FREE SHIPPING ON ALL ORDERS IN CONTINENTAL US*
Note: All prices in US Dollars
Sale Price
Sale Price
Sale Price
Sale Price
Sale Price
Sale Price
Sale Price
Relaxing Hammocks.com Spring Grove, PA今日推荐：
A&Chair&with&no&leg&to&stand&on
作者：Michèle…&&&&文章来源：本站原创&&&&更新时间：
英文阅读：A Chair with no leg to stand on Michèle Asprey, a lawyer and plain language consultant, arguew the case for gender-neutral language as an integral component of good communication. She is the author of Plain Language for Lawyers (2nd ed. 1996, The Federation Press, Sydney).
The Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, has had a couple of setbacks in his efforts to eliminate gender-neutral languagege from the language of government.
Some time ago, Mr Howard's office issued a directive that the terms "chairperson" and "chair" should not be used to refer to the heads of Commonwealth bodies. Mr Howard then began his attempt to enshrine this directive in legislation C beginning with the Productivity Commission Bill 1996.
But on 2 September 1997, the Senate blocked the Prime Minster's attempts to eliminate the gender-neutral term "chairperson". This news item was reported in The Sydney Morning Herald on 3 September 1997, accompanied by a cartoon with showed the Prime Minister asking a woman: "Why can't I call you chairman?" The woman replies: "It's time we had a little talk about the birds and the bees..."
On 25 September 1997, the Senate struck another blow against sexist language. It passed amendments to the Legislative Instruments Bill 1996 which ensures that delegated legislation (such as rules and regulations) cannot be put into effect if it contains sexist, gender-specific language.
On each occasion, the amendments to the legislation were proposed by the Australian Democrats, as part of their policty to oppose what they call "the Government's sexist agenda".
I have strong views about gender-neutral language. I believe, along with George Orwell and many others, that language can influence thought. When I first began to practise law, there were virtually no statutes or documents which on their face acknowledged that women take part in the world of law and business. I really did feel that I had somehow wandered into a boys' club, and I didn't feel it reflected the "real world". I wanted to see formal recognition of the existence of women in the legal an dbusiness landscape.
Now, nearly 20 years later, I like to think that in a small way I helped influence the move to gender-neutral drafting in the law in Australia. It only took a degree of firm, but friendly, persuasion and a little persistence to convince people of the importance of gender in language. In the dynamic 1980s, it was not such a hard argument to make. The Parliamentary Counsel's Office of New South Wales adopted a policy of gender-neutral drafting in 1983. The Commonwealth Parliamentary Counsel did the same in 1988. Law firms began drafting even commercial documents in gender-neutral terms. I thought the battle was won.
But the position in the 1990s, under a conservative government in Australia, is different. The pendulum seems to be swinging back, and I see our government's change in attitude to gender-neutral language as a disturbing symptom of the way the government is thinking about women more generally.
The government has decided to abolish the office of the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner. It proposes to make sex discrimination just one of the reponsibilities of a deputy president of a new Human Rights and Responsibilities Commission (with a much reduced budget). The government has also slashed the budget of the Office of the Status of Women. And it has begun to strip funds from women's groups. Even the United Nations has taken notice. Several of these moves were singled out for strong criticism in the report of the Seventeenth Session of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, 7-25 July 1997.
The Prime Minister is apparently unmoved. He has described himself as "traditionalist", and takes a personal interest in the language issue.
However, his interest in the issue apparently does not lead him to agree with Chapter 8 of the Australian Government Publishing Service's Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers. That chapter is entitled "Non-discriminatory language". In the 5th edition (1994), there are 14 pages of advice there about how to avoid discriminating against women in the language we use. On page 128 (paragraph 8.27) it says: "Occupational nouns and job titles ending in -man obscure the presence of women in such professions and positions."
The Style Manual then goes on to list various strategies for replacing what it calls "-man compounds", including the word "chairman". The gender-neutral alternatives include "the chair", "chairperson", "convenor", "coordinator", and "head (of)". It also lists what it calls the "gender-specific" alternatives of "chairwoman" and "chairman".
