| 功能性半文盲200英語詞彙量的新總統川普 |
| 送交者: Pascal 2017年01月22日08:14:23 於 [五 味 齋] 發送悄悄話 |
|
功能性半文盲、200個英語詞彙量、思維散漫、表達混亂 不堪、跑題跑不停、不會使用從屬句、語法不達小學六年 級水平的美國241年歷史上少見的新式總統 —— 川普 Is Donald Trump dumbing down America? And is that even possible? November 6, 2016 5:12PM LL: Yeah. To dumb down is to take something difficult and make it easy. POLLS continue to climb for Donald Trump and, with the election just days away, his limited vocabulary is coming into question. Comedian Samantha Bee has unveiled a totally real and compelling theory that Donald Trump is functionally illiterate, and cannot read at all. 以下一概為谷歌一秒鐘 自動英翻中： 喜劇演員薩曼莎蜜蜂公布了一個完全真實和令人信服的理論，唐納德特朗普是功能性的文盲，沒有閱讀能力。 Of course, this is not the first time the reality television star has been criticised for his way with words. His former ghostwriter, Tony Schwartz, claimed last week that “Trump has the lowest vocabulary of any person who has ever run for any office of any kind, much less president.” Schwartz believes the billionaire candidate has a vocabulary of 200 words, a sentiment shared by at least one business associate of Trump that we met on the campaign trail. 他的前任受僱撰稿捉刀人托尼·施瓦茨（Tony Schwartz）上周宣稱，“特朗普對任何曾經擔任任何辦公室的人來說都是具有最少量的詞彙，更不用說總統。 Schwartz認為，億萬富翁候選人僅有200個詞彙的詞彙，這一說法由至少一個Trump的商業夥伴分享的，我們在競選活動中遇到的情況。 Of course, on the face of it, this all seems absurd. The idea that Trump only uses 200 different words seems impossible, until actually you go to a Trump rally and hear the man speak. When something he is describing is good, for Trump it is “just great”, “tremendous” or more often than not “terrific”. Or if he’s really into something, it’s “really, really, really terrific”. And that’s about it. Put it this way, Rogets are not going to appoint him as an editor for their thesaurus anytime soon. And then, when something’s bad, it’s “terrible”, “the worst” or “just terrible”. And that’s about it. Of course, this would mean nothing if Donald Trump was still just a reality television star, but now that he’s entered national politics things are different. His impact on the English language has started to become noticeable especially at Trump rallies. His fans have started to mimic his way of speaking. To hear them speak, you’d think they were mini-Trumps. Suddenly everything Trump does is “terrific” or “really terrific”. Of course, proving that Donald Trump is actually leading a linguistic decline of the United States is harder said than done. So we conducted a totally valid and scientific poll of Trump supporters to see what words they’d use to describe their candidate. The results speak for themselves. Brian Hartman, studied at Rutgers University Written Aug 28 It's not his limited vocabulary that tells you about his intelligence. It's his inept use of what vocabulary he has, and his inability to express a well-reasoned thought. @Sam Harris (author) put it this way (paraphrasing): If you have a bottle, and you don't know what's in it, the first thing you might pull out could be some twigs, and the next could be the Hope Diamond. Items in a bottle are not necessarily connected. Thoughts don't work that way. They *are* connected. You can't constantly spout nonsense but secretly be a genius. 這不是他有限的詞彙，告訴你他的智慧。 這是他沒有使用他有什麼詞彙，他無法表達一個理智的思想。 @薩姆哈里斯（作者）這樣說（改述）：如果你有一個瓶子，你不知道它是什麼，你可以提出的第一件事可能是一些樹枝，下一個可能是希望鑽石 。 瓶子中的物品不一定連接。 想法不會這樣工作。 他們*是*連接。 你不能經常吐出廢話，而是秘密地成為一個天才。 Jon Hilderbrand, etymology is the Agatha Christie of language Written Jun 19, 2016 It’s not just his limited vocabulary; it’s this coupled with his petulant insistence that he “knows all the words, all the good words.” A person who has to keep reminding himself and others that he REALLY is smart…isn’t. On some level, he knows his vocabulary is very limited, that his grammar is poor, that his public speeches, memorable as they are to his devotees, are horrible works of oratory, memorable only for their vacuousness. Have you ever actually sat down and READ a transcript any of his unscripted speeches? They’re hard enough to follow on audio, but reading them gives you a truer sense of how…”challenged” he is. Here’s a couple of treats for you: 看一段好有趣味的唐納德·川普總統早先的 rigmarole 演講： rigmarole: ( confused, incoherent, foolish, or meaningless talk. ) n. 