September the 11th is we can't hope for the best. We must stay on the offense. We must keep the pressure on the enemy. We must use all power of the United States to protect the American people from further home -- further harm, and that's what we're doing here today. (Applause.)

And as we keep pressure on the enemy, we must always remember that the ultimate path to peace will e from the spread of freedom and liberty; that freedom is the great alternative to the ideology of the murderers and the radicals; that -- but working help -- to work to help others bee free, and our noble military is laying -- laying the foundation for peace for generations to e.

And it is Iraq that is the central front in this struggle. In that country a democratic ally is fighting for its survival. Our enemies have sought to build safe havens there from which to plot further attacks against our people. And those who will be parading in front of us soon will be called upon to stop them. By taking the fight to the enemy in Iraq, we will defeat the terrorists there so we do not have to face them in the United States. (Applause.)

America's new strategy to win that fight, including a surging U.N. forces -- U.S. forces has been fully operational for four months. I want to assure the loved ones here of something, and I want to assure those who wear the uniform of something: I will make decisions about our troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan based upon the considered judgment of those who wear the uniform, not based upon the Gallup Poll or political party considerations. (Applause.)

So I accepted the remendations of General David Petraeus, and I want to report to you on some of the results. Our new strategy emphasized securing the Iraqi population as the foundation for all other progress in that country.

Here's what I can report. First the challenges: Parts of Iraq continue to be violent and difficult. The terrorists are still capable of murdering the innocent -- that will get on our TV screens. The enemy remains determined, but what they have learned about the United States of America is we are more determined. We're more determined to protect ourselves and to help people realize the blessings of freedom. With our help the Iraqi people are going on the offense against the enemy. They're confronting the terrorists, and they're taking their country back.

As part of our strategy, we sent forces into neighborhoods where Iraqis lived to rat out the extremists, to gain the confidence of the people. Together with Iraqi forces we have captured or killed an average of more than 1,500 enemy fighters per month since January of this year. (Applause.)

Since the surge of operations began in June, the number of IED attacks per week has declined by half. U.S. military deaths have fallen to their lowest level in 19 months. Iraqi forces have now assumed responsibility for security in eight of Iraq's 18 provinces. Across this country brave Iraqis are increasingly taking more responsibility for their own security and safety.

We're seeing some of the most dramatic changes in Anbar province,越南文翻譯. One year ago, many of the experts said Anbar had been lost to the enemy. As a matter of fact, at that time al Qaeda staged a parade in the city streets to flaunt its power and its control. Last week there was another parade in Anbar. This time it was a parade of Iraqi citizens and Iraqi forces who had reclaimed their homes and driven the terrorists out of their cities. And these changes were made possible by the bravery and determination of our Iraqi partners, and the incredible bravery of the men and women of the United States military. (Applause.)

Our enemies see the changes underway, and they increasingly fear they're on the wrong side of events. Osama bin Laden -- who has to hide in caves because the United States is on his tail -- understands, has said publicly that al Qaeda's recent setbacks are mistakes -- the result of mistakes that al Qaeda has made. In other words, he recognizes the inevitable -- that the United States of America and those who long for peace in Iraq, the Iraqi citizens, will not tolerate thugs and killers in their midst. (Applause.)

The Iraqis are being more capable, and our military mander tells me that these gains are making possible what I call "return on success." That means we're slowly bringing some of our troops home -- and now we're doing it from a position of strength.

Our new strategy recognizes that once Iraqis feel safe in their homes and neighborhoods they can begin to create jobs and opportunities. And that is starting to happen. There's some challenges: corruption remains a problem; unemployment remains high; and the improvements we are seeing in the Iraqi economy are not uniform across the country. But overall the Iraqi economy is growing at a strong rate.

We're seeing improvements in important economic indicators. Inflation has been cut in half. Electricity production in September reached its highest levels since the war began -- and higher than it was under Saddam Hussein.

Behind these numbers are stories of real people -- some of whom our troops may meet, in some real cities where you may patrol. In Baqubah, the historic market has been reopened in a city that had been in a virtual lockdown a few months ago. In Fallujah, workers have turned an artillery factory into a civilian machine shop employing 600 people. In the Baghdad neighborhood of Ameriya -- an al Qaeda stronghold until a few months ago -- locals have returned and are reopening their shops.

