查看完整版本 : serve food to the customers 還是 for the customers好?

黃金工程 2019-1-15 10:03 PM

serve food to the customers 還是 for the customers好?

[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEt1LipvT4k&feature=youtu.be]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEt1LipvT4k&feature=youtu.be[/url]

1. 請教
serve food to the customers 還是 for the customers好?

e.g. This restaurant serves tasty food to / for their customers.

2. 如果The White House will be serving McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Burger King during a dinner.
即然是will be, 為甚麼不是將來發生?

3. 就咁想表達"幫襯", 可以使用be served來表達"幫襯"呢?
需不需要一定要有店員將食物搬出來款待顧客的樣子, 才算是serve?


[attach]9220990[/attach]
[attach]9220991[/attach]

[[i] 本帖最後由 黃金工程 於 2019-1-15 10:08 PM 編輯 [/i]]

krzys995x8 2019-1-15 11:05 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]黃金工程[/i] 於 2019-1-15 10:03 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493474474&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEt1LipvT4k&feature=youtu.be[/url]

1. 請教
serve food to the customers 還是 for the customers好?

e.g. This restaurant serves tasty food to / for their customers.

2. 如果Th ... [/quote]

1) serve to. 你邊豎見到for呀?
2) 你又玩斷章取義? 你見唔到前面 President Trump's "confirmed on Monday that...." 咩?
佢周一confirmed時未發生將來事阿。
3) 你成句句子係點呀? 邊個話你知幫襯係“be served"啊?
你見過邊間餐廳嘅客人自己入廚房攞嘢㗎?

黃金工程 2019-1-15 11:23 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]krzys995x8[/i] 於 2019-1-15 11:05 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493477563&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


1) serve to. 你邊豎見到for呀?
2) 你又玩斷章取義? 你見唔到前面 President Trump's "confirmed on Monday that...." 咩?
佢周一confirmed時未發生將來事阿。
3) 你成句句子係點呀? 邊個話你知幫襯係“be served"啊?
你見過邊間餐廳嘅客人自己入廚房攞嘢㗎? ... [/quote]

1. serve for 是不是指 work in?

2. 原來如此, 那麼外國人是不是規定把可以用被動句的情況,
就要儘量用被動句, 目的要將白宮放在最前, 餐廳名放在最後?


3. 如片中, 白宮只是"幫趁", 店員並無serve過白宮的客人,
都用be served

[[i] 本帖最後由 黃金工程 於 2019-1-15 11:25 PM 編輯 [/i]]

krzys995x8 2019-1-16 01:24 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]黃金工程[/i] 於 2019-1-15 11:23 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493478603&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


1. serve for 是不是指 work in?

2. 原來如此, 那麼外國人是不是規定把可以用被動句的情況,
就要儘量用被動句, 目的要將白宮放在最前, 餐廳名放在最後?


3. 如片中, 白宮只是"幫趁", 店員並無serve過白宮的客人,
都用be served ... [/quote]

1)你無查字典?
3)你 邊度見到被動? 邊度見到white House擺最前?邊度見到餐廳名擺最後呀?
3)你邊度見到"be served" 呀?

黃金工程 2019-1-16 01:59 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]krzys995x8[/i] 於 2019-1-16 01:24 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493482186&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


1)你無查字典?
3)你 邊度見到被動? 邊度見到white House擺最前?邊度見到餐廳名擺最後呀?
3)你邊度見到"be served" 呀? [/quote]
更正一下, 是will be serving,

will be serving 是甚麼意思?

krzys995x8 2019-1-16 02:22 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]黃金工程[/i] 於 2019-1-16 01:59 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493482725&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]

更正一下, 是will be serving,

will be serving 是甚麼意思? [/quote]

你唔識分"will be serving" 同被動式嘅分別?
你唔識分“will be serving" 同“will be served"嘅分別?

黃金工程 2019-1-16 02:24 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]krzys995x8[/i] 於 2019-1-16 02:22 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493483058&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


你唔識分"will be serving" 同被動式嘅分別?
你唔識分“will be serving" 同“will be served"嘅分別? [/quote]

識D唔識D。

krzys995x8 2019-1-16 11:53 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]黃金工程[/i] 於 2019-1-16 02:24 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493483081&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


識D唔識D。 [/quote]

No meal will be served during the 1 hour flight.
The crew will be serving breakfast from 7 to 10am Saturday at the senior center.
睇唔睇得明分別呀?