鬼話，冗長的廢話，無聊的；冗長的文章。 adj. 亂七八糟的，條理不清的；無聊的。 “Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.” Help Us Diagram This Sentence by Donald Trump! This is probably the world’s longest run-on sentence ever! Nineteen lines and the man didn’t even say anything! “看，有核 - 我的叔叔是一位偉大的教授和科學家和工程師，麻省理工學院的約翰·特朗普博士;好的基因，非常好的基因，OK，非常聰明，沃頓商學院的金融，非常好，非常聰明，你知道，如果你是一個保守的共和黨人，如果我是一個自由主義者，如果，喜歡，OK，如果我跑作為一個自由民主黨人，他們會說我是世界上最聰明的人之一 - 這是真的 - 但是當你是一個保守的共和黨人，他們試圖 - 哦，他們做一個數字 - 這就是為什麼我總是開始：去沃頓，是一個好學生，去那裡，去那裡，做這個，建立一個財富 - 你知道我必須給我的所有的時間，因為我們的憑據，因為我們有點不利，但你看看核交易，這真的打擾我的事情 - 這本來是那麼容易，它不像這些生活那麼重要（核能是強大的;我的叔叔向我解釋說，許多，許多年前，權力，這是35年前;他會解釋發生的事情的力量，他是對的 - 誰會想的？），但是當你看看四個囚犯發生了什麼 - 現在它是三個，現在是四個 - 但是當它是三個，甚至現在，我會說，這一切都在使者;因為，你知道，他們沒有，他們沒有想到現在的女人比男人更聰明，所以，你知道，它將帶他們大約另一個150年 - 但波斯人偉大的談判者，伊朗人是偉大的談判者，所以，他們，他們剛剛殺了，他們只是殺了我們。 幫助我們圖解一下唐納德·特朗普的這段話！這可能是世界上最長的連續句子 —— 十九行！但這位，其實什麼都沒說！ How Donald Trump Answers A Question 看看唐納德·川普是如何回答一個問題 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aFo_BV-UzI Trump's grammar in speeches ‘just below 6th grade level,’ study finds 研究發現，川普演講詞中的英語語法不夠小學六年級水平
Schwartz was the ghostwriter for Trump’s 1987 best-selling The Art of the Deal, and has said he wrote “every word” despite being listed as a co-author. Schwartz has said he worries that the book helped create a falsely positive impression of Trump, so the writer started speaking out against the candidate as his campaign picked up steam. Schwartz said Trump’s vocabulary is tiny ― evidenced by how he ad-libs his speeches with phrases like “believe me.” “It’s a 200-word vocabulary, so as soon he gets beyond that, you know that he’s reading someone else’s words,” Schwartz said. He theorized that Trump probably doesn’t familiarize himself with prepared remarks before delivering them because of his “incredibly short attention span.” While most candidates speak at a sixth- to eighth-grade level, Trump “lags behind others” when it comes to vocabulary and grammar, according to a March analysis by Carnegie Mellon University. Abraham Lincoln’s grammar sets the bar with an 11th-grade level, while former President George W. Bush’s fifth-grade grammar ranked even lower than Trump’s (although Bush’s vocabulary rates much higher). Schwartz, who spent 18 months working closely with Trump in the 1980s, noted that the GOP nominee’s limited vocabulary is reflected by his policy positions: The candidate began his run with populist rhetoric, but his current agenda favors the ultra-wealthy. “I don’t think he knows the word ‘irony,’” Schwartz said. “Irony, nuance, subtlety ... those aren’t part of that small vocabulary.” Schwartz是特朗普1987年暢銷的“交易藝術”（The Art of the Deal）的編劇，他說他儘管被列為合作作者，其實，“每一個字”都是他寫的。 Schwartz說他擔心這本書幫助創造了一個對Trump的假陽性印象，所以作家開始對候選人說話，因為他的運動得到了蒸汽。 施瓦茨說特朗普的詞彙很小 - 這是他如何用“相信我”這樣的短語來表達自己的演講。 “這是一個200字的詞彙，所以，只要他超越了，你知道，他正在讀別人的話，”施瓦茨說。他認為特朗普可能不會熟悉自己準備的言論，然後交付他們，因為他的“令人難以置信的超短注意力。 雖然大多數候選人在六年級到八年級水平，特朗普“落後於其他人”的詞彙和語法，根據卡內基梅隆大學3月分析。 亞伯拉罕·林肯的語法將酒吧設置為11級，而前總統布什的五年級語法排名甚至低於特朗普（雖然布什的詞彙率高得多）。 Schwartz在20世紀80年代花了18個月與特朗普密切合作，他指出，共和黨提名人的有限詞彙表現在他的政策立場：候選人開始了他的民粹主義言論，但他目前的議程有利於超富裕。 “我不認為他知道這個詞”諷刺“，”Schwartz說。 “反諷，細微，微妙......這些不是那個小詞彙的一部分。 Dictionary calls out Donald Trump for saying braggadocious in debate braggadocious 愛說大話的，好吹牛X的 /ˌbræɡəˈdəʊʃəs/ adjective 1. (US, informal) boastful http://ew.com/article/2016/09/26/donald-trump-braggadocious-dictionary-debate/ Lexical facts May 29th 2013, 16:02 BY R.L.G. | NEW YORK SEVERAL years ago we mentioned TestYourVocab.com here on the blog. Not long ago, the site reached its two millionth test result, and so the researchers have put together some data: Most adult native test-takers range from 20,000–35,000 words Average native test-takers of age 8 already know 10,000 words Average native test-takers of age 4 already know 5,000 words Adult native test-takers learn almost 1 new word a day until middle age Adult test-taker vocabulary growth basically stops at middle age The most common vocabulary size for foreign test-takers is 4,500 words Foreign test-takers tend to reach over 10,000 words by living abroad Foreign test-takers learn 2.5 new words a day while living