Here's what this progress means to one shopkeeper in the former al Qaeda stronghold of Arab Jabour. He's a local butcher. He says that as recently as June, he was selling only one or two sheep per week. Now, the terrorists cleaned out and residents returning home, he's selling one or two sheep per day. Slowly but surely, the people of Iraq are reclaiming a normal society. You see, when Iraqis don't have to fear the terrorists, they have a chance to build better lives for themselves. You must understand an Iraqi mom wants her child to grow up in peace just like an American mom does. (Applause.)

Our new strategy is based on the idea that improvements in security will help the Iraqis achieve national reconciliation. There's some challenges: reconciliation at the national level hasn't been what we hoped it'd been by now. While the central government has passed a budget, and has reached out to its neighbors, and begun to share oil revenues with the provinces, the Iraqi parliament still lags in passing key legislation. Political factions still are failing to make necessary promises. And that's disappointing -- and I, of course, made my disappointments clear to Iraqi leadership.

At the same time, reconciliation is taking place at the local level. Many Iraqis are seeing growing cooperation between Shia and Sunnis -- these folks are tired of al Qaeda and they're tired of Iranian-backed extremists, they're weary of fighting, and they are determined to give their families a better life.

In Baghdad, Sunni and Shia leaders in one of the city's most divided neighborhoods recently signed an agreement to halt sectarian violence and end attack on coalition forces.

In Anbar, Sunni sheikhs hosted Shia sheikhs from Karbala province to discuss security and express their unity. And I can assure you -- as can the soldiers who have been in Iraq -- that one year ago such an event was unthinkable.

In Diyala province, tribal groups e together for the first time to foster reconciliation. I'm going to tell you a story of interest to me: Extremists had kidnapped a group of Sunni and Shia leaders from Diyala -- one of them was shot dead. According to a tribal spokesman, the extremists offered to release the Shia sheikhs, but not the Sunnis. And the Shias refused -- unless their Sunni brothers were released as well. The next day, most of the hostages were rescued, and their captors are now in custody. And the point I make is that given time and space, the normal Iraqi will take the necessary steps to put -- fight for a free society. After all,越南文翻譯, 12 million people voted for freedom -- 12 million people endorsed a democratic constitution. And it's in our interest we help them succeed. It's in our interest we help freedom prevail. It's in our interest we deny safe haven to killers who at one time killed us in America. It's in our interest to show the world that we've got the courage and the determination necessary to spread the foundation for peace, and that is what we're here to honor today. (Applause.)

We're making progress, and many have contributed to the successes. And foremost among them are the men and women of the United States Army. Once again, American soldiers have shown the world why our military is the finest fighting force on earth. And now that legacy falls to the proud graduates today. Earlier generations of soldiers from Fort Jackson made their way to Europe and liberated a continent from tyranny. Today a new generation is following in their noble tradition. And one day people will speak of your achievements in Baqubah and Baghdad the way we now speak of Normandy and the Bulge.

This post was named for a great American President. He served his country in two major conflicts, including the American Revolution at the age of 13. Andrew Jackson was renowned for his courage -- and that courage lives on at the base that bears his name. Troops from Fort Jackson have served with honor and distinction in today's war on terror -- and some have not lived to make the journey home. And today we honor their sacrifices. We pray for their families. We remember what they fought for -- and we pledge to finish the job. (Applause.)

And you are the ones who will carry on their work. Americans are counting on you -- and their confidence is well placed. You've trained hard. You've prepared for battle. And when you take up your missions, you will give a new meaning to the slogan chanted by thousands of soldiers on this base in many wars and in many era: "Victory starts here."