It seems the Prime Minister feels free to ignore this advice. He was quick enough to point out when his government was elected that it included quite a few more woment than there were in the previous government. But his feminism apparently stops short of acknowledging the existence of women in the language of government documents.
Earlier this year I found myself arguing about language issues on ABC radio station 2BL. My opponent was the Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel, Bronwyn Bishop. She was in favour of the move away from "chair" and "chairperson". She raised the hoary old argument that the "man" in "chairman" does not mean "man" but derives from manus, the Latin for "hand".
What a load of rot! I have heard this argument time and time again. I raised the matter last year at an Australian Institute of Professional Communicators seminar, when our speaker was Macquarie linguist, Associate Professor Pam Peters. She dismissed that argument out of hand. Manus is indeed the root of many words, like "manage", "manacle" and "manicure". But it has nothing to do with the suffix "man" in in words like "chairman". These words derive their suffix from the Old English word man or mann, which was both the word for "male" and for "human being" or "person". And so we are left with the same problem: it is impossible to separate the two meanings.
But the point I made to Bronwyn Bishop was that deriviation was not the point. The Old English meaning of a word is not the important thing in this context. The key issue is the effect of that word on the listener. I repeated my argument that language influences thought, and though dictates behaviour. Today, when someone hears the word "chairman", more often than not the visualise a man in that role. By using gender-neutral language, we avoid that association, and provide a neutral word which allows the listener to visualise whatever they like.
To illustrate the point I told the radio audience a story included in my book (Plain Language for Lawyers) about an incident at a plain language conference held in Vancouver in 1992. A (female) judge told the conference how, for 10 years she had instructed juries that they should appoint a "foreman". Then one day she decided to say instead that they should appoint a "foreperson". For the first time in her 10 years experience of instructing juries, they appointed a woman.
This story deeply impressed the radio interviewer, but did not impress Mrs Bishop. She replied that she'd be surprised if that was all there was to the story, and that it could have been explained by other factors. Unfortunately, I was not given the chance to reply, and the interview moved on to another topic.
But I see gender-neutral language as more than simply a feminist issue. I am both a feminist and a plain language writer. I see gender-neutral language as a fundamental part of plain language writing. If you use language which excludes (and even alienates) some proportion of your audience, then you are not communicating properly. Plain language writing requires that you consider the needs of your audience. And if language influences thought, and thought dictates behaviour, then by using the word "chairman", you mislead people into thinking that only a man can chair a meeting.
Speaking of chairpersons, I'm reminded of what the former Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament, Joan Childs, once said on the subject. When asked in Parliament if she wished to be referred to as "chairman" or "chairperson", she replied: "You can call me 'chairperson'. I have no sex when I'm in this chair."
It brought the House down.
