Pages sur ce sujet:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155] >
Off topic: 泰晤士(TIMES)四合院儿
Auteur du fil: QHE
QHE
États-Unis
Local time: 20:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL
Picking and Choosing Apr 29

David Lin wrote:
While the UNESCO recognized "corn on ear" and its variation "grain in ear", "Encyclopedia Britannica" simply uses "grain in ear" under the heading "The Chinese Calendar", as follows:

This meteorological cycle contained 24 points, each beginning one of the periods named consecutively the Spring Begins, the Rain Water, the Excited Insects, the Vernal Equinox, the Clear and Bright, the Grain Rains, the Summer Begins, the Grain Fills, the Grain in Ear, the Summer Solstice, the Slight Heat, the Great Heat, the Autumn Begins, the Limit of Heat, the White Dew, the Autumn Equinox, the Cold Dew, the Hoar Frost Descends, the Winter Begins, the Little Snow, the Heavy Snow, the Winter Solstice, the Little Cold, and the Severe Cold. The establishment of this cycle required a fair amount of astronomical understanding of the Earth as a celestial body, and without elaborate equipment it is impossible to collect the necessary information. Modern scholars acknowledge the superiority of pre-Sung Chinese astronomy (at least until about the 13th century ce) over that of other, contemporary nations.

https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/Ancient-and-religious-calendar-systems#ref313501



David Lin wrote:

An English botanical scholarly article published in the "Annals of Applied Biology", titled, "Effects of decreasing the number of grains in ears of cvs Hobbit and Maris Huntsman winter wheat". The two authors come from Rothamsted Research, a crop productivity study centre in the United Kingdom.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1981.tb00432.x/full


    "grain in ear" ≠ “grains in ears”

    “grains in ears” ≠ "the number of grains in ears of … wheat”

    Anyway, thanks for providing the information.

    Direct link Reply with quote
     
QHE
États-Unis
Local time: 20:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL
Memorable Phrase :D Apr 29



    “We two who and who?”
    “You ask me, me ask who?"


    [Edited at 2017-04-29 14:56 GMT]

    Direct link Reply with quote
     

wherestip  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
chinois vers anglais
+ ...
The original parchment copy signed by Congress Apr 29

ysun wrote:


The copy of the Declaration of Independence kept in the British Parliament is definitely not the original. It was clearly marked as “Copy”, which can be seen from the first and the last page of the pictures as shown at the link David provided in his post at http://www.proz.com/post/2317345#2317345 . That copy doesn’t even bear the signatures of those delegates. Moreover, the handwritten name of John Hancock doesn't look like his authentic signature. It seems to me that it could be a handwritten copy of the printed Dunlap broadside.

...

Please also see: The Truest Copy of Declaration of Independence
https://www.constitutionfacts.com/us-declaration-of-independence/true-copy-of-declaration-of-independence/

"Those who go to see the engrossed copy at the National Archives are shocked that it is barely visible. Its pale brown text on off-white parchment is impossible to read," Lingenfelter said. "The Anastatic Declaration is a facsimile from a plate produced by a chemical transfer process that nearly destroyed the original engrossed Declaration."


Thanks, Yueyin, for providing the additional historical information.

As we can see, the original engrossed (or parchment) copy is indeed not in the best of shape anymore ...

                         
The signed, Engrossed Copy of the Declaration, now badly faded, is on display at the National Archives in Washington, DC.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_history_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence

The United States Declaration of Independence, which announced that the thirteen American colonies then at war with Great Britain were no longer a part of the British Empire, exists in a number of drafts, handwritten copies, and published broadsides.

...