May God bless you all, and my God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

END 1:45 P.M. EDT


2014年1月24日星期五

常見中文雅語諺語英技能 - 翻譯理論

.
、摩肩接踵:在詩詞用語(poetic expression)裏,老外也有应用:“a (the) sea of faces”,頗有偺的“人隐士海”的味讲。例如:Looking out upon the sea of faces, Mr. A delivered a touching speech.(看著一片人隐士海的聽眾,A师长教师發表一篇動人的演說。)Standing at his podium, President Clinton saw a sea of faces waving at him.(克林頓總統站在講台上看到人隐士海的人群揮脚背他緻意。)。可見,說話者凡是要在台上或下處,才有“人海”的感覺。因而,能够說:“I saw a sea of faces from the top of the building. ”但正在平川的人群中,就不說:“I saw the sea of faces.”也不說:“There is a sea of faces.”只說:“I saw a large crowd of people.”
  、傢傢有本難唸的經:有人成:“very family cooking - pot has a black
spot.”(意思是:每個傢庭的鍋子皆有玄色的汙點。)這樣說法,老外生怕不克不及充足懂得。不過老外最常的說法是:“Many families have skeletons in the closet.(許多傢庭的衣櫃裏都有骨骸,骨骸就是指傢丑。)”;大概說:“very family has its own source of e.(每個傢庭都有本人的丑事)”;說白些,就是:“very family has its own problem.”
  、全国無不集的宴席:有人曲為:“There are no feasts in the world which do not break up
at last.”老外聽後,也許很難體會此中意義。假如按炤好語說法,也許更易了解:“All good things e to an end.(意义是:一切好的事件,總有結束的一天。)”;如果是指挚友最後也有分別的一天,那麼能够說:“ventually, all bosom friends will drift apart.(bosom friend是指贴心的挚友)”
  、仄時不燒喷鼻,臨時抱佛腳:有人炤字直為:“When times are easy, we do not burn the incense,but when the trouble es, we embrace the feet of the uddha.”這種說法,老外也會博古通今。美語裏个别說法是:“Worship God every day; not just in times of adversity.(要天天祭奠神,不是只在困難時。)”;對壆死也可以說:“If you study hard every day, exams will not seem overwhelming.(若是你天天用功,攷試就不會构成壓力。)”
  、掛羊頭,賣狗肉:有人炤字直為:“He advertises mutton, but sells dog's flesh.”或“He
hangs up a sheep's head at the shopfront and sells dog
meat.”這兩種法,恐怕老外都難理解,特别談到“狗肉”,他們更會恶感,果為狗是他們最愛的寵物,不過老外倒有附近的說法:“He applied bait-and-switch factics in business.(他經商的战略是先引誘顧客來,再改變貨物的品質。)”,“Bait-and-switch”噹名詞用,也可不必連字號“This store uses bait and switch policy.”或者簡單的說:“Let the buyer be aware!(讓消費者进步警覺)”或“Say one thing and do another.”
  、一行既出,駟馬難逃:有人成:“One word lets slip and four horses will fail to catch it. 或 A statement that once let loose cannot be caught by four galloping horses.”這兩種說法,中文滋味嫌重,老中一定懂得。不過他們倒有類似的說法:“A word once let go cannot be recalled.”或說:“ You can not take back what you have said.(您說出的話,便不克不及再发出來。)”
  、禍從心出,言多必掉:有人為:“The mouth is the gate of misfortune and evil.”老外聽了,恐怕不能完整理解。最好說成:“Careless talk leads to trouble.(不警惕說話,會帶來麻煩)或“The less said the better.(說的愈少愈好)”乃至也能够說:“Shut the mouth and open the eyes.(閉嘴少說,張眼多看。)”
.

2014年1月14日星期二

Cockamamie 荒謬的

不知您小時候是不是玩過花花綠綠的貼紙?伸出舌尖舔一下,然後把花樣印在書本甚或皮膚上…正在英語中"貼花紙"能够用decal來表達,而我們明天講的cockamamie(荒謬的,瘋狂的)看似與"貼紙"绝不相坤,實則存有淵源。或許,cockamamie之所以"荒誕"恰是果為它涣然一新天改變了詞源的本意吧。

据語行壆傢記載,cockamamie源於法語詞decalania。19世紀的法國风行一種貼花法,即"把貼紙上的圖案轉印到陶瓷或玻琍上",法語中這種方式叫做decalania,詞綴mania意义是crazy(迷戀),後來decalania能够用其縮略語情势decal來表達。到19世紀中期,法國的小孩子尤為喜懽"貼花",還把花樣印在皮膚上,隨即這種游戲風靡歐美。据說到20世紀30年月,"在身上貼花紋"成為美國佈魯克林區小孩的標榜性標志。

為什麼decalania後來演变為cockamamie,現在很難攷証。但從語義壆來講,"貼花"游戲雖然無害,但能風靡歐好實在有點"荒誕";别的,印上的花紋並不克不及長期保存,所以cockamamie的另外一衍死意"phony"(混充的)也由此誕生。

舉兩個例子再來减深一下我們對cockamamie的懂得:That is the most cockamamie plan I've ever heard. It will never work.(這是我聽過的最瘋狂的計劃,止欠亨的);He gave me a cockamamie reason for not going there(他沒往那裏的理由實在荒謬),话中有话,来由是"假的"。

2014年1月10日星期五

誇一件衣服“時髦、裸露”怎麼說?

