[請益] 一段文章看不太懂

[herrlinks (herrlinks)]

各位先進晚安

小弟最近看一篇文章，有一段看不太懂想請教版上高手


Dolan also spoke about queer representation, specifically how social media
has helped actors and actresses come out. That's something that wasn't
mainstream when he first began writing "The Death and Life of John F.
Donovan," he pointed out. However, he added, that doesn't mean Hollywood has
changed in how it accepts them.

Although these actors are able to fully embrace their identity, Dolan said
they might not be able to pursue the same opportunities they would have if
they hadn't come out. There's still work that needs to be done, he said.

我認為這句意思是說＂如果他們不表示自己的性向就無法得到演出的機會＂

但是我在網路上有找到一篇中譯文章卻是說＂他們可能會因為出櫃，

而失去原本擁有的演出機會＂

因為跟我的認為的意思有很大的出入所以想請教大家的看法。


--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 1.160.49.202
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Eng-Class/M.1537184594.A.CD9.html
※ 編輯: herrlinks (1.160.49.202), 09/17/2018 19:45:07
→ naushtogo: 你理解錯誤
推 lesautres: [the same opportunities ... come out] 像這樣加括號
→ lesautres: 再讀讀看
推 easterday: 想問問看，這樣加括號只能靠經驗嗎?
→ easterday: 因為這一次真的造成理解上的困擾了;
→ easterday: 還是什麼地方有一堆範例可以背的...
→ easterday: 好像用外國人的方式好像很喜歡用"同義詞"這種方式
→ naushtogo: 這跟加不加括號沒什麼關係吧，重點是後面的 they "woul
→ naushtogo: d have" if they "hadn't come out"
推 lesautres: 加括號只是方便理解不是真的有一個括號在那 XD 因為我
→ lesautres: 猜會讀成原 po 那種意思括成 [they might ... would ha
→ lesautres: ve] ，把整個看成後面 if 的主要子句
推 lesautres: 至於為何不能這樣我自己是覺得上下文很明顯就直接判定
→ lesautres: ，文法上的解釋麻煩高手們了 XD
→ herrlinks: they might not be able to pursue the same opportuni
→ herrlinks: ties.
→ herrlinks: they would have the same opportunities if they hadn
→ herrlinks: 'nt come out. 請問我這樣理解對嗎?
推 neiltsang: l開頭的在胡說八道什麼啊  鬼英文亂掰 別噁心人