[[i] 本帖最後由 krzys995x8 於 2019-1-16 11:56 AM 編輯 [/i]]

黃金工程 2019-1-17 07:23 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]krzys995x8[/i] 於 2019-1-16 11:53 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=493496566&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


No meal will be served during the 1 hour flight.
The crew will be serving breakfast from 7 to 10am Saturday at the senior center.
睇唔睇得明分別呀? [/quote]

第一句是無提供餐飲,
第2句是不是有人款待他們進食早餐? 但點樣7-10am咁長時間? Saturday要不要加on或者s?

核心芳香的駱駝 2019-1-31 03:43 PM

both work, depending on the context you are in.

for me, "to" is used when I have a group of ppl in mind...so "to" a party (of people).

whereas, "for" is used when I have a cause for action...so "for" hungry guests.

there are exceptions too. English is a complicated language, so I cannot say definitively what is correct and what is not.

narius 2019-2-7 10:15 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]核心芳香的駱駝[/i] 於 2019-1-31 03:43 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=494240564&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
English is a complicated language, so I cannot say definitively what is correct and what is not. [/quote]

No it is not. English is a much easier language, compared to Chinese. Language is all about common usage. I am sure, except linguists, no one obsessed too much about whether what you say is 100% correct, as long as it is not too distracting.

The only exception is when one does scholarly work. I do teach PhD students to be accurate with their language when writing an academic paper or when presenting. Other than that, it is really not a big deal. I am quite sure when I am joking with my business colleagues, they care less if my language is 100% correct, as long as my jokes are on point and funny.

核心芳香的駱駝 2019-2-7 12:11 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]narius[/i] 於 2019-2-7 10:15 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=494515072&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


No it is not. English is a much easier language, compared to Chinese. Language is all about common usage. I am sure, except linguists, no one obsessed too much about whether what you say is 100% c ... [/quote]


Wow, you must be a professor yourself to be able to teach PhD students. Hats off to you.

Though what you said about English being a language of common usage is true to an extent (your example is quite convincing enough for your case), I have quite a different perspective. Language, other than articulating what I have in mind, reflects the kind of person that I am, and people will judge you depending on the choice of your words. Sure, you can crack a joke or two with completely harmless, day to day language. But when you replace words like "you are" with "you should", I have a problem with that- 1. who are to advise me what to do and how to act? 2. what are your status relative to mine that convinces me that I should follow what you said? and 3. why does your opinion matter in that context? I will judge you on the spot and based on my evaluation of you, I will either push back or acquiesce.

Social status matters, and people judge you based on your speech. Some will judge you harshly. Depending on the context, your speech reflects the kind of person you are, and people will make note of that. On one final note, if I pass by a homeless man on the street and  he says to me "money matters" with signs that say "pls donate", I will pity him because money does matter, otherwise the poor man wouldn't end up on the street. But if I pass by a TV with Trump in it, and he says to everybody "money matters", I will curse at him on the spot. Hell, he took my money to build a wall, while it could have spent elsewhere to improve the society. What is money to him?

narius 2019-2-7 10:58 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]核心芳香的駱駝[/i] 於 2019-2-7 12:11 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=494519052&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
Wow, you must be a professor yourself to be able to teach PhD students. Hats off to you.

Though what you said about English being a language of common usage is true to an extent (your example is  ... [/quote]

Tell you a secret. It is not that big of a deal to be a professor. There are tons of us. Some have made major contributions to knowledge. Some less so. You really have to judge us by what we have done. The title means little.

Of course people judge you by your words. Obviously i talk to business executives differently than when I talk to other scientists. However, the point is that one one cares about whether you are 100% "correct", with respect to grammar, by some arcane rules. Again, it is about common usage. In your example, the difference between "you are" and "you should" is relevant to meaning and tone. That is not just grammar. In fact, in verbal communication, we often do not even use complete sentences. I am talking about things like that.

I would also add that the game changes completely when you write. Writing and verbal communication are two very different things. People, including native speakers, often do not understand that .. or at least do not internalize that enough.

核心芳香的駱駝 2019-2-8 07:01 AM

Cool, I have respect for people who went through the trenches of academia and survived without losing their mental health.