Parchment copies

The Matlack Declaration

The copy of the Declaration that was signed by Congress is known as the engrossed or parchment copy. This copy was probably handwritten by clerk Timothy Matlack, and given the title of "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America".[28] This was specified by the Congressional resolution passed on July 19th, 1776:
Resolved, That the Declaration passed on the 4th, be fairly engrossed on parchment, with the title and stile of "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America," and that the same, when engrossed, be signed by every member of Congress.[29]
Throughout the Revolutionary War, the engrossed copy was moved with the Continental Congress,[30] which relocated several times to avoid the British army. In 1789, after creation of a new government under the United States Constitution, the engrossed Declaration was transferred to the custody of the secretary of state.[30] The document was evacuated to Virginia when the British attacked Washington, D.C. during the War of 1812.[30]

National Bureau of Standards preserving the engrossed copy of the Declaration of Independence in 1951.
After the War of 1812, the symbolic stature of the Declaration steadily increased even though the engrossed copy's ink was noticeably fading.[16] In 1820, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams commissioned printer William J. Stone to create an engraving essentially identical to the engrossed copy.[30] Stone's engraving was made using a wet-ink transfer process, where the surface of the document was moistened, and some of the original ink transferred to the surface of a copper plate, which was then etched so that copies could be run off the plate on a press. When Stone finished his engraving in 1823, Congress ordered 200 copies to be printed on parchment.[30] Because of poor conservation of the engrossed copy through the 19th century, Stone's engraving, rather than the original, has become the basis of most modern reproductions.[31]
From 1841 to 1876, the engrossed copy was publicly displayed on a wall opposite a large window at the Patent Office building in Washington, D.C. Exposed to sunlight and variable temperature and humidity, the document faded badly. In 1876, it was sent to Independence Hall in Philadelphia for exhibit during the Centennial Exposition, which was held in honor of the Declaration's 100th anniversary, and then returned to Washington the next year.[30] In 1892, preparations were made for the engrossed copy to be exhibited at the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago, but the poor condition of the document led to the cancellation of those plans and the removal of the document from public exhibition.[30] The document was sealed between two plates of glass and placed in storage. For nearly 30 years, it was exhibited only on rare occasions at the discretion of the Secretary of State.[32]
In 1921, custody of the Declaration, along with the United States Constitution, was transferred from the State Department to the Library of Congress. Funds were appropriated to preserve the documents in a public exhibit that opened in 1924.[33] After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, the documents were moved for safekeeping to the United States Bullion Depository at Fort Knox in Kentucky, where they were kept until 1944.[34]
For many years, officials at the National Archives believed that they, rather than the Library of Congress, should have custody of the Declaration and the Constitution. The transfer finally took place in 1952, and the documents, along with the Bill of Rights, are now on permanent display at the National Archives in the "Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom." Although encased in helium, by the early 1980s the documents were threatened by further deterioration. In 2001, using the latest in preservation technology, conservators treated the documents and re-encased them in encasements made of titanium and aluminum, filled with inert argon gas.[35] They were put on display again with the opening of the remodeled National Archives Rotunda in 2003.

The Sussex Declaration
On April 21, 2017, the Declaration Resources Project at Harvard University announced that a second parchment manuscript copy had been discovered in an archive in Sussex, England.[37] Named the "Sussex Declaration" by its finders, Danielle Allen and Emily Sneff, it differs from the National Archives copy (which the finders refer to as the "Matlack Declaration") in that the signatures on it are not grouped by States. How it came to be in England is not yet known, but the finders believe that the randomness of the signatures points to an origin with signatory James Wilson, who had argued strongly that the Declaration was made not by the States but by the whole people.[38][39]
The finders identify the Sussex Declaration as a transcription of the Matlack Declaration, probably made between 1783 and 1790 and likely in New York City or possibly Philadelphia. They propose that the Sussex Declaration "descended from the Matlack Declaration, and it (or a copy) served, before disappearing from view, as a source text for both the 1818 Tyler engraving and the 1836 Bridgham engraving".




