意義不明?所指不明?

第一句：Mr. A 應該提供准許的平裝封面相簿，以用來放好那些照片。
第二句：Mr. A 應該提供准許的平裝封面相簿和放好那些照片。

第一句和第二句的分別在於「那些相片是否要放入相簿」

第一句很明確地點出了「相片放入相簿」，而第二句則沒有指明「相片放入相簿」，只是說「放好相片」，有點 ambiguous 啦，可以放入相簿或不放。

這是因為第一句有 to，它表示了「approved albums with a plain cover 是用來 accommodate the photos」的意思；相反，第二句的是 and，在這裡，「approved albums with a plain cover」和「accommodate the photos」只是並排的關係，兩者並沒有如第一句入面的關係。

不過，兩句都明確地指出了 Mr. A 是「把相片放入相簿中的人」，因為兩句的 subject 都是 Mr. A。

另外，應該是 albums with plain covers 才對。albums with a plain cover 是「有很多相簿，但只有一本有 cover」的情況、albums with plain covers 才是「有很多相簿，每一本都有 cover」的情況。


希望幫到你。

Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover to accommodate the photos.
The facts are:
Mr. A shall supply the albums.-Mr A 供應相簿。
The albums are approved ones.-相簿是被認可的。
The album has a plain cover each.相簿有平裝封面。
The albums are to accommodate the photos.相簿是放相片用的。

2013-08-24 12:16:13 補充：
Facts中有 "把相片放入相簿中" 的含意，但誰是"把相片放入相簿中" 的人是題外話。

2013-08-24 12:26:15 補充：
Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover and accommodate the photos.
=Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover and
Mr. A shall accommodate the photos.

2013-08-24 12:34:55 補充：
The meaning of "Mr. A shall accommodate the photos." is ambiguous. Its meaning can only be completed by adding "with them (the albums)." , expanding the original sentence to "Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover and accommodate the photos with them."

We are talking about a language, right? A language is made up of text and the meaning of the text must be understood in its context. General understanding of its usage and context is important for determining the meaning of the text. Common understanding has precedent over word twisting when it comes to determining the meaning, even in a court ruling. Having said that, there is no ambiguity in either sentence.

In sentence 1, the to-infinitive is to explain the purpose of the albums. Who is the person to accommodate the photos is not a concern to the writer. If it is a major concern, the sentence would have been written as

Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover (for someone) to accommodate the photos.

The only ambiguity in the original sentence is what is being used to accommodate the photos, the albums or the cover. Using our common sense, we know it is the album that the to-infinitive refers to.

The meaning of the original sentence is conveyed clearly.

In sentence 2, Mr. A is told to supply albums and accommodate the photos. Although no discrete mention is made about where to accommodate the photos, the context of the whole sentence implies clearly that the photos are to be put in the albums. Mr. A is to supply albums with photos already in them.

Answer the thread poster's questions:
哪句含有 "把相片放入相簿中" 此含意?
Ans: Both sentences 1 and 2.

哪句有明確指出 "把相片放入相簿中" 的人是誰?
Ans: Sentence 2


Mr. A shall supply albums to accommodate the photos.to accommodate 可以理解成 albums 的功能嗎?
Ans: Yes, to accommodate is to explain the purpose of having the albums


Mr. A 應該提供准許的平裝封面相簿，以用來放好那些照片。即使是中文我亦視乎看不到 放入相的動作誰做。
Ans: This is about sentence 1. No, there is no mention of who should put the photos in the album.

還有..有沒更好的寫法表達得更明確?
Ans: Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover (for someone) to accommodate the photos.

for someone to do something 可以指出責任誰屬。

2013-08-25 16:07:07 補充：
Agree with EICA that having 'with them' in
Mr. A shall accommodate the photos with them
will make the sentence complete.

1. 可以演譯為
Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover to (let others) accommodate the photos.

2. 是指
Mr. A shall supply approved albums with a plain cover and (he shall) accommodate the photos.

所以答你：
哪句含有 "把相片放入相簿中" 此含意?　〔句２〕
哪句有明確指出 "把相片放入相簿中" 的人是誰?　〔句２〕

2013-08-24 19:32:55 補充：
追尋的人，讓我補充一點。

但先謝謝 一都兄、 大蒜大大 和 EICA大大 的分享。
真理愈辯愈明。

其實你自己講得好好，雖然仔細上的分析可以指出微妙的分別，但有時如果唔係故意含糊的話，而又必須寫明確的話，你可以再寫清楚一ｄ。

我舉例說：I drive my sister to the school to pick her son.
那麼 pick her son的是 I 還是 my sister呢？

現在你的問題就有丁點兒像這個。

2013-08-24 19:33:18 補充：
你問「to accommodate 可以理解成 albums 的功能嗎?」
這個就是我原本的意思，所以我寫了(let others)。
但如果你說主體是 Mr. A 也同樣可以解得通。

也看一例：
I should take my cake to the party to share with them. vs
I should take my cake to the party and share with them.

2013-08-24 19:33:39 補充：
至於你問「放入相的動作誰做」，其實我昨晚答你的時候我自己老實説也很矛盾。
由於第二句是並排，所以我答了第二句有。
而第一句是用以放入相，所以我答了你沒有。
但其實我正式貼出意見之前，我的想法其實是兩句都有。
因為這個句子其實正如你所說，有含糊的地方。
如果硬要二選一，那麼我就選了第二句。

2013-08-24 19:33:56 補充：
有時句子難免會含糊，所以有時說話不要一句起兩句止。（廢話多的人另計。）
對我來說的經典例子： Peter met John and he was happy.　我都唔知 he係指Peter定係 John。
Compare: Peter met Jane and she was happy. vs Peter met Jane and he was happy.

最後，你問「有沒更好的寫法表達得更明確」，首先要知道你想表達的是哪一個意思。相信前面的網友已經為你解難了。