You have made your point about being 100% correct with grammar. Sure enough, you follow a normative practice and carry yourself in public without so much as succumbing to any of the "arcane" rules of grammar and still make your points across. That's absolutely okay. I am leaning more on the prescriptive side, thinking grammar should be adhered to, adapted only to situational contexts and interlocutors. When I say English is a complicated language, I mean it by how language could be affected by ideology and power (see all works by Michel Foucault and Antonio Gramsi)

It's interesting that you point out people, even native speakers, do not often understand the difference between written and spoken communication. My view is that this largely predicates on how educated the people you are talking about are. The higher up you go in academia, it's easier to find people who make a conscious choice of words between their writing and speech, though not many will question, let alone evaluate, why they make a conscious choice as they did.

narius 2019-2-8 10:39 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]核心芳香的駱駝[/i] 於 2019-2-8 07:01 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=494553672&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
The higher up you go in academia, it's easier to find people who make a conscious choice of words between their writing and speech, though not many will question, let alone evaluate, why they make a conscious choice as they did. [/quote]

Finding the right words (not grammar) for the right occasion to the right audience is an art. Some can do it naturally without giving it a second thought. Most cannot even if they practice 1000 times and their lives depend on it. It takes a bit of talent.

But most academics can do it to some extent since explaining and putting forth their ideas are their business.

I think people on this forum are too obsessed with grammar and what is "correct" without thinking about communications. It is sad but i don't suppose i can change the whole world. I guess i will go back to teaching one class at a time. The interesting thing is that while teaching students how to communicate is important, it is just the small part of my job. There are much bigger fish to fry.

核心芳香的駱駝 2019-2-9 12:00 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]narius[/i] 於 2019-2-8 10:39 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=494590915&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


Finding the right words (not grammar) for the right occasion to the right audience is an art. Some can do it naturally without giving it a second thought. Most cannot even if they practice 1000 ti ... [/quote]


So, so true about your observation.

From what I see, some people here, including me, are obsessed with grammar. And we have a legitimate reason: If one speak English, one has got to sound like a native with impeccable grammar.

Why is this?

If you live in a backwater city like Hong Kong with a Chinese face, a Chinese last name, and happen to understand a Chinese word, 99% chance the locals will critique your speech with respect to your face. My experience in a HK university classroom and a HK typical office workplace showed me that millennials in the former context tend to hold me against my words, turn and twist my words around, and put it right back into my mouth. This is particularly worse during group presentations where some of them, although brilliant and absolutely fluent in English, nitpick on 1 word/ phrase on my ppt slide beyond context and challenge my choice of words. I later learned that this is their strategy to get discussion marks for striking up arguments (a nasty and pointless way, if I may). Teahers didn't care, turning a blind eye on those nasty bums, with a wry, sneering curl of their lip. in those and other similar circumstances, I slowly became more precise and careful with my words, and it has saved me a lot of unnecessary explanation since.

Whereas the students aren't so nice and easy going, people working in a typical HK office apparently have not any better things to do and start picking apart their manager's email and pass off any trivial mechanical errors as your "every day" jokes with each other. This has got me fed up, and I resigned without regret.

So with only these anecdotes, I may not have completely convinced you why some tend to stick to grammar rules to a point of obsession. MY POINT is: following rules and using perfect grammar is our self protection mechanism to avoid needless derision, nasty jokes, and name calling at work. It's a linguistic knee jerk reaction driven by the wider social practices of laughing at the grammar dumbs and making those in power in office stay in power.

There is no way one can break the cycle when no one bother to end it but join it. I guess common wisdom has it right: if you can't beat them, join them.

narius 2019-2-11 12:22 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]核心芳香的駱駝[/i] 於 2019-2-9 12:00 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=494594373&ptid=27975080][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]

So, so true about your observation.

From what I see, some people here, including me, are obsessed with grammar. And we have a legitimate reason: If one speak English, one has got to sound like a n ... [/quote]

wow .. this sounds .. horrible. Don't get me wrong. We do give feedback about presentations, but often it is about content, tone and communication, and never about trivial grammar or inconsequential word choices. In fact, you can probably tell that I don't bother to write 100% correct English on forums (although I would have to be much more careful writing things for publications, or memos that needs to communicate issues clearly).

I don't think HK is a place i recognize anymore. But given what you are saying (and numerous other problems like housing, crowds, traffic and what-not), i don't think i am going to miss it very much. The place i grew up in no longer exists :(
頁: [1]
查看完整版本: serve food to the customers 還是 for the customers好?