发表于：2010/2/6 2:00:45
#0楼
常见英文文法错误
(common mistakes in english writing)
前言：
英文是很具备逻辑结构的语言，只要任何一个地方允许读者有读成别的意思的可能，那它就有修改的必要，务必破除差不多先生的习性，对你而言是差不多，对外国人读起来却是差很多。学好英文文法，则在中文的表达上也会变得清晰。学会直接以英文来思考是进入英文学习新阶段的开始。另外，因为我们所用的都是科学的描述，因此科学逻辑的清晰也是必然应要求的，一篇文章里的各段的安排，及一段里各句的安排都必须符合科学规范，才能容易理解。
以下为本实验室过去学生常犯的英文文法错误。文法错误范围很大，很难一一描述，只能叙述一些基本要领，细节则请利用比较原来的版本和修改后的版本来发掘个中差异，并查询一般文法书籍。
1. 句中所有的单字、词组、子句所扮演的角色应十分清楚，要明白它在这句话中是扮演主词、动词、受词、形容词、还是副词。如果你用了它而无法说出它在句中的角色，那就可能会犯了文法上的错误。
2. 一个段落里的句子，起、承、转、结的连接要流畅，这取决于适当的连接词和副词的使用。
3. 时式的考虑要确实。如果是一个动作则依其发生时间来决定时式，但如果是在叙述文中的一张图或不变的物理则用现在式。有时同样一件事从某个角度来看应用过去式，从另一个角度来看又可用现在式，如此情形则两者皆可，但整篇文章必须一致，即必须维持一贯的角度。
4. 对等连接词应用于句中（逗点后），而不能作为一个句子的开端（句点后），例如 but, so, and，要放在句子的开端应以 however, therefore, in addition 来取代。
5. (at, in, on)或 (by, with)或 (when, during , while) 的选择应以逻辑或惯用法为依据，有疑问时可查计算机英汉字典的例句为参考。
6. which （ , which） 和 that 的差异要掌握，前者只是补充说明，拿掉也不影响这句话所要表达的，后者则是限制性的描述，是一定要符合该项描述的才算，所以是不能拿掉的。
7. a, an, the, 和不加的差异。凡可数的东西一定要加 (a, an) 或 the，前者适用于描述一般的那种东西，后者则是描述专有的东西、专指的那件东西。不可数的东西则是加 the 或不加，前者是专有的、指定的，后者则是一般的叙述。一般而言，很多东西有时是可数的，有时是不可数的，端看你用的地方所要表达的是甚么，也就是说一切还是取决于逻辑。
8. 避免使用不当的字。有很多英文字的中文翻译可能类似，但英文的含意却大不相同，应使用计算机英汉字典，随时查询同义字，选取最适切者。
9. could, would的用法要注意，用在疑问句时是表示礼貌。用在 if 句时是与现在事实相反的假设语气。
10.can代表对这句话的陈述有 100%信心指数，may 代表有 50%信心指数，could与 might代表信心指数只有 30%以下。
11.if-then的时式应熟悉。如果是用在单纯科学因果的描述，则用现在式－未来式。
12.副词词组在句子前时，其后加逗点则是当拿掉该词组时并不会影响主要句子的成立，而只是补充说明，不加逗点表示其为完整句子的一部份或是必要条件。但基本上只要不会造成混淆，也不用太在意这个差别。
13.对于描述物理量的名词，其可数与不可数、单数与复数的使用完全视其所使用之处而定，例如 for 12-mj pulse energy, for a pulse energy of 12 mj, for various pulse energies, with increasing pulse energy。
14.所有的标点符号前面不能有空格，后面要有一个空格。这是简单到连文法书都懒得讲，但却还是有很多人犯。
15.使用任一 acronym（首字母缩略字） 时，第一次出现时一定要写出其全名并在后面括号中写出缩略字，然后在后来的地方才能使用此缩略字。
16.同一个名词不要在连续三句话内重复出现，否则读起来便会很累赘，应使用同义字或代名词来取代。
商业书信方面，除了文法方面要正确以避免误解或无法理解外，也要注意商业上的礼貌和规矩，并能简洁清晰，避免累赘的辞语。
信件范例：
to jovi-yvon, about the damaged grating
original:
yes, we did understand that the grating exhibits a burn mark probably due to the oil coating or laser damaged.but the reason why we send back to you is to make sure which one indeed makes the grating exhibits a burn mark. if it was a laser-damaged problem, it was no doubt that we used the grating under your specification on the quotation (0.1 to 0.2j/cm2 for fs pulse). if so, that is your grating didnt reach your specification. and next time we will buy grating from other manufacturer, which can provide the specification we need. if it was an oil coating problem, now we had set up a cold-trap closed to the compressor to avoid the oil coating problem happened again. and we hoped that you shall clean it and then we would buy another from you.
