「Cambrigde Dictionary: good value (for money = a lot was offered for the amount of money paid. 這並非物超所值。何况物有所值已是一個帶有褒意的形容詞。」
http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/?qid=7006101103550
本人不明的是, 以上字典解釋為何不是指物超所值? 難道換取「等值」的價品, 會用 「a lot 」來形容嗎? 本人現再引用 Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English 的一例來供大家參考, 希望大家分析一下, 究竟意思是否物超所值?
The lunch SPECIAL is really good value.
for money 是 optional 的
********************************************************************** 請大家回答時, 不要只看問題便即答, 希望大家可以仔細一點 看清楚我反對他的答案的理據, 最好自己也查查好的字典, 及問問外籍老師/朋友才作答. (maybe im too demanding) **********************************************************************
GJ: 謝謝回應... (1) 雖然你的分析有「理」, 但語言是以主流使用者約定俗成為基礎的, 是有很多主觀成份的, 所以有很多 grammar 及 usage 都不是講「理由」的. 我的意思是, good value for money 是主觀的「抵買」, 只要「說話者覺得」是抵便已可以用的了. (2) 之前我是靠自己的常識再加字典的定義和例句, 來肯定第一位回答者說「物超所值」是恰當的 (我可以同意物「有」所值都可以解抵買, 但不能同意他所說, 指「超」字是太過份, 並將 a lot 解作 「多」的意思視若無睹), 之後,我請教一些外籍朋友,我更相信原先的理解是正確的.
nuke: (1) im NOT saying that ONLY good value means 超. what i mean is that person shouldnt have rejected it. got it? (2) if TWO sources tell us two dif. meanings, shall we consult native speakerS instead of using a HKgers own common sense (which is not reliable at all in this case)?
nuke: (1) i think u, gj, and i also agree that 「good value」is a possible choice, so we should have said 「no」to the one who insisted 「good value」is wrong (pls refer to the link above).
(2) i think asking ordinary native speakerS should be enough (if dict. by linguists not reliable), & guess u meant UNDERESTIMATE instead of undermine, didnt u?
SADLY.... (1) as we all know, its been said that local peoples (including college students) eng standards are far from satisfactory. it just sounds weird if one claims that a local guy should trust his own sense MORE than a dict. or native speakers.
(2) i didnt ask this question to offend you, but to express my disappointment over the situation that someone (not you!) has insisted that ONLY his interpretation is correct. (3) its not just a game if his 「knowledge」 is passed over to those who believe him.
(4) im from hk too and theres no point arguing that i criticise hk ppl for 「upgrading」 myself. its just sensible to trust foreigners more when learning their language.
(5) still undermine? did you mean 「look someone down or show contempt for someone」. i do hope you LOOK UP the word undermine to check whether its properly used.
correction: (3) passed on
首先希望可以弄清楚, 以下是否我們的並識: (1) value for money, 及 good value for money, 都可以解 物有所值. (2) good value for money, 亦可以解 物超所值. (3) 要否定good value for money只可以解作物有所值是不沿當的. 如果兩位都認同以上1-3, 根本就沒有必要繼續爭論有關good value的部分了.
至於undermine一字, 請恕在下孤陋寡聞. 只知可以此字用來講一個人暗地裡做些破壞工作; 說一些話影響別人的自信心, 挖掘地道, 但何謂「undermine香港人的英語能力」? 還是我查考的「字典s」都不及兩位的語文觸角及能力?
please dont take offence, but supporting with REASONS is essential...... actually what you quoted is a GOOD sentence:「the current obsession with acquiring English may also undermine competence in the national language」 I suppose the above sentence was given by a Chinese who thought that:
現時的(港)人對學習英語「趨之若騖(?)」, 這種過分追求的態度可能也不知不覺間, 漸漸地影響(破壞)了自己的母語能力. BUT what do you mean by 某一個人不應undermine香港人的英語能力? last night i asked an eng teacher (i quoted the exacting wording, no distortion) and she also thought you might wish to express underestimate.
sorry i didnt read the source, so gotta change the translation to: 中國人 instead of 港人
the point is 「not who wrote what」BUT what you really mean by 我們不應undermine香港人的英語能力?
