#情感[超话]##情感##十年前夏天和现在的区别#
在梦中，一切事都散漫着，都压着我，但这不过是一个梦呀。当我醒来时，我便将觉得这些事都已聚集在你那里，我也便将自由了。
This is a dream in which things are all loose and they oppress.
I shall find them gathered in thee when I awake and shall be free.
在梦中，一切事都散漫着，都压着我，但这不过是一个梦呀。当我醒来时，我便将觉得这些事都已聚集在你那里，我也便将自由了。
This is a dream in which things are all loose and they oppress.
I shall find them gathered in thee when I awake and shall be free.
美音中t的四种发音方法
说话能多懒就多懒
❶1: True /t/
The /t/ is a regular, aspirated /t/ when it is the first sound of a word or a stressed syllable (or does not fit into patterns 2-4 below). This rule overrides all other /t/ allophone patterns.
attach: /ə ˈtæʧ/
❷Quick 'd sound' /t̬/
The alveolar stop /t̬/ sounds like a quick /d/. It occurs when a /t/ is between a vowel sound or /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels) and either another vowel sound, /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels), or a syllabic /l/.
daughter: /ˈdɔt̬ ɚ/
computer: /kəm ˈpjut̬ ɚ/
settle: /ˈsɛt̬ l/
❸Glottal stop /ʔ/
The /t/ is pronounced as a glottal stop /ʔ/ (the sound in the middle of the word 'uh-oh') when it is between a vowel, /n/, or /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels) and followed by an /n/(including a syllabic /n/), /m/, or non-syllabic /l/.
partner: /ˈpɑrʔ nɚ/
certain: /ˈsɚʔ n/
fitness: /ˈfɪʔ nəs/
❹Omitted /t/: /t/
An italicized /t/ means that the sound can be silent—or omitted—from a word. This /t/ allophone varies the most widely among native speakers, and even within a single speaker's speech patterns. The /t/ is less likely to be omitted when the speaker is emphasizing the word for an reason. Also, among all the /t/ allophones, this usage can be considered the most informal and non-standardized.
Scenario 1) The /t/ is optionally silent when it follows /n/ and precedes a vowel sound, /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels) or a syllabic /l/.
Scenario 2) In addition to the above instances of omitting the /t/, it is often omitted when it occurs between two consonant sounds (except the consonants specifically mentioned for /t̬/ and glottal stop). This is likely to occur when an -s ending is added to a word.
prints: /prɪnts/
acts: /ækts/
accepts: /ək ˈsɛpts/
说话能多懒就多懒
❶1: True /t/
The /t/ is a regular, aspirated /t/ when it is the first sound of a word or a stressed syllable (or does not fit into patterns 2-4 below). This rule overrides all other /t/ allophone patterns.
attach: /ə ˈtæʧ/
❷Quick 'd sound' /t̬/
The alveolar stop /t̬/ sounds like a quick /d/. It occurs when a /t/ is between a vowel sound or /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels) and either another vowel sound, /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels), or a syllabic /l/.
daughter: /ˈdɔt̬ ɚ/
computer: /kəm ˈpjut̬ ɚ/
settle: /ˈsɛt̬ l/
❸Glottal stop /ʔ/
The /t/ is pronounced as a glottal stop /ʔ/ (the sound in the middle of the word 'uh-oh') when it is between a vowel, /n/, or /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels) and followed by an /n/(including a syllabic /n/), /m/, or non-syllabic /l/.
partner: /ˈpɑrʔ nɚ/
certain: /ˈsɚʔ n/
fitness: /ˈfɪʔ nəs/
❹Omitted /t/: /t/
An italicized /t/ means that the sound can be silent—or omitted—from a word. This /t/ allophone varies the most widely among native speakers, and even within a single speaker's speech patterns. The /t/ is less likely to be omitted when the speaker is emphasizing the word for an reason. Also, among all the /t/ allophones, this usage can be considered the most informal and non-standardized.
Scenario 1) The /t/ is optionally silent when it follows /n/ and precedes a vowel sound, /r/ (including all r-controlled vowels) or a syllabic /l/.
Scenario 2) In addition to the above instances of omitting the /t/, it is often omitted when it occurs between two consonant sounds (except the consonants specifically mentioned for /t̬/ and glottal stop). This is likely to occur when an -s ending is added to a word.
prints: /prɪnts/
acts: /ækts/
accepts: /ək ˈsɛpts/
[The Federalist Papers] (18)
No.10(2): Madison
… But the most common and durable source of factions, has been the various and unequal distribution of property. ... The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern Legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of Government.
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause; because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men, are unfit to be both judges and parties, at the same time; … Yet the parties are and must be themselves the judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail. …
It is in vain to say, that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm: Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all, without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another, or the good of the whole.
The inference to which we are brought, is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controling its effects.
From this view of the subject, it may be concluded, that a pure Democracy, by which I mean, a Society, consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the Government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert results from the from of Government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party, or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is, that such Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives, as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of Government, have erroneously supposed, that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
No.10(2): Madison
… But the most common and durable source of factions, has been the various and unequal distribution of property. ... The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern Legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of Government.
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause; because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men, are unfit to be both judges and parties, at the same time; … Yet the parties are and must be themselves the judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail. …
It is in vain to say, that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm: Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all, without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another, or the good of the whole.
The inference to which we are brought, is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controling its effects.
From this view of the subject, it may be concluded, that a pure Democracy, by which I mean, a Society, consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the Government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert results from the from of Government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party, or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is, that such Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives, as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of Government, have erroneously supposed, that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
✋热门推荐