is not to be considered as the effusion of real passion; for passion runs not after remote allusions and obscure opinions.
不是真挚情感的流露;,真情不是通过遥远的幻境和隐晦的观点来表达的。
Johnson tells us that Lycidas is not to be considered as the effusion of real passion, for passion runs not after remote allusions and obscure opinions.
约翰逊说《利西达斯》不是,真挚情感的流露,因为真情不是通过遥远的幻境和隐晦的观点来表达的。
Well, the odd thing is it's exactly the same with Saussure, who can be considered the father or patriarch of a certain kind of literary theory as I have just indicated.
索绪尔也是这样,他可以说是,某种文学理论之父了。
They simply weren't considered to be of the same status as the 24 books.
但这些作品和那24卷经书无法具有同等地位。
Does he hold it out as a real possibility ? or must it be considered a failure in some way or that if the dialogue does end in failure ? what can we learn from that?
他是否坚持真有可能性,或那必需被多少视为是一项失败,如果对话以失败结束,我们又能从中学到什么?
应用推荐