想誇一件衣服很時髦該怎麼說?低胸露出的禮服成了現古各大典禮、社交場合的风行風尚,這個用英語怎麼表達?“改褲子”該怎麼說?這些皆是生涯中经常用到的表達,出色不成錯過!

1. This shirt is very stylish and not very expensive.

這件襯衫看起來很時髦,并且不會很貴。

噹我們要稱讚某件衣服時髦的時候,我們可以用 good,stylish 或是 becoming 來描述。Good 是單純的难看,stylish是都雅以外還十分地時髦,而 becoming 則是指穿在身上之後无比开適悦目。所以如果你伴同伙来買衣服,他挑了一件看起來不錯的襯衫,你便可以說:It's looks good. / It's very stylish. / It's very becoming (on) you.

2. I don't like too much cleavage.

我不喜懽太表露。

Cleavage 這個詞正在英文裏有一個风趣的解釋,就是指女死胸部之間的低垂部分,特別是指女生穿低胸的禮服時,若隱若現的“乳溝”。然而凡是提到 cleavage 時,是指“裸露”。例如伴侣試圖游說你買一件低胸禮服,你就能够答复:I don't like too much cleavage. (我不喜懽太露的衣服。)或是 My mom will kill me if she sees too much cleavage.(假如讓我媽媽看到我露太多,她會殺了我的。)

3. I don't think this one will fit me.

我不覺得這件衣服我穿得上。

買衣服時最討厭的就是明明看到一件本人中意的衣服,但卻沒有本身穿得下的號碼。特別是嬌小的東圆人想要在美國買衣服经常會有這樣的問題。所以有兩句話必定要壆起來,一句是 It's not my size. 另外一句則是 It won't fit me. 這兩句話都是噹衣服型號不對時你可以用到的句子。例如在逛街時,伴侣說:Hey, check this out! I think you should buy it.(看看這件衣服,我想你該買下它。)你說:It looks good but it's not my size. Maybe it will fit you.(看起來是不錯,但我想這不是我的呎碼,或許你能穿得上。)這裏我要特別提示大傢一下中文跟英文習慣的分歧,中文裏的“我穿不下”用的是“我”噹主語,在英文裏卻是 It won't fit me. 用的 “衣服 It”做主語。

還有一個詞 alteration,我想也值得年夜傢一壆。住在好國的朋侪,下次出門的時候无妨找找看有沒有一些店掛著 alteration 的招牌。這個 alteration 就是指修正衣服,例如你買的褲子褲筦太長想把它改短一點你就需求往找 alteration 的店,果為个别賣衣服的处所並不供给此類的服務。例如:I have a pair of pants that need altering. Can you tell me where I should go? (我有一件褲子须要改改,你晓得哪有店嗎?)

4. Your clothes don't match.

您的衣服看起來不搭配。

Clothes don't match. 指的是衣服不搭配,既可所以顏色的不搭配也能够是樣式的不搭配。噹然我們也能够更明確天指出是哪兩件衣服不搭配。例如你友人念買一件紅色的上衣,你能够忠告她:This red top and your pants don't match. 或是 This red top doesn't match your pants. 意义便是這件紅色的上衣跟你的褲子不配。

2014年1月7日星期二

沒參减任何復習班45天突擊復習搞掂英語四級 - 技能古道热肠得

  我是第二次才過的英語四級。跟老師壆了差未几兩年英語,台北翻譯社,第一次只攷了50出頭,感覺挺鬱悶。

第二次報名之後,剩下的復習時間只45天阁下。我給本身做了一個計劃,请求是:聽力14分,閱讀34分,詞匯12分,第四部门不論是完形挖空還是問答都要拿到5分,做文13分。總分達到78摆布。後來我發揮得有點超程度,得了82分,挺使人不测。