in an English-speaking country 大多數母語成年人的測試者從20,000-35,000字 8歲的平均母語測試者已經知道10,000個單詞 4歲的平均母語測試者已經知道5000單詞 成年的本土測試者每天學習近一個新詞，直到中年 成人測試者詞彙增長基本上停止在中年 外國測試者最常見的詞彙量為4,500字 住在國外的外國考生通常達到10,000多個詞 外國考試者每天在英語國家學習2.5個新詞 If you thought you had a big vocabulary, think again. The average English-speaker knows between 25,000 and 40,000 words, Oxford English Dictionary Chief Editor Michael Proffitt told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Thursday. Test your vocab: hard words Puzzled by the hardest words in the test? Here are the rarest words we included, in order of increasing difficulty. They each occur in English less than 3 times per hundred million words, but they do occur. Click on any word to open its definition in a new tab/window. captious - bibulous - malapropism - tricorn - tenebrous - braggadocio - bruit - embonpoint - pabulum - parlay - pother - valetudinarian - cenacle - hypermnesia - legerdemain - vibrissae - cantle - estivation - myrmidon - regnant - terpsichorean - clerisy - deracinate - fuliginous - oneiromancy - tatterdemalion - williwaw - caitiff - funambulist - hypnopompic - opsimath - pule - sparge - uxoricide Donald Trump’s strange speaking style, explained by linguists 聽聽語言學家怎麼解說唐納德·川普奇特的語言風格 Updated by Tara Golshan Jan 11, 2017, 12:50pm EST President-elect Donald Trump’s much-anticipated, much-delayed press conference on his private business dealings — and the recent unverified reports about Russia’s alleged blackmail of Trump — reminded the nation of his unique speaking style and how it is received by the press. Consider the opening lines of his press conference. Despite this being Trump’s first press conference since winning the election, he declared, “It's very familiar territory, news conferences, because we used to give them on an almost daily basis. I think we probably maybe won the nomination because of news conferences.” Over the next few minutes, Trump jumped from news in the auto industry to bidding procedures in the drug industry, pharma lobbyists, and his involvement with generals and admirals on the F-35 program and “perhaps the F-18” program, declared himself the “greatest jobs producer that God ever created,” and then discussed plans for the inauguration ceremony’s musical performances. Somewhere in there, he also announced his pick for Veterans Affairs secretary. For those who covered and followed Trump during this campaign, his style has become familiar — and transcribing him off script continues to be a challenge (I can attest to this). He often jumps to an entirely new thought before finishing his previous one. When Donald Trump goes off script, transcribing him can be a challenge. As someone covering him during this campaign, I can attest to this. When he’s speaking off the cuff, his rambling remarks can be full of digressions and hard-to-follow tangents. He often jumps to an entirely new thought before finishing his previous one. 在接下來的幾分鐘內，特朗普從汽車行業的新聞中跳出了藥物行業的招標程序，製藥遊說，他參與F-35計劃和“F-18”計劃的通用和上將，宣布自己“上帝創造的最偉大的工作生產者”，然後討論了就職典禮的音樂表演的計劃。在那裡的某個地方，他還宣布他的退伍軍人事務秘書的選擇。 對於那些在這次運動中覆蓋和跟隨特朗普的人來說，他的風格已經變得熟悉了 - 並且把他抄過腳本繼續是一個挑戰（我可以證明這一點）。他經常跳到一個全新的思想，完成他的前一個。 當唐納德·特朗普走下腳本，抄寫他可以是一個挑戰。作為在這個運動期間覆蓋他的人，我可以證明這一點。當他說話的袖口，他的漫步的話可以充滿分歧和難以跟隨的切線。他經常跳到一個全新的思想，完成他的前一個。 Recall Trump’s comment on the Iran nuclear deal during a campaign rally in South Carolina on July 21, 2015: His simple message — "the Iran deal is bad for the United States" — was interrupted by musings on his uncle’s education, his own education, the power of nuclear energy, prisoners, the intelligence of women, and the negotiating prowess of Iranians. Slate even called on the public to help diagram it. Trump is aware of his unique style; he explained it to a crowd in West Allis, Wisconsin, at one of his victory tour rallies in December: During the campaign, I was curious if professional linguists and historians could help us figure out what makes Trump’s speaking style unique. There were lots of disagreements on this front, but one thing stood out: Trump’s speeches aren’t meant to be read or used for sound bites, which is probably why Trump is so frustrated with how he comes off in