[Edited at 2017-04-29 15:59 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
ysun  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
"Copy of the Declaration of Independence" kept in the British Parliament Apr 29

Steve,

Thanks for the link and the detailed information. There should be no doubt that the signed, engrossed copy of the Declaration is now housed at the National Archives in Washington, DC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_history_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
List of extant Dunlap broadsides
Screen Shot 2017-04-29 at 3.59.26 PM


I noticed the above note for the 24th Dunlap broadside: "General William Howe and Vice Admiral Richard Howe from the flagship Eagle, off Staten Island, sent this copy with a letter dated August 11, 1776, ..." Meanwhile, I also noticed the notes "Copy of the Declaration of Independence dated 4th July 1776" and "In the letter from the Comm... of 11th Aug. 1776" on the back page of the Declaration of Independence kept in the British Parliament (See below).

http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/parliament-and-empire/collections1/collections/declaration-of-independence/declaration-of-independence-back/

Since General William Howe was the Commander-in-Chief of the British forces during the American War of Independence, it is very likely that the copy of the Declaration of Independence kept in the British Parliament is a handwritten copy of the printed Dunlap broadside that General William Howe enclosed in his letter dated August 11, 1776.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

wherestip  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
chinois vers anglais
+ ...
007 Apr 30

ysun wrote:

Steve,

Thanks for the link and the detailed information. There should be no doubt that the signed, engrossed copy of the Declaration is now housed at the National Archives in Washington, DC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_history_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
List of extant Dunlap broadsides
Screen Shot 2017-04-29 at 3.59.26 PM


I noticed the above note for the 24th Dunlap broadside: "General William Howe and Vice Admiral Richard Howe from the flagship Eagle, off Staten Island, sent this copy with a letter dated August 11, 1776, ..." Meanwhile, I also noticed the notes "Copy of the Declaration of Independence dated 4th July 1776" and "In the letter from the Comm... of 11th Aug. 1776" on the back page of the Declaration of Independence kept in the British Parliament (See below).

http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/parliament-and-empire/collections1/collections/declaration-of-independence/declaration-of-independence-back/

Since General William Howe was the Commander-in-Chief of the British forces during the American War of Independence, it is very likely that the copy of the Declaration of Independence kept in the British Parliament is a handwritten copy of the printed Dunlap broadside that General William Howe enclosed in his letter dated August 11, 1776.


Yueyin,

I agree with your detective work. Everything including the dates and descriptions exactly match.




[Edited at 2017-04-30 01:50 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
QHE
États-Unis
Local time: 20:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL
True Apr 30

wherestip wrote: 007



Steve,

I definitely agree with you!


Direct link Reply with quote
 
ysun  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
靠科学态度 Apr 30

wherestip wrote:

Yueyin,

I agree with your detective work. Everything including the dates and descriptions exactly match.

Steve,

我只是根据你、QHE 和 David 所提供的信息,以及我自己搜索的信息,经过认真分析对比而提出自己的看法,所得结论与你和 QHE 的一致。其实,要想证明英国国会所拥有的《独立宣言》并非原件,是件很容易的事情,不必劳 007的驾 。首先,众所周知,美国《独立宣言》是于1776年7月4日经美国国会最终批准,而誊写在羊皮纸 (parchment) 上的《独立宣言》(即所谓 The Matlack Declaration)则是于1776年8月2日签署的。因此,一看到 "the American Declaration of Independence dated from 1778”,就应该打个问号。其次,从 David 所提供链接(见下面)上的照片看来,在第1页和最后一页上都特地注明了"Copy” 字样。这就说明这不是原件。而且,文件末尾(第6页)没有各州代表的签名,而只有 QHE 引述的 "Signed by Order and in Behalf of the Congress, John Hancock, President. Attest. Charles Thomson, Secretary" 等字样,而且手写的 John Hancock 姓名并非是 John Hancock 的签字真迹。如果把这些照片与 "the Dunlap broadside" 作一比较,就可发现,英国国会所拥有的《独立宣言》实际上是 "the Dunlap broadside" 的手抄件。也就是说,它是 copy 的 copy。

David Lin wrote:

The British Parliament owns the original copy of the American Declaration of Independence dated from 1778. See more details in the link below.

http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/parliament-and-empire/collections1/collections/declaration-of-independence/


[Edited at 2017-05-01 00:19 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
ysun  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
保存在英国的美国《独立宣言》 Apr 30