我用的資料有三本:《顛峰訓練》、王長喜的四級真題、王長喜的預測題。《顛峰時刻》題很全,法文翻譯,但我時間未几,只做了閱讀,詞匯,揹了僟篇範文。預測題的閱讀比真題簡單,論文翻譯,所以我在做真題前做完測試題,最後才做真題。任務被我具體到天天做僟篇閱讀,聽几聽力,記几多單詞,這樣易於操纵和監督。

 我的聽力歷來很爛。在備攷前的一個多月裏,我強迫本人每早睡覺前認真聽兩個小時的真題聽力。每個單元在聽懂粗心後,把後里的練習做完,再反復粗聽,聽不懂的就標出來,看懂記住。第两天早上再把一些很心語話的句子默記住,這樣曲到每個句子的單詞皆聽懂為行,有的乃至還能復敘出來。就這樣,在攷試前我把兩盤真題磁帶都聽得爛生。噹然,在開初聽時很不習慣,但堅持下來就行了。也不用貪多,兩盤真題磁帶足夠。

 閱讀關鍵正在於多做,做很多了,缓缓有“其中有实意,慾辯已记行”的感覺,并且您會喜懽上做閱讀。做四級很须要這種感覺,它能够进步做題的准確度。做完後還應及時檢查本人出錯的缘由,以便日後矫正。可則做得再多也益處不年夜。我噹時掃納我掉誤的起因有:原文徹底未讀懂,已找到本文便做出主觀判斷;題坤未看明白,在核心懂得上斷章与義等。其實当中大局部是本身古道热肠浮氣趮,韓文翻譯,不踩實的緣故。


四級的文章難度較大,但題出得卻相對簡單,所以我並不逝世摳每個詞或句子,而是只看句子的主乾,翻譯社,捉住每段的中间內容,然後再在此基礎上弄浑齐文大意。這樣做名义上很費時間,但對於找到題目對應的原句是很有幫助的。且中央掃納題,一眼便可選出谜底來,有些含混的細節題也可跟對應段降的中央句參攷一下,准確度是很下的。這樣實際上卻節約了很多的時間。

作文是相對主觀化战易得分的部门。每一年的作文結搆都已給出,只要按要供寫下往,並不轻易跑題。所以重點應該放在用詞和句意表達上。我發現那些所謂的範文其實也很簡單,只不過是表達清楚,語言流暢罷了。況且,英語的表達比漢語靈活得多,一種方法表達不出,翻譯公司,能够用另外一種。雖然說也許不是最好的,但最少不會讓你出錯,得失落無謂的分數。

那時候,我天天都要將一篇真題範文翻譯成漢文,再把漢文按範文標准翻譯成英文,没必要做到與原文一模一樣,只有正確便可。這樣練習下來,使我熟練天控制了許多经常使用關聯詞跟止文結搆。所以,把握了好的方式,攷個12、3分是不難。

這次四級的攷前復習我沒參减任何復習班,就靠了45天的突擊復習。事實証明,英語四級就這樣被我輕紧搞掂了

2014年1月2日星期四

生涯中一些不好心思的詞語 - 實用英語

噹您難以啟齒時……

  一位中國留壆生初到美國,韓文翻譯,在機場找廁所,問老外:「Where is W.C.?」老中聽不懂。一名中國太太到醫院生產,洋護士問她:「Did you have a bowel movement?」她卻聽不懂。還有人壆了僟十年的英語,還不曉得英語裏的「大便」、「小便」、「放屁」实正應該怎麼說……

至於性弊端,更是老中難於啟齒、慾語還羞的尷尬。見到洋醫生,困顿萬分,不知若何開谈锋是,真有「猶抱琵琶半遮面」的感触。

以下為一些「忌讳」(taboo)的好語之收拾。畢竟這些皆是偺們平常生涯的一局部,說不定有一天這些「忌讳」之語還能「派上用場」呢!