the media. Rather, his seeming incoherence stems from the big difference between written and spoken language. Trump’s style of speaking has its roots in oral culture. He rallies people through impassioned, targeted conversation — even if it doesn’t always follow a clear arc. Why Trump’s speeches are incomprehensible to some — and make perfect sense to othersOnly a few of Trump’s big speeches have been scripted. At many of his rallies, he speaks off the cuff. We get a lot of fractured, unfinished sentences, moving quickly from thought to thought — what Trump calls a “beautiful flowing sentence.” "His speeches are full of non sequiturs," says Kristin Kobes Du Mez, a Calvin College historian who did a comparative study of Trump and Clinton’s speaking styles. It’s a completely different style from nearly any other politician you normally hear. To some, this style is completely incoherent. But clearly not everyone feels this way. Many others havewalked away from Trump’s rallies having understood — and believed — what he said. The difference can be observed in reading Trump’s remarks versus listening to them in real time, University of Pennsylvania linguist Mark Liberman explained: 特朗普知道他獨特的風格;他在威斯康星州西艾利斯的一個人群中解釋說，他在12月的一次勝利之旅集會上： 對於上個月，我決定不做面試，因為他們接受採訪，他們切斷你的句子，把他們短。你會有這個美麗的流暢的句子，句子的後面回到前面，他們切斷了句子的後面，我說我從來沒有說過。所以，我說，你知道什麼，我不打算處理他們。他們是非常不誠實的人，我說。 在競選期間，我很好奇，如果專業語言學家和歷史學家可以幫助我們弄清楚什麼使特朗普的說話風格獨特。在這一面上有很多分歧，但有一件事情突出了：特朗普的演講不是為了讀或用於聲音叮咬，這可能是為什麼特朗普如此沮喪，他在媒體上脫穎而出。 相反，他表面上的不一致源自於書面語言和口語之間的巨大差異。特朗普的說話風格源於口頭文化。他通過慷慨激昂，有針對性的對話召集人 - 即使它不總是遵循一個明確的弧。 為什麼特朗普的演講對某些人來說是不可理解的 - 而且對他人來說是完美的只有少數特朗普的大演講是腳本。在他的許多集會上，他說出袖口。我們得到了很多斷裂，未完成的句子，從思想到思想的迅速移動 - 特朗普稱之為“美麗的流動句子”。 卡爾文學院的歷史學家克里斯汀·科貝斯·杜梅斯說：“他的演講充滿了非窮人，”他對特朗普和克林頓的演講風格進行了比較研究。這是一個完全不同的風格，幾乎任何其他政客，你通常聽到。 對一些人來說，這種風格是完全不連貫的。但顯然不是每個人都這樣認為。許多其他人遠離特朗普的集會，理解並相信他說的話。 這種差異可以在閱讀特朗普的話來觀察，而不是實時地聽他們，賓夕法尼亞大學語言學家馬克·利博曼解釋說： In other words, Trump’s digressions and rambles — or, as he says, when “the back of the sentence reverts to the front” — are much easier to follow in person thanks to subtle cues. His style of speaking is conversational, and may even stem from his New York City upbringing. As George Lakoff, a linguist at UC Berkeley, told me, "[The] thing about being a New Yorker is it is polite if you finish their sentences for them. It’s a natural part of conversation." This may be why Trump’s sentences often seem, in transcript form, to trail off with no ending. "He knows his audience can finish his sentences for him," Lakoff says. Watching Trump, it’s easy to see how this plays out. He makes vague implications with a raised eyebrow or a shrug, allowing his audience to reach their own conclusions. And that conversational style can be effective. It’s more intimate than a scripted speech. People walk away from Trump feeling as though he were casually talking to them, allowing them to finish his thoughts. Yet to many linguists, Trump stands out for how often he deploys these conversational tics. "Trump's frequency of divergence is unusual," Liberman says. In other words, he goes off topic way more often than the average person in conversation. Geoffrey Pullum, a linguist at the University of Edinburgh, argues that there’s more going on than just a conversational, I’ll-let-you-fill-in-the-gaps style. Trump’s unorganized sentences and short snippets might suggest something about how his mind works. "His speech suggests a man with scattered thoughts, a short span of attention, and a lack of intellectual discipline and analytical skills," Pullum says. More sophisticated thinkers and speakers (including many past presidents), Pullum argues, are able to use "hypotaxis — that is, embedding of clauses within clauses." Trump can’t seem to do that. Pullum explains further: "When you say something like, 'While Congress shows no interest in doing X, I feel that the American people believe it is essential,' the clause ‘it is essential’ is inside the clause ‘the American people believe it is essential’ which is inside the clause ‘I feel that the American people believe it is essential,’ and so on. You get no such organized thoughts from Trump. It's bursts of noun phrases, self-interruptions, sudden departures from the theme, flashes of memory, odd side remarks. … It's the disordered language of a person with a concentration problem." 