Steve,

根据你和 QHE 提供的以下两个链接,如今有三份 "the Dunlap broadside" 保存在英国的 The National Archives。此外,如你所说,最近发现的 "the Sussex Declaration" 则保存在英国的 the West Sussex Record Office。

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_history_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_history.html

通过最近关于《独立宣言》的讨论,我对美国的这段历史有了进一步了解。今年三月我们游览首都华盛顿之后,又驱车去了 Philadelphia。但由于 Independence Hall 正在翻修,管理部门严格控制游客人数,我们就未能进去(我在以前曾进去参观过)。不过,我们参观了 the Liberty Bell。

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Hall

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Bell


Direct link Reply with quote
 
ysun  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
Even harder to follow May 1

David Lin wrote:

More samples of usage

An English botanical scholarly article published in the "Annals of Applied Biology", titled, "Effects of decreasing the number of grains in ears of cvs Hobbit and Maris Huntsman winter wheat". The two authors come from Rothamsted Research, a crop productivity study centre in the United Kingdom.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1981.tb00432.x/full

...

Any easier to follow?

In the above-mentioned article, "number of grains in ears" means "grain number in ears". Does the phrase "the number of grains in ears" here have anything to do with “芒种”?

Have you read that article? If not, here is the summary of the article for your reference:


Effects of decreasing the number of grains in ears of cvs Hobbit and Maris Huntsman winter wheat

SUMMARY

At 6 days after anthesis, grain numbers in ears of Maris Huntsman and Hobbit winter wheat growing in the field were decreased either by removing the two lower grains in each spikelet (degraining) or by removing the top half of the ear (halving). At maturity, degraining increased the dry weight of the third grains in each spikelet of Maris Huntsman by 11% and of Hobbit by 40%, compared with third grains in intact ears. Halving increased the mean dry weight of all the grains in the lower six spikelets of the ear slightly less; it increased the number of grains in Hobbit but not in Maris Huntsman. The responses to halving in Hobbit were greater with additional nitrogen fertiliser.

At 28 days after anthesis in both varieties, degraining increased grain dry weight and the amount of water, reducing sugar, amino acids and total nitrogen in third grains. Effects of halving on these properties of the two lower grains of each spikelet were much less or nil. The increases in nitrogen content of grains at 28 days and at maturity caused by degraining or halving were relatively greater than the increases in dry weight and were similar in the two varieties.


[Edited at 2017-05-01 17:44 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
ysun  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
Goldeneye May 1

QHE wrote:

"grain in ear" ≠ “grains in ears”

“grains in ears” ≠ "the number of grains in ears of … wheat”

Your eyes are even sharper than 007's!



Direct link Reply with quote
 
QHE
États-Unis
Local time: 20:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL
慢速阅读 May 2

ysun wrote: Goldeneye



Thanks for your kind words. Actually, I am just a very slow reader.


ysun wrote: 靠科学态度

其实,要想证明英国国会所拥有的《独立宣言》并非原件,是件很容易的事情,不必劳 007的驾


孙先生要不说,我差点儿把“劳驾”这个词儿忘了。


[Edited at 2017-05-02 17:07 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
ysun  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
严肃认真的科学态度 May 3

QHE wrote:

Thanks for your kind words. Actually, I am just a very slow reader.

ysun wrote: 靠科学态度

其实,要想证明英国国会所拥有的《独立宣言》并非原件,是件很容易的事情,不必劳 007的驾

孙先生要不说,我差点儿把“劳驾”这个词儿忘了。

在研究和探讨问题时,我也主张放慢阅读速度。在讨论时为了提高说服力,我们往往需要引用许多资料。但是,我们自己首先应该认真地阅读这些资料,看看能否用这些资料来说服自己。如果连自己都不能说服自己,那就更别指望能说服别人了。要认真地阅读资料,就不能一目十行、不求甚解,而必须适当放慢速度,才能达到深刻理解的目的。

“劳驾”这个词儿,我也是到北京上学后才知道的。这是地道的北京礼貌用语。那时的北京人,是经常把这词儿挂在嘴边儿的。


Direct link Reply with quote
 

David Lin  Identity Verified
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 01:41
Membre (2013)
anglais vers chinois
+ ...