modified:
dear sir:
we do understand that the burn mark on the grating was probably caused by the oil coating or laser damage. however, the reason why we sent it back to you was to make sure which one of these made the burn mark.
if it was a laser damage problem, then it is obvious that the grating doesnt conform with the specifications shown on the quotation (it is no doubt that the laser energy flux we used was below your specification on the quotation, i.e., 0.1 to 0.2j/cm2 for fs pulse). in this case, we will need to find other manufacturers that can provide the gratings with the specifications we need.
on the other hand, if it was an oil coating problem, then we can avoid this by setting up a cold trap close to the compressor to trap the oil. in this case, we can buy new gratings from you to replace the damaged one. better yet, we were hoping that you may have a way to clean it. if you can clean it, then we can identify it to be an oil coating problem and we can send it back for cleaning whenever this happens again.
is there any way you can find out the answer or try to clean it? this is very important to us. thank you for your patience.
to quantum technology, about the pockels cell
original:
dear sir,
our group had bought the qc-10(s/n q00-229, w/o no: e00-229),qc-20(s/n q00-277, w/o no: e00-277) from your company about three year ago. now we want to add a new qc-10 the same as before.
in the quote(q03-193) we neednt the dd1 divider delay unit in the driver(model: hvp-5i-diff-9). but the price in the new quote is still higher than before about us1500. could you give us a special discount? in addition, if the connection cables are include in the quote or not? if no, please include them in it!
thank you for your assistance!
best regard
modified:
dear sir,
in the quotation q03-193 you gave me, we do not need the dd1 divider delay unit. however, the price for the rest items is still about us$1500 higher than what we got before. since we had bought the qc-10(s/n q00-229, w/o no: e00-229) and qc-20(s/n q00-277, w/o no: e00-277) from your company in the last three years, we wonder if you can give us a discount for the new qc-10. in addition, are the connection cables included or do they have to be added in the quotation? if they are not included, please add them into the quotation!
thank you for your assistance!
best regard
to ophir, about the powermeter
original:
dear sir/madam:
our energy detector (pe10-v2, s/n:119907) made by ophir do not work again, we are looking for the solution to sure if the detector was damaged by the peak intensity that over than its damage threshold ( there is some obviously scars on the detect area ) or just the question of electron signal .if it is allowed, could you give us the standard electron check procedure to confirm the question of our detector ? and suggest us the ways to make our detector work again.
sincerely,
modified:
dear sir/madam:
our energy detector (pe10-v2, s/n:119907) made by ophir is not functioning. there is nothing showing up in the lcd screen when we plugged in the power and turned on the power switch. we did check the power and found it to be o.k. we are not sure if it is a problem with the detector chip or the electronics. although we did found some small damage spots on the surface of the detector chip, we guess it may not be severe enough to cause a problem. could you please give me an instruction for the procedure to find and fix the problem? or, if you recommend we should send it back, please give me an rma number.
thank you for your assistance!