没有相关文章
【】【】【】【】
上一篇文章： 下一篇文章：
156152854192415885295832131590542& “How many hours do yo...”习题详情
0位同学学习过此题，做题成功率0%
How many hours do you spend sitting in a chair every day? Eight hours in the office and three hours in front of the TV after work is the normal condition for many people.You& probably don't need an expert to tell you that sitting too much is not good for your health, but the following fact can tell you more.A study showed the health of 123,000 Americans between 1992 and 2006. The death rate（比率）for men who spent six hours or more per day sitting was about 20 percent higher than for men who sat for three hours or less. The death rate for women who sat for more than six hours a day was about 40 percent higher&①　&．In other words,　&②　&．So what can we do about it? Health experts suggest we spend more hours standing instead of sitting. The BBC and the University of Chester in& the UK did a simple experiment with a small group of 10 volunteers who usually spent most of the day sitting. They were asked to stand for at least three hours a day. The researchers took records on days when the volunteers stood, and when they sat around. As a result, there were some great differences, the BBC reported on Oct 16.The researchers believe that even small movements,& like standing while talking on the phone, going over to talk to a workmate rather than sending an e-mail, or simply taking the stairs instead of lift, will help.【小题1】从A.C中为①②处选出恰当的选项使文章通顺、连贯、合理。A. you can sit while you're standing for longB. sitting is killing usC. than the death rate for women who sat for three hours or less①　&②　&【小题2】In the passage, what do the "great differences" refer to in English?　&【小题3】 If possible， will you stand or sit while calling according to the passage?　&【小题4】请将划线的句子翻译成汉语。　&【小题5】 Choose a proper title to the passage.　&A．You can Never SitB．Always StandC．A Survey on StandingD．Stand More or Sit More&
本题难度：较难
题型：解答题&|&来源：2014-初中毕业升学考试（湖北恩施卷）英语
分析与解答
习题“How many hours do you spend sitting in a chair every day? Eight hours in the office and three hours in fr...”的分析与解答如下所示：
本文叙述了根据调查研究发现每天坐得时间太长了对身体没有好处，每天有6个小时或更长时间坐着的男性，其死亡率比每天只有3个小时或更少时间坐着的男性高出20%。短文还给出了志愿者的实验结果也得到了证实---站着要比坐着好。【小题1】①根据这里的比较级可知后面应该用有比较连词的选项，故选C。&②根据第三段可知坐的时间长的人等于慢性自杀，故选B。【小题2】根据上文sitting too much is not good for your health 坐得时间长了对身体不好。这里是志愿者来做实验，来证明这个观点，故用While standing for three hours a day,the volunteers are in better health.【小题3】根据最后一段可知打电话的时候最好站着，故用Stand while calling.【小题4】sb spend +some time （in）+doing sth做某事花费某人多长时间。每天有6个小时或更长时间坐着的男性，其死亡率比每天只有3个小时或更少时间坐着的男性高出20%。【小题5】标题归纳题。根据短文的内容可知根据研究发现站着要比坐着对身体有好处，也就是站着比坐着好，故选D。
找到答案了，赞一个
如发现试题中存在任何错误，请及时纠错告诉我们，谢谢你的支持！
How many hours do you spend sitting in a chair every day? Eight hours in the office and three hours ...
错误类型：
习题内容残缺不全
习题有文字标点错误
习题内容结构混乱
习题对应知识点不正确
分析解答残缺不全
分析解答有文字标点错误
分析解答结构混乱
习题类型错误
错误详情：
我的名号（最多30个字）：
看完解答，记得给个难度评级哦！
“How many hours do yo...”的最新评论
欢迎来到乐乐题库，查看习题“How many hours do you spend sitting in a chair every day? Eight hours in the office and three hours in front of the TV after work is the normal condition for many people.You probably don't need an expert to tell you that sitting too much is not good for your health, but the following fact can tell you more.A study showed the health of 123,000 Americans between 1992 and 2006. The death rate（比率）for men who spent six hours or more per day sitting was about 20 percent higher than for men who sat for three hours or less. The death rate for women who sat for more than six hours a day was about 40 percent higher____①____．In other words,____②____．So what can we do about it? Health experts suggest we spend more hours standing instead of sitting. The BBC and the University of Chester in the UK did a simple experiment with a small group of 10 volunteers who usually spent most of the day sitting. They were asked to stand for at least three hours a day. The researchers took records on days when the volunteers stood, and when they sat around. As a result, there were some great differences, the BBC reported on Oct 16.The researchers believe that even small movements, like standing while talking on the phone, going over to talk to a workmate rather than sending an e-mail, or simply taking the stairs instead of lift, will help.