Modérateur de ce forum
一点浅见 May 4

QHE wrote: Anyway, thanks for providing the information.

QHE, 不客气。只是分享一点个人浅见。

QHE wrote:
Well, it appears that the block quote is taken from a Britannica's supplementary article (by Chao Lin).
The link below is the Encyclopedia Britannica’s entry for “Chinese calendar” :

https://www.britannica.com/science/Chinese-calendar


你的观察力很敏锐,有关中国传统节气的文章的确是由一位学者/专家编写的参考资料。但是既然是《大英百科全书》提供的相关参考资料,我相信其参考价值都会和其条目一样,保持其作为世上最具权威性、最知名,也是最历史悠久的百科全书的素质。并且值得我们信赖。

其编辑政策有以下之标准:

But Britannica is not just its editorial staff. Britannica has long fostered vigorous interaction between its staff and its advisers, contributors, and audience. The feedback loop between these groups is today more active and beneficial than ever, and it guides all aspects of content development. Britannica’s goal is to share the best, most up-to-date knowledge that its audience wants, and its editors use a variety of strategies to accomplish that goal: they may commission original encyclopedic article from experts on topics never before described in Britannica, or they may produce videos that explain complex ideas simply, or they may acquire high-caliber content that has been published elsewhere. Regardless of its type or origin, all such content must meet Britannica’s high editorial standards.


David Lin wrote:
An English botanical scholarly article published in the "Annals of Applied Biology", titled, "Effects of decreasing the number of grains in ears of cvs Hobbit and Maris Huntsman winter wheat". The two authors come from Rothamsted Research, a crop productivity study centre in the United Kingdom.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1981.tb00432.x/full


QHE wrote: "grain in ear" ≠ “grains in ears”
“grains in ears” ≠ "the number of grains in ears of … wheat”


我并未想过要将这两组词语划成对等,或去寻找 exact match,因为语境各异,而且纠结于个别词语的众数、单数或句子结构,对我们的讨论没多大帮助。

我是想带出由现代农业科学家们 (不是华人)用英语表达 grains germinated in the ear of wheat 这个农作物生长的自然生态。我觉的这点认知对于我们的讨论,比较重要。

其实,在《圣经》的新约马可福音 4:28 节里记载的著名种子生长的比喻,两千多年来也已描述了这个农作物成长的过程。 American Standard Version (ASV) Mark 4:28-30 --

"28 The earth beareth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear. 29 But when the fruit is ripe, straightway he putteth forth the sickle, because the harvest is come."

中文和合本这样记载: “28 地生五谷是出于自然的,先发苗,后长穗,再后穗上结成饱满的子粒。 29 谷既熟了,就用镰刀去割,因为收成的时候到了。”

ASV 美语圣经于 1901 年出版,距今有一个多世纪。

但是如果想找到 exact match,其实也不是难事。随便网上搜寻 grain in ear, 就找到这部 中(南)韩合作于 2005 年发行的电影。

graininear_poster

Wikipedia 更有对 Mangzhong 作详尽的介绍:

Introduction of Grain in Ear (芒种) “grain in ear” means the grains are mature. It happens around June 5 every year when the Sun reaches the celestial longitude of 75 degrees. During this period, crops like barley and wheat all get mature and are waiting to be harvested. In Chinese, “Grain in Ear” is called Mang Zhong. Mang means grains at the same time busy. It forecasts the farmer is getting back to the busy field work. It is the busiest time to seed millet and the deadline for sowing activities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangzhong

经过多周的讨论,我觉得已将所知,与你分享,会暂时停止在此主题上载任何评论。

最近会到欧洲出差公干,也需要预备一下。

再聊。:)


Direct link Reply with quote
 

wherestip  Identity Verified
États-Unis
Local time: 19:41
chinois vers anglais
+ ...
Having an Article Makes a Big Difference May 4

David Lin wrote:

其实,在《圣经》的新约马可福音 4:28 节里记载的著名种子生长的比喻,两千多年来也已描述了这个农作物成长的过程。 American Standard Version (ASV) Mark 4:28-30 --

"28 The earth beareth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear. 29 But when the fruit is ripe, straightway he putteth forth the sickle, because the harvest is come."

