推 AppleRam:謝謝你～ 04/22 12:13
推 noatu:就如 qualified opinion 翻為 "保留意見" (accounting) 04/22 22:38
立法的歷史顯示，相較於開放式地解讀法條而作出大膽的政策宣示而言，
國會致力於橫斷法選取陪審團之理想顯得更有資格。
1. cross-sectional ideal is a law term which is not that easy to be put
in Chinese for just literal explanation.....always better to make it
clear
2. "qualified" can be translated in different ways on different contexts
my translation might not be a good one...just for your reference
※ 引述《AppleRam (蘋果羊咩咩)》之銘言：
: 這篇是有關美國陪審團的文章 這一句我一直翻的不滿意
: 有請英文強者解救 ＠＠ 感謝～
: This legislative history shows that congressional commitment to the
: cross-sectional ideal was more qualified than the bold policy declaration
: with which the statute opens might otherwise have indicated.
: 這個立法歷程顯示國會對於跨階層理想的致力更符合法條精神，而非只是像條文看似指稱
: 的大膽政策宣言。
: =
: 謝謝熱心的大家～
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.119.144.88