愛丁堡大學的語言學家傑弗里·普拉姆（Geoffrey Pullum）認為，不僅僅是一個對話，還有更多的事情，我會讓你填補空白的風格。特朗普的無組織的句子和短片可能會提示他的心如何工作。 Pullum說：“他的演講表明一個人有着分散的想法，短暫的注意力，缺乏知識紀律和分析能力。 Pullum認為，更複雜的思想家和演講者（包括許多過去的總統）都能夠使用“降維 - 即在條款中嵌入子句”。特朗普似乎不能做到這一點。 Pullum進一步解釋道：“當你說話時，'國會對X不感興趣，我覺得美國人認為這是必要的，'條款'是必要的'在條款”美國人民相信是必要的“，這是在”我覺得美國人民認為它是必不可少的“這個條款裡面。你從特朗普沒有這樣有組織的想法，它是名詞短語，自我中斷，突然離開主題，閃光的記憶，奇怪的一面說...這是一個有濃度問題的人的無序的語言。 Trump’s speeches can be appealing because he uses a lot of salesmen’s tricks Lakoff has an explanation for why Trump’s style of speaking is so appealing to many. Many of Trump’s most famous catchphrases are actually versions of time-tested speech mechanisms that salespeople use. They’re powerful because they help shape our unconscious. Take, for example, Trump’s frequent use of "Many people are saying…" or "Believe me" — often right after saying something that is baseless or untrue. This tends to sound more trustworthy to listeners than just outright stating the baseless claim, since Trump implies that he has direct experience with what he’s talking about. At a base level, Lakoff argues, people are more inclined to believe something that seems to have been shared. And when Trump kept calling Clinton "crooked," or referring to terrorists as "radical Muslims," he strengthened the association through repetition. He also calls his supporters "folks," to show he is one of them (though many politicians employ this trick). Trump doesn’t repeat phrases and adjectives because he is stalling for time, Liberman says; for the most part, he’s providing emphasis and strengthening the association. These are normal techniques, particularly in conversational speech. "Is he reading cognitive science? No. He has 50 years of experience as a salesman who doesn’t care who he is selling to," Lakoff says. On this account, Trump used similar methods in his QVC-style pitch of steaks and vodka as he does when he talks about his plan to stop ISIS. "He has been doing this for a very long time as a salesman — that’s what he is best at," Lakoff says. People understand Trump on an emotional levelTrump’s style proved to be successful — he beat out a highly competitive field of lifelong Republicans and a seasoned politician in Hillary Clinton. He's confident enough to address large crowds conversationally and ad-lib on stage. That said, his rise can’t be attributed purely to his speaking style. It certainly has a lot to do with what he is actually saying. "If the content were different, I think it would come across as rambling and flabby and ineffective," Liberman says. In other words, when Trump’s audience finishes his sentences for him, the blanks are filled with sentiments that resonate: fears of joblessness, worries about the United States losing its status as a major world power, concerns about foreign terrorist organizations. Trump validates their insecurities and justifies their anger. He connects on an emotional level, Du Mez says. "For listeners who identify with Trump, there is little they need to do but claim what they’re entitled to," she says. "No need for sacrifice, for compromise, for complexity. He taps into fear and insecurity, but then enables his audience to express that fear through anger. And anger gives the illusion of empowerment." That doesn’t mean it will translate to effective leadership, however. As much as the American people look for authenticity and spontaneity in a president, which Trump seems to have mastered, they are also known to value discipline. "Leadership is hard; it needs discipline, concentration, and an ability to ignore what's irrelevant or needless or personal or silly," Pullum says. "There is no sign of it from Trump. This man talks honestly enough that you can see what he's like: He's an undisciplined narcissist who craves power but doesn't have the intellectual capacity to exercise it wisely." Have We Ever Had a President Like Donald Trump? Yes, we have—but you have to go back to the nineteenth century. 從前我們有過像唐納德·川普這樣的總統嗎？ 