有一位網友,電郵詢問香港公務員聯考(JRE)的問題,擔心自己的英文不濟,寫了一些試答的文章給我看看。
我的回覆電郵,可能有些同樣處境的讀者會有興趣一讀,轉貼如下:
XX兄,
匆匆瀏覽過你寫的三篇文章,是你針對公務員聯考的題目的試作吧。
我可以說,你的英文一點不差,好過以前和我共事的行政主任同事,文法錯誤甚少;
主要問題,是文章的學術性外觀和官腔味比較重,論述表達方法有點迂迴。
我相信公務員筆試平常的準則,是看你敘述已知的事實的能力,和提出的論述的技巧和質素。
評卷的大人,每日都在看官腔文章多;想出奇制勝,就不要陳陳相因,文字要有生氣,多用實在的字眼,少用抽象的表達。
就拿你第三篇文章的一段為例:
Aging population, by definition, refers to proportion of the people aged above 65 is increasing in the society because of declining birth rates and rising life expectancy. For World Health Organization (WHO), when there is over 7% of overall population aged above 65, it is an “aging-society”; and when there is 20% population aged above 65, it is a “hyper-aged society”. In other words, so called “aging population” is just in statistical means. What we worry is the problems caused by the aging population, which include decreasing labor force, increasing financial burden for elderly welfare, and declining social vigor and economics competitiveness.
如果是我,或者會這樣寫:
Aging population normally refers to proportion of the people aged above 65 is increasing in a community due to the declining birth rates and rising life expectancy. According to World Health Organization (WHO), where there is over 7% of population aged above 65, it is an “aging-society”; and when there is 20% population aged above 65, it is a “hyper-aged society”. In other words, “Aging Population” is up to statistical interpretations. Aging Population is a big issue because it implies a decreasing labour force, increasing financial burden in social welfare, declining social vigour and economic competitiveness.
年齡是否應考人獲得取錄的障礙?這有可能的。
雖然招聘廣告沒這樣標明,如果申請的人多,就會以此為潛規則來篩選,你就會莫名其妙的刷下來了。不過這是你沒法控制的,所以屢試不第,也毋須懷疑自己的能力。
你已經有足夠的語彙和見識,學寫文章就是要增進表達能力,我會認為還是用老方法,觀察與模仿。每日精讀英國The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/commentisfree)和美國 New York Times 的(http://www.nytimes.com/pages/opinion/index.html)的評論版。
不用貪多,如果時間不夠,就每份報紙精讀其中一篇的一大段,我意思是反覆的讀,咀嚼和欣賞他們的好句。久之必有進益。
前兩日剛好與朋友談了“normally”的用法。以前我“染上壞習慣”,與朋友談話(當然是說英語)“濫用”此詞,好多時便引起“笑話” !
回覆刪除在以上文中,可否用“usual”好些呢?
也可以。
刪除香港有些人口語的壞習慣,
是每句中文都用「其實」來開頭,
英文就句句都說 actually(講成 ek-cho-ly)
更濫用是「you know」,煩到想答「I just don't know」。
刪除最慘是講成大大聲的「 U 撈」。
刪除You know 的 You 是唸輕聲,know 的 n 的鼻音要清楚,整個know字唸得婉轉。
梁sir我也試過讀報學英文,但讀完水過鴨背,更莫講話學到半點神髓了。正確方法係咪需要逐句分析,覺得好句就應寫低佢並仿作先學到嘢?
回覆刪除是啊,還要大聲讀出來,「妹」真下D味道,最好是能隨時背出一些精句。
刪除I read the following old blog recently:
回覆刪除“「A former reporter for the BBC, his columns have also appeared in Apple Daily, Next Magazine and CUP Magazine, among others.」須改寫為:「A former reporter for the BBC, he also writes columns that have appeared in Apple Daily, Next Magazine and CUP Magazine, among others.」......
寫 這段文字的人,想必沒有讀過被很多職業寫作人奉為聖經的The Elements of Style。這本權威的英文寫作指南列出有關用法的八大守則(Elementary Rules of Usage),第七大守則就是「句子開端的分詞片語,所指的必須是句子當中文法上的主語」。
原文照錄如下:A participial phrase at the beginning of a sentence must refer to the grammatical subject。
它 還舉了一個例子。「On arriving in Chicago, his friends met him at the station.」是錯的英文,要改寫為 「When he arrived(or, On his arrival)in Chicago, his friends met him at the station.」才啱文法。”
I think the original writing is not wrong because the beginning of the sentence has no participial phrase ( no verb) hence the rule doesn’t apply. Secondly “A former reporter ....., his columms...” echo each other.
Chris what do you think? Just a matter of interest.
上面兩個例子,日常一邊講一邊想,時時都會這樣講,無可厚非,寫出來就不大妥當。
刪除除非是寫娛樂新聞,看的人也是隨隨便便啦。
第一個例子,我會寫
Mr XXX, a former reporter for the BBC, also writes columns that have appeared in Apple Daily, Next Magazine......
第二個例子,如果一定要用這個句式,我會寫
On arriving in Chicago, he was met by his friends at the station.
雖然說現代英語應儘量避免被動語態,這裡也唯有這樣用了。
Chris:
刪除請問第二個例子點解要轉被動語態??
原文 意思其實是
刪除HE arrived in Chicago. + His friends met him at the station.
若果寫成 On arriving in Chicago, his friends met him at the station
意思就會是
His friends arrived in Chicago. + His friends met him at the station.
Chris:
刪除謝謝。
Thank you Chris
回覆刪除工作忙關係,我都係一星期睇一份英文雜誌 (要 Native Speaker 寫的)
回覆刪除以前在 NZ 日日睇英文報紙, 英文就係咁練成的 (先用英中 + 英英字典)
大學選轉左英文系,出來做野就係寫 Documentation 同 User Guide
政府文件用字係深的,目的是令你無心機睇