【小题1】从A.C中为①②处选出恰当的选项使文章通顺、连贯、合理。A. you can sit while you're standing for longB. sitting is killing usC. than the death rate for women who sat for three hours or less①____②____【小题2】In the passage, what do the "great differences" refer to in English?____【小题3】 If possible， will you stand or sit while calling according to the passage?____【小题4】请将划线的句子翻译成汉语。____【小题5】 Choose a proper title to the passage.____A．You can Never SitB．Always StandC．A Survey on StandingD．Stand More or Sit More”的答案、考点梳理，并查找与习题“How many hours do you spend sitting in a chair every day? Eight hours in the office and three hours in front of the TV after work is the normal condition for many people.You probably don't need an expert to tell you that sitting too much is not good for your health, but the following fact can tell you more.A study showed the health of 123,000 Americans between 1992 and 2006. The death rate（比率）for men who spent six hours or more per day sitting was about 20 percent higher than for men who sat for three hours or less. The death rate for women who sat for more than six hours a day was about 40 percent higher____①____．In other words,____②____．So what can we do about it? Health experts suggest we spend more hours standing instead of sitting. The BBC and the University of Chester in the UK did a simple experiment with a small group of 10 volunteers who usually spent most of the day sitting. They were asked to stand for at least three hours a day. The researchers took records on days when the volunteers stood, and when they sat around. As a result, there were some great differences, the BBC reported on Oct 16.The researchers believe that even small movements, like standing while talking on the phone, going over to talk to a workmate rather than sending an e-mail, or simply taking the stairs instead of lift, will help.【小题1】从A.C中为①②处选出恰当的选项使文章通顺、连贯、合理。A. you can sit while you're standing for longB. sitting is killing usC. than the death rate for women who sat for three hours or less①____②____【小题2】In the passage, what do the "great differences" refer to in English?____【小题3】 If possible， will you stand or sit while calling according to the passage?____【小题4】请将划线的句子翻译成汉语。____【小题5】 Choose a proper title to the passage.____A．You can Never SitB．Always StandC．A Survey on StandingD．Stand More or Sit More”相似的习题。扫二维码下载作业帮
拍照搜题，秒出答案，一键查看所有搜题记录
下载作业帮安装包
扫二维码下载作业帮
拍照搜题，秒出答案，一键查看所有搜题记录
a young boy went to into a drugstore.He took a chair to stand on so that he could r___ the phone.then he took out a piece abd nade a telephone call.the boy asked"Lady can you give me the job of c___ your lawn?" the woman replied"I have had someone e___cut my lawn already lady I will cut your lawn for half the p___ of the person who does it now" repiled the boy they woman answered that she was very sarisfied w___ the person who was working for her.The young boy didn't g___ up and said Think about it again lady I‘ll even sweep your wholg garden so on Sunday you will have the most b___ garden in Florida Again the woman answerde no .With a smile on hisface the little boy p___down the telephone The store owner who had been listening the w___ time walk over to the boy and said Son what if I o___ you the job I like you attitude The young boy replide Thanks for giving me the chance But sorry I just want to know my achievement in the job I already have I am the one who works for that lady
作业帮用户
扫二维码下载作业帮
拍照搜题，秒出答案，一键查看所有搜题记录
楼上的答案有错误reach cuttingelse paywithgivebeautifulput wholeoffer
为您推荐：
其他类似问题
Reach CleanElseWithPriceGiveBeautifulPutWholeOffer
reach cutting修剪草坪else其他人pricewithgive放弃beautifulputwholeoffer主动提供
扫描下载二维码扫二维码下载作业帮
3亿+用户的选择
下载作业帮安装包
扫二维码下载作业帮
3亿+用户的选择
几个蛮奇怪又蛮简单的英语问题He had a good seat.He was sitting in a good ____.a.chair b.place d.classThe writer could not bear it.He could not ____ it.a.carry b.suffer c.stand d.liftPS：有sit in a good place这样的用法吗还有suffer和stand的区别?第一题就在a,b两个里面选 第二题就在b,c两个里面选 问suffer 和stand的区别？
作业帮用户
扫二维码下载作业帮
3亿+用户的选择
1b.on the chair ,in the place2c.suffer from doing ,stand sth
为您推荐：
其他类似问题
1b.on the chair ,in the place2c.suffer from doing ，stand sth
He had a good seat.He was sitting in a good place.The writer could not bear it.He could not stand it.
扫描下载二维码