有過，那得從十九世紀說起 BY JOSHUA KENDALL March 25, 2016 He is the presidential candidate with no filter, a man compelled to reveal all the thoughts that pop into his head—no matter how violent or crude—including his sexual fantasies about his own daughter. While many have accused Donald Trump of having an abnormally large ego, the opposite is true: His ego happens to be so small that it is barely able to control any of the rumblings of his own id. Whenever Trump feels slighted, he finds it necessary to start a holy war—with Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly, the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims, or even Pope Francis himself. Simply put, he does not bond with the rest of humankind. He may know everyone who is anyone, but he has few real friends. As MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough recently told The New York Times, “I have known this guy for a decade and have never once had lunch with him alone?” Trump trusts hardly anyone besides his third wife, his children, and his lackeys. He’s a suspicious loner who has convinced himself that he has little need for advisers. As he said earlier this month, before finally naming a handful of unfamiliar, press-averse foreign policy advisers, “I’m speaking with myself.” Have Americans ever placed anyone with the curious characterological make-up of the Donald in the White House before? To find comparable presidents, we have to go back to the nineteenth century: John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson and John Tyler. While these four nineteenth-century presidents were all more qualified than Trump to set foot in the White House—each had previously served in a high-elective office—they did share his reckless temperament. This history lesson should make Americans wary of Trump, as three of the four were doomed to unsuccessful one-term presidencies. 美國人有沒有把任何人與唐納德在好奇的性格組成的白宮？ 為了找到可比的總統，我們必須回到十九世紀：約翰·亞當斯，約翰·昆西亞當斯，安德魯·傑克遜和約翰·泰勒。 雖然這四個十九世紀的總統比特朗普更有資格進入白宮 - 每個人以前曾在一個高選擇性的辦公室工作 - 他們分享了他的魯莽的氣質。 這個歷史課應該使美國人警惕特朗普，因為四個人中有三個註定失敗的一個任期的主席。 Though John Adams was an intellectual powerhouse, his fiery disposition caused him problems throughout his political career. As biographer John Ferling has noted, “Adams’s great failing seemed to be his volcanic temper, which could explode with such suddenness and so little provocation that some of his colleagues feared that passion occasionally eclipsed reason.” At the Continental Congress, fellow delegates liked to pick Adams’s brain, but they saw him as too unstable to be a leader. Thus, the admission of Adams’s character in the musical 1776 that he was too “obnoxious and disliked” to draft the Declaration of Independence hews closely to reality. As president, Adams exhibited a Trump-like contempt for his cabinet, most of whom disagreed strongly with his policies. And like Trump, the only advisor Adams ever took seriously was a member of his own family: his wife, Abigail. In early 1800, Secretary of War James McHenry resigned in the wake of a vicious tirade by the president. In writing of the incident to a family member, McHenry described Adams as “totally insane.” Adams also had little tolerance for dissenters in the media. On the ninth anniversary of the storming of the Bastille, he signed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which punished journalists who made what were deemed “false, scandalous and malicious” statements against government officials with both hefty fines and prison sentences. While Adams tried to pass off this draconian measure as the handiwork of his fellow Federalist Alexander Hamilton, the former treasury secretary considered it an act of tyranny; Hamilton also argued that an “ungovernable temper” made Adams unfit to govern. American voters apparently agreed: Adams lost the election of 1800 to Thomas Jefferson by 23 points. Adams’s eldest son, John Quincy, had an even harder time getting along with his fellow man. As our sixth president wrote in his diary, “my political adversaries [call me] a gloomy misanthropist; and my personal enemies, an unsocial savage.” Biographer Paul Nagel, describes