sincerely,
to femtolase, about the dazzler
original:
dear pascal:
we make sure that we need wb-800 t1 dazzler, and the foundation is ok. there are some questions about delivery, operation and training. the first question is when do you send the dazzler and training time. do we need prepare laser systems such as 8-pass amplifier, stretcher and compressor for training or you could take your arrangement here for testing and training as training?
the second question is on our laser system. we use a 12 nm fwhm laser for testing and building up, but we have to use a 37 nm fwhm laser in main experiment. would this type dazzler work efficiently in 12 nm fwhm laser?
the third question is about the system energy. because our testing system is building up, such that laser beam energy may not enough. would you please tell me the minima energy need? indeed this question is depending on the first question.
modified:
dear pascal:
we are sure now that what we need is the wb-800/t1 dazzler, and there is no problem about the budget any more. however, there are some questions relevant to the schedule of delivery, installation, and training. although we have a 10-tw laser system that uses a 40-nm fwhm oscillator, we do not want to do the test and training on that system because it will take the system off-line and delay the schedule of the experiments. however, we have another laser system that contains a 10-nm-fwhm oscillator, a pulse selector (running at 10 hz), a stretcher, and a compressor. we are currently constructing an 8-pass amplifier to put into that system. therefore, the question is what kind of system do you need here for the test and training of the dazzler? can it be tested using a 10-nm oscillator? does it need the 8-pass amplifier to booster up the pulse energy in order to test it? that is, what is the pulse energy level you need? furthermore, what kind of waveform measurement do we have to prepare for you? or, will you bring diagnostic equipment with you?
if you need the oscillator bandwidth to be >40nm, then we will have to wait for the upgrade of the 10-nm oscillator to 12-fs oscillator (which might take half a year). in other words, we need to arrange the proper sequence of (1) constructing the 8-pass amplifier, (2) test the dazzler, and (3) installing the new 12-fs oscillator. of course, there is another solution to this. we can get the dazzler now, and ask you to come here at a later time when the system reaches the status you need for test and training.
----------------------------------------------
此篇文章从博客转发
原文地址： Http://blog.gkong.com/more.asp?id=110224&Name=zjcsharp
(common mistakes in english writing)
前言：
英文是很具备逻辑结构的语言，只要任何一个地方允许读者有读成别的意思的可能，那它就有修改的必要，务必破除差不多先生的习性，对你而言是差不多，对外国人读起来却是差很多。学好英文文法，则在中文的表达上也会变得清晰。学会直接以英文来思考是进入英文学习新阶段的开始。另外，因为我们所用的都是科学的描述，因此科学逻辑的清晰也是必然应要求的，一篇文章里的各段的安排，及一段里各句的安排都必须符合科学规范，才能容易理解。
以下为本实验室过去学生常犯的英文文法错误。文法错误范围很大，很难一一描述，只能叙述一些基本要领，细节则请利用比较原来的版本和修改后的版本来发掘个中差异，并查询一般文法书籍。
1. 句中所有的单字、词组、子句所扮演的角色应十分清楚，要明白它在这句话中是扮演主词、动词、受词、形容词、还是副词。如果你用了它而无法说出它在句中的角色，那就可能会犯了文法上的错误。
2. 一个段落里的句子，起、承、转、结的连接要流畅，这取决于适当的连接词和副词的使用。
3. 时式的考虑要确实。如果是一个动作则依其发生时间来决定时式，但如果是在叙述文中的一张图或不变的物理则用现在式。有时同样一件事从某个角度来看应用过去式，从另一个角度来看又可用现在式，如此情形则两者皆可，但整篇文章必须一致，即必须维持一贯的角度。
4. 对等连接词应用于句中（逗点后），而不能作为一个句子的开端（句点后），例如 but, so, and，要放在句子的开端应以 however, therefore, in addition 来取代。