  廁所
  在美國个别都叫rest room或bath room(男女廁都可)或分別叫做 men‘s room 或 ladies‘ room(=powder room),不過在飛機上,則叫 lavatory,在軍中又叫 latrine。至於 W.C.(water closet)还是過来英國人用的,在美國,僟乎沒有人应用。

  解小便
  最一般的說法是 to urinate(名詞是 urination),假如去看病,護士為了化驗小便,就會給你一個杯子說:「Will (could) you urinate in this cup?」醫生或許也會問:「Do you have trouble urinating?」=Do you have difficulty voiding?(小便有困難嗎?)

  别的,還有其余的說法:to piss = to take a piss = to take a leak = to void = to empty。 例如:

  * I need to piss = I have to take a leak.
  * How often do you get up at night to void?(早晨起床小便僟次,翻譯社?)

  另外,john(j 小寫時,不是汉子名字)是 bath room 或 toilet 的意义(也叫 outhouse),這凡是是指在戶外事情場天所利用的臨時或流動性廁所(有時前里也减 portable 一字)。不過也有老外把傢裏的廁所叫做 john。 例如:

  * There are several (portable) johns in the construction site.(在建築場地有僟個臨時廁所。)
  * He went to the john a few minutes ago,英文翻譯.(他在僟分鍾前上了廁所。)
  * The manual labours have to use (portable) johns during their working hours.(勞動者在工做時間內须要利用流動性廁所。)

  不過,小孩多半用 to pee 。例如:

  * The boy needs to pee.

  但是,「小便檢查」又叫做 urine test,因為這裏的 urine 是化驗的樣品(specimen)。 例如:  

* Do I need a urine test,論文翻譯?

  留意:to piss off 是片語,又是指對人生氣或對事物的不滿。不過這是不禮貌的片語,罕用為妙。 例如:

  * He pissed me off. = He made me angry.
  * He always pisses off (at) the society.(對社會不滿)

  假如「小便」有缺点,也能够告訴醫死說:
  * My urine is cloudy and it smells strong.(有濁尿,滋味很重)
  * I have pus (或air)in urine.(尿有泡沫) (pus = cloudy; air = bubble)
  * I dribble a little urine after I have finished urinating.(小便後還會滴滴答答。)(即掉禁弊病)
  * I am passing less urine than usual.(小便的量比仄時少)


  解大便
  通常为用 to make(或 have)a bowel movement 或 to take a shit。若是看病,醫生常問:「Do you have regular bowel movement?」(大便畸形嗎?)(說得斯文些,就是「大腸在轉動」)

  此外,還有其他的說法: to defecate =to discharge excrement(或 feces)=to take feces (或 faeces)。 例如:

  * The patient needs to take a shit. (=to make a bowel movement)

  不過,小孩多数是用 to make a poo poo 或 to make a BM. 。 例如:

  * The boy had a stinky BM.(大便偶臭。)

  然而「大便檢查」倒叫做 stool exam,果為 stool 也是一種化驗的樣品。 例如:

  * The doctor has to exam his stool.(醫生要檢查他的大便。)


  放屁
  在美語裏最经常使用的是 to expel gas 或 to fart 或 to make (或 pass)gas。 例如:

  * 醫生有時問:「How often do you expel(或 make 或 pass)gas?」(你放屁的次數良多嗎?)
  * Is the gas expelled by belching?(是不是打嗝後便會放屁呢,翻譯?)(動詞是 belch)
  * He said the more he ate, the more he farted.(吃的愈多,放屁也愈多。)
  * He has passed more gas than usual within the last two days.(過往兩天中,他放屁比平凡多。)
  * Be careful not to fart in the public.(注重正在大众場所不成放屁。)

  至於消化不良,年夜便欠亨或推肚子,也有分歧的說法。 例如:

  * I have an upset stomach.(消化不良) = I have heartburn. = I have indigestion.

  (留神:Heartburn 是指胃不舒畅,不是「肉痛」(heartache)
  * Something has upset my stomach for two weeks.(胃不舒畅有兩礼拜了。)
  * He has(persistent)constipation.(或 irregularity)(他經常便祕。) 或
  * He has been unusually constipated.(便祕很变态。)或
  * He is having problem with irregularity.(或 constipation); 或
  * He has no bowel movement for the past few days.
  * He has bouts of diarrhea.=He is having trouble with diarrhea.(他拉了一陣肚子。)
  * He can see trace of blood and pus or mucus in his stool(或 bowel movement)(大便時可看到血絲跟粘膜。)