him as “notorious for his harshness, tactlessness and even rudeness.” Like Trump, who was once a Democrat, Adams had no use for party loyalty. His only allegiance was to himself. As a young Federalist senator from Massachusetts, he repeatedly sided with the Democratic-Republicans; the Federalist party honchos were greatly relieved when he resigned his seat in 1808. This undiplomatic man turned out to be a good diplomat, but his success had more to do with his towering intellect than his people skills. As the chief negotiator of the Treaty of Ghent, which ended the War of 1812, he managed to get the Brits to agree to accept the status quo ante bellum (though he was unable to maintain cordial relations with fellow U.S. delegates such as Albert Gallatin, the treasury secretary under Jefferson). And as James Monroe’s two-term secretary of state, he authored the Monroe Doctrine. But his presidency was a disaster. As Gallatin observed, the temperamental Adams lacked “that most essential quality—a sound and correct judgment.” On the domestic front, he launched a host of ambitious proposals—including a national university and a vast network of roads and canals—but he refused to curry favor to build support for them. Pennsylvanian Congressman Samuel Ingram noted in the last year of Adams’s administration, “[The president] has always been hostile to the government and particularly to its great bulwark—the right of suffrage.” In his bid for re-election in 1828, Adams was trounced by Andrew Jackson, who earned more than twice as many electoral votes. The ten-year-old John Tyler bound and gagged his schoolmaster, whom he left for dead. Just as a second-grade Donald Trump punched his music teacher, the ten-year-old John Tyler bound and gagged his schoolmaster, whom he left for dead. And like Trump, our tenth president was not only combative, but lusty; he, too, liked to fling around sexually explicit language. In his first speech on the floor of the House, the 26-year-old Virginia congressman compared popularity to “a coquette—the more you woo her, the more she is apt to elude your embrace.” In 1844, a couple of years after the death of his first wife, Tyler, then in his final year in the White House, married a raven-haired beauty with an hourglass figure, Julia Gardiner, who was 30 years his junior. For the rest of his life, Tyler would brag about his sexual prowess, noting, for example, after the birth of their fifth child, that at least his name would not “become extinct.” Within a few months of assuming the presidency after the sudden death of William Henry Harrison in April 1841, the headstrong former vice president who demanded absolute allegiance from his political allies alienated just about everyone in Washington. That September, after he twice vetoed banking legislation that he had promised to sign, five of his six cabinet members tendered their resignations. Suddenly, the former Whig was, as the influential Senator Henry Clay put it, “a president without a party.” Hardly anyone came to Tyler’s defense. That fall, future president Millard Fillmore, then a Whig Congressman from upstate New York, noted, “I have heard of but two Tyler men in this city [Buffalo]…and both of these are applicants for jobs.” In 1844, Tyler had to create his own party to mount a re-election bid, but when he found few takers, he was forced to drop out of the race. Andrew Jackson, who served for two terms in between John Quincy Adams and Tyler, was the one fiery president who ranks high in polls taken by historians. Like Trump and Tyler, the young Jackson liked to punch people out, and rage attacks would remain a constant throughout his life. As one biographer put it, “He could hate with a Biblical fury and would resort to petty and vindictive acts to nurture his hatred and keep it bright and strong and ferocious.” Of his brief career as a senator from Tennessee in the late 1790s, Thomas Jefferson observed, “He could never speak on account of the rashness of his feelings.” But over time, Jackson gained more self-control and most historians insist that what enabled Jackson to thrive as the country’s