5. (at, in, on)或 (by, with)或 (when, during , while) 的选择应以逻辑或惯用法为依据，有疑问时可查计算机英汉字典的例句为参考。
6. which （ , which） 和 that 的差异要掌握，前者只是补充说明，拿掉也不影响这句话所要表达的，后者则是限制性的描述，是一定要符合该项描述的才算，所以是不能拿掉的。
7. a, an, the, 和不加的差异。凡可数的东西一定要加 (a, an) 或 the，前者适用于描述一般的那种东西，后者则是描述专有的东西、专指的那件东西。不可数的东西则是加 the 或不加，前者是专有的、指定的，后者则是一般的叙述。一般而言，很多东西有时是可数的，有时是不可数的，端看你用的地方所要表达的是甚么，也就是说一切还是取决于逻辑。
8. 避免使用不当的字。有很多英文字的中文翻译可能类似，但英文的含意却大不相同，应使用计算机英汉字典，随时查询同义字，选取最适切者。
9. could, would的用法要注意，用在疑问句时是表示礼貌。用在 if 句时是与现在事实相反的假设语气。
10.can代表对这句话的陈述有 100%信心指数，may 代表有 50%信心指数，could与 might代表信心指数只有 30%以下。
11.if-then的时式应熟悉。如果是用在单纯科学因果的描述，则用现在式－未来式。
12.副词词组在句子前时，其后加逗点则是当拿掉该词组时并不会影响主要句子的成立，而只是补充说明，不加逗点表示其为完整句子的一部份或是必要条件。但基本上只要不会造成混淆，也不用太在意这个差别。
13.对于描述物理量的名词，其可数与不可数、单数与复数的使用完全视其所使用之处而定，例如 for 12-mj pulse energy, for a pulse energy of 12 mj, for various pulse energies, with increasing pulse energy。
14.所有的标点符号前面不能有空格，后面要有一个空格。这是简单到连文法书都懒得讲，但却还是有很多人犯。
15.使用任一 acronym（首字母缩略字） 时，第一次出现时一定要写出其全名并在后面括号中写出缩略字，然后在后来的地方才能使用此缩略字。
16.同一个名词不要在连续三句话内重复出现，否则读起来便会很累赘，应使用同义字或代名词来取代。
商业书信方面，除了文法方面要正确以避免误解或无法理解外，也要注意商业上的礼貌和规矩，并能简洁清晰，避免累赘的辞语。
信件范例：
to jovi-yvon, about the damaged grating
original:
yes, we did understand that the grating exhibits a burn mark probably due to the oil coating or laser damaged.but the reason why we send back to you is to make sure which one indeed makes the grating exhibits a burn mark. if it was a laser-damaged problem, it was no doubt that we used the grating under your specification on the quotation (0.1 to 0.2j/cm2 for fs pulse). if so, that is your grating didnt reach your specification. and next time we will buy grating from other manufacturer, which can provide the specification we need. if it was an oil coating problem, now we had set up a cold-trap closed to the compressor to avoid the oil coating problem happened again. and we hoped that you shall clean it and then we would buy another from you.
modified:
dear sir:
we do understand that the burn mark on the grating was probably caused by the oil coating or laser damage. however, the reason why we sent it back to you was to make sure which one of these made the burn mark.
if it was a laser damage problem, then it is obvious that the grating doesnt conform with the specifications shown on the quotation (it is no doubt that the laser energy flux we used was below your specification on the quotation, i.e., 0.1 to 0.2j/cm2 for fs pulse). in this case, we will need to find other manufacturers that can provide the gratings with the specifications we need.
on the other hand, if it was an oil coating problem, then we can avoid this by setting up a cold trap close to the compressor to trap the oil. in this case, we can buy new gratings from you to replace the damaged one. better yet, we were hoping that you may have a way to clean it. if you can clean it, then we can identify it to be an oil coating problem and we can send it back for cleaning whenever this happens again.
is there any way you can find out the answer or try to clean it? this is very important to us. thank you for your patience.
to quantum technology, about the pockels cell
original:
dear sir,
our group had bought the qc-10(s/n q00-229, w/o no: e00-229),qc-20(s/n q00-277, w/o no: e00-277) from your company about three year ago. now we want to add a new qc-10 the same as before.
