蕭愷一錯評高考卷

人氣網誌《英文由F字學起》的作者蕭愷一，昨日以《高考試卷的破英文》為題，高調批評本屆高級程度會考的英文水平低下。可惜，蕭的批評暴露了他對學術文章行文方式一竅不通。

以下是蕭認為「水平低下」的文章內容：

The researchers looked at 58 people who had recently started a relationship and compared their neutrophin protein levels with those in both the same number of people in long-term relationships and the same numbers of single people. In those who had just started a relationship, levels of the NGF protein, which causes well-known signs of uneasiness such as sweaty palms and the feeling of having 'butterflies in the stomach', were significantly higher. Of the 39 people from the original sample who were still in the same new relationship after a year, the levels of NGF had returned to normal.

（上文 numbers 中的 s 為蕭的原文所有，當為他手民之誤。）文章的第一句，蕭認為「文句不通，詞序大亂」和「十分累贅」，並質疑「甚麼叫 with those in both the same number?」

不幸地，蕭連原文都解錯了。原文的 'those'，指的不是人，而是 neutrophin protein levels。累贅一點說，原文首句的意思其實是這樣：

The researchers looked at 58 people who had recently started a relationship. They compared their neutrophin protein levels with those (here 'those' means 'the neutrophin protein levels') in another two groups of people of the same size, namely the people in long-term relationships and the single people.

原文的句子雖然並不淺白，但不難理解。我讀第一次已明其意，不明白英文修養比我高出多倍的蕭愷一為何讀不通。更奇怪的是本地報章竟隨著蕭的錯誤批評而起舞。就我所知，明報、東方日報和南華早報均有簡述蕭愷一的批評。南華早報的編輯和記者不都是英文素養極佳的嗎？怎麼看不出蕭的批評中的錯誤？

要把原來的句子說得簡單點，可以這麼寫：

The researchers looked at the neutrophin protein levels of three groups of people (each of size 58), namely, the people who had recently started a relationship, the single people and the people in long-term relationships.

說原來的句子累贅，我也同意。但學術文章首要是內容紮實，表義準確。能有邱吉爾的文采固然好，但只得 The Suffocated 的水平亦無不可。何況寫學術文章的人多不是專研文學的文學家，其文字枯燥無味，早已不是新聞。正如在蕭的網站留言的某幾位訪客指出，被蕭批評的這段文字，並不是作為範文用，而是被用來考驗學生的閱讀理解能力。艱澀一點，正好用來分辨考生強弱。

蕭的批評還有另外兩點。其一是他認為 'looked at' 二字語義含糊；其二是說 "the feeling of having 'butterflies in the stomach'" 實在累贅到極。前者暴露了蕭的無知。在某些學術範疇，'look at' 是標準學術用語，意思和 inspect, examine 類同。至於後者，總算有一定道理。英文水平低下如我，其實並未聽過 'butterflies in the stomach' 這個詞語。上網搜尋，發現這似乎是美式英語。假若如是，原文的作者可能為了讓不明此語的讀者至少能明白 'butterflies in the stomach' 是一種感覺（而非胃潰瘍之類的物理傷害）而加上 'the feeling of having ...'。這樣行文雖不簡潔，但卻是負責任的做法。

總括來說，蕭論證錯誤，但其結論正確、無新意、和閱讀理解部份的選文準則「唔啦更」。整體成績：F。

註：雖然蕭的這篇批評謬誤處處，但大家不要誤會，以為我對他的整個 blog 有甚麼劣評。事實上，如果閣下是很想自己英文進步的香港中學生，我想蕭的網誌是一個絕佳的學習場所。從蕭對讀者的回應看來，此君為人友善，胸襟亦廣，應當是良師益友。我不在他的網頁留言，而在這裏指出他的錯誤，純粹因為雅虎網誌只接受雅虎人留言，別無其他。