中文和合本这样记载: “28 地生五谷是出于自然的,先发苗,后长穗,再后穗上结成饱满的子粒。 29 谷既熟了,就用镰刀去割,因为收成的时候到了。”

ASV 美语圣经于 1901 年出版,距今有一个多世纪。



Indeed. IMO, "(the) full grain in the ear", or "grain in the ear" would be proper English. As I've been saying, adding an article before the word "grain" makes a big difference. For one (important) thing, it makes the phrase a lot more English-sounding.

Sometimes, the absence of an article in a phrase could render it ungrammatical, (or Chinglish-like). "Year of Rooster" vs. its correct form "Year of the Rooster" would be another such example.

~*~*~*~*~*

David, enjoy your trip to Europe.



[Edited at 2017-05-04 23:39 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
QHE
États-Unis
Local time: 20:41
anglais vers chinois
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL
劳驾看一下原话 May 4

David Lin wrote: 一点浅见

QHE wrote:
Well, it appears that the block quote is taken from a Britannica's supplementary article (by Chao Lin).
The link below is the Encyclopedia Britannica’s entry for “Chinese calendar” :

https://www.britannica.com/science/Chinese-calendar


你的观察力很敏锐,有关中国传统节气的文章的确是由一位学者/专家编写的参考资料。但是既然是《大英百科全书》提供的相关参考资料,我相信其参考价值都会和其条目一样,保持其作为世上最具权威性、最知名,也是最历史悠久的百科全书的素质。并且值得我们信赖。


很清楚,问题并不是《大英百科全书》是否有参考价值的问题。原话:
David Lin wrote:
... "Encyclopedia Britannica" simply uses "grain in ear" under the heading "The Chinese Calendar"...




David Lin wrote: 一点浅见

An English botanical scholarly article published in the "Annals of Applied Biology", titled, "Effects of decreasing the number of grains in ears of cvs Hobbit and Maris Huntsman winter wheat". The two authors come from Rothamsted Research, a crop productivity study centre in the United Kingdom.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1981.tb00432.x/full


QHE wrote: "grain in ear" ≠ “grains in ears”
“grains in ears” ≠ "the number of grains in ears of … wheat”


我并未想过要将这两组词语划成对等,或去寻找 exact match,因为语境各异,而且纠结于个别词语的众数、单数或句子结构,对我们的讨论没多大帮助。


原话:
David Lin wrote: More samples of usage

An English botanical scholarly article published in the "Annals of Applied Biology", titled, "Effects of decreasing the number of grains in ears of cvs Hobbit and Maris Huntsman winter wheat". The two authors come from Rothamsted Research, a crop productivity study centre in the United Kingdom.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1981.tb00432.x/full


Any easier to follow?


Bon voyage.

[Edited at 2017-05-05 02:10 GMT]


Direct link Reply with quote
 
Pages sur ce sujet:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

泰晤士(TIMES)四合院儿

Advanced search






Déjà Vu X3
Try it, Love it

Find out why Déjà Vu is today the most flexible, customizable and user-friendly tool on the market. See the brand new features in action: *Completely redesigned user interface *Live Preview *Inline spell checking *Inline

More info »
PerfectIt consistency checker
Faster Checking, Greater Accuracy

PerfectIt helps deliver error-free documents. It improves consistency, ensures quality and helps to enforce style guides. It’s a powerful tool for pro users, and comes with the assurance of a 30-day money back guarantee.

More info »



Forums
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Recherche par terme
  • Travaux
  • Forums
  • Multiple search