in the quote(q03-193) we neednt the dd1 divider delay unit in the driver(model: hvp-5i-diff-9). but the price in the new quote is still higher than before about us1500. could you give us a special discount? in addition, if the connection cables are include in the quote or not? if no, please include them in it!
thank you for your assistance!
best regard
modified:
dear sir,
in the quotation q03-193 you gave me, we do not need the dd1 divider delay unit. however, the price for the rest items is still about us$1500 higher than what we got before. since we had bought the qc-10(s/n q00-229, w/o no: e00-229) and qc-20(s/n q00-277, w/o no: e00-277) from your company in the last three years, we wonder if you can give us a discount for the new qc-10. in addition, are the connection cables included or do they have to be added in the quotation? if they are not included, please add them into the quotation!
thank you for your assistance!
best regard
to ophir, about the powermeter
original:
dear sir/madam:
our energy detector (pe10-v2, s/n:119907) made by ophir do not work again, we are looking for the solution to sure if the detector was damaged by the peak intensity that over than its damage threshold ( there is some obviously scars on the detect area ) or just the question of electron signal .if it is allowed, could you give us the standard electron check procedure to confirm the question of our detector ? and suggest us the ways to make our detector work again.
sincerely,
modified:
dear sir/madam:
our energy detector (pe10-v2, s/n:119907) made by ophir is not functioning. there is nothing showing up in the lcd screen when we plugged in the power and turned on the power switch. we did check the power and found it to be o.k. we are not sure if it is a problem with the detector chip or the electronics. although we did found some small damage spots on the surface of the detector chip, we guess it may not be severe enough to cause a problem. could you please give me an instruction for the procedure to find and fix the problem? or, if you recommend we should send it back, please give me an rma number.
thank you for your assistance!
sincerely,
to femtolase, about the dazzler
original:
dear pascal:
we make sure that we need wb-800 t1 dazzler, and the foundation is ok. there are some questions about delivery, operation and training. the first question is when do you send the dazzler and training time. do we need prepare laser systems such as 8-pass amplifier, stretcher and compressor for training or you could take your arrangement here for testing and training as training?
the second question is on our laser system. we use a 12 nm fwhm laser for testing and building up, but we have to use a 37 nm fwhm laser in main experiment. would this type dazzler work efficiently in 12 nm fwhm laser?
the third question is about the system energy. because our testing system is building up, such that laser beam energy may not enough. would you please tell me the minima energy need? indeed this question is depending on the first question.
modified:
dear pascal:
we are sure now that what we need is the wb-800/t1 dazzler, and there is no problem about the budget any more. however, there are some questions relevant to the schedule of delivery, installation, and training. although we have a 10-tw laser system that uses a 40-nm fwhm oscillator, we do not want to do the test and training on that system because it will take the system off-line and delay the schedule of the experiments. however, we have another laser system that contains a 10-nm-fwhm oscillator, a pulse selector (running at 10 hz), a stretcher, and a compressor. we are currently constructing an 8-pass amplifier to put into that system. therefore, the question is what kind of system do you need here for the test and training of the dazzler? can it be tested using a 10-nm oscillator? does it need the 8-pass amplifier to booster up the pulse energy in order to test it? that is, what is the pulse energy level you need? furthermore, what kind of waveform measurement do we have to prepare for you? or, will you bring diagnostic equipment with you?
if you need the oscillator bandwidth to be >40nm, then we will have to wait for the upgrade of the 10-nm oscillator to 12-fs oscillator (which might take half a year). in other words, we need to arrange the proper sequence of (1) constructing the 8-pass amplifier, (2) test the dazzler, and (3) installing the new 12-fs oscillator. of course, there is another solution to this. we can get the dazzler now, and ask you to come here at a later time when the system reaches the status you need for test and training.
----------------------------------------------
此篇文章从博客转发
原文地址： Http://blog.gkong.com/more.asp?id=110224&Name=zjcsharp