leader was his ability to harness his anger to good effect. Jackson’s strong-armed tactics led to his major accomplishments as president. When southerners tried to get around the “Tariff of Abominations” by invoking their right to nullify federal laws, Jackson put his foot down, declaring, “Disunion by armed force is treason,” and threatened punitive measures. He also pushed through legislation that gave him the power to use the military to collect import duties. “Again and again at crucial moments of his public life,” concluded biographer HW Brands, “Jackson carried the day because opponents were terrified of his temper.” Jackson was constantly threatening to let his wrath loose on his opponents—and because of his record of getting carried away in duels and brawls, everyone was forced to listen to him carefully. Trump has no such equivalent in more recent American history. Even our most labile twentieth-century presidents had enough sense to keep their rage attacks private. According to Evan Thomas’s Ike’s Bluff, when President Dwight Eisenhower (aka “the Terrible-Tempered Mr. Bang”) told aides that his mother had taught him how to control his emotions, they would respond sotto voce, “And she didn’t do a very good job.” But Ike was self-aware enough to hire his son, John, as his Assistant Staff Secretary in his second term. In John’s presence, Ike would give himself permission to lose it, figuring that he would thus be able to keep himself in check the rest of the time—a strategy that was largely successful. In 1965,in discussing the situation in Cyprus, Lyndon Johnson did tell the Greek ambassador to the US to “f…your constitution.” But for the most part, LBJ tended to confine his potty-mouthed rages to his private discussions with White House insiders such as those he held from his perch on the potty. Likewise, Richard Nixon could not stop going off on paranoid rants against “disloyal” Jews and other political enemies, but most Americans did not find out about this dark side until the release of his Oval Office tapes. Trump hasn’t even secured the Republican nomination, and already he makes both LBJ and Nixon seem prudish. The 60 most commonly used words by Donald Trump are: 唐納德·川普最常使用的60個英語單詞： Going2271 Times Know1608 Times People1504 Times Want911 Times Think753 Times Great728 Times Right608 Times Country556 Times Lot453 Times Money438 Times Look435 Times Good407 Times Mean395 Times Way391 Times Make375 Times Really367 Times Love339 Times Time331 Times Doing331 Times Trump321 Times Tell315 Times Win314 Times Big304 Times Thing280 Times Things273 Times Believe271 Times World257 Times Okay256 Times Come255 Times Deal249 Times Everybody246 Times Guy246 Times China243 Times Years226 Times Million225 Times Thank220 Times President211 Times Wall211 Times Happen199 Times Talk199 Times Number190 Times Actually186 Times Talking182 Times America181 Times Mexico177 Times Little167 Times Saying166 Times Trade164 Times Hillary160 Times States159 Times Better155 Times Incredible147 Times Remember147 Times Person147 Times Problem143 Times Amazing142 Times Probably140 Times Billion140 Times Tremendous136 Times Somebody135 Times Linguistic Analysis: Donald Trump Talks Like a 4th Grader 語言學角度分析：說話像個9歲孩子、四年級小學生的唐納德·川普 What Happens When You Ask Donald Trump Real Questions? 當你嚴肅地詢問唐納德·川普同志一個正經問題 ...... 川普說話的藝術 ( 中文字幕 ) Geoff James Nugent (born 14 February 1977), known professionally as Jim Jefferies (and previously Jim Jeffries), is an Australian stand-up comedian, actor, and writer. Jim Jefferies -- 為何川普會是個可怕的總統 ( 中文字幕 ) “我呢，也有一點點好像川普，比如說，“Fuck, let's do it.”” 扣扣熊調侃川普：你攤上大事了 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OzQG7-7EYA Allan Lichtman: President Trump will be impeached 唐納德·川普一定會被彈劾 像這位爺一樣，做女人真好 |
|
 |
 |
| 實用資訊 | |
|
|
| 一周點擊熱帖 | 更多>> |
| 一周回復熱帖 |
| 歷史上的今天：回復熱帖 |
| 2016: | 朝鮮問題解決起來很簡單,對中共黨員來 | |
| 2016: | 哈哈哈。附加題。別說我沒給機會你們。 | |
| 2015: | 今天下午快下班的時候去院裡看科研統計 | |
| 2015: | ZT: 漢朝初年歷史 | |
| 2014: | 食品安全歐洲比美國好，美國比中國好， | |
| 2014: | 同意老情一把。我也認為濫用轉基因會加 | |
| 2013: | 聽許多朋友說如果請中國同胞 | |
| 2013: | 蘇武牧羊 | |
| 2012: | 香港也是中國的一部分，香港人也是中國 | |
| 2012: | 孔慶東評中國漁民殺韓國海警：外交部是 | |
