反藍色是原始版（只找到介紹版而非全文版），反紅色是委員會通過版（有找到全文版） SEC.104. ... Directs the Secretary of State to negotiate the renaming of the "Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office" to the "Taiwan Representative Office" and adjust all references accordingly. SEC.104. (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS .—It is the sense of Congress that the United States, consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law 96–8; 22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.) and the Six Assurances should— (1) ... (2) seek to enter into negotiations with the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office torename the "Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office" in the United States as the "Taiwan Representative Office". 疑問一：通說通過版比原始版的強度稍微退讓。是指用seek取代direct嗎？seek比較讓行 政機關可以裁量？是否重點單字不是negotiate（那是指美國立場--國會強制或不強制國務 院的--決定後跟台灣方面的協商）？ 疑問二：主詞用Secratary of State或用United States其實沒關係，因為這部分的美國執 行者幾乎就是指國務卿？ SEC.213. Designation of Taiwan as a Major Non-NATO Ally. Amends the ForeignAssistance Act to designate Taiwan as a major non-NATO ally and provide Taiwan preferences for foreign assistance and arms exports and requires the President to notifyCongress before the termination of the designation. SEC.212. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, Taiwan shall be treated as though ~~~~~~ it were designated a major non-NATO ally, as defined in section 644(q) of the ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2403(q) et seq.), for the purposes of the transfer or possible transfer of defense articles or defense services under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), section 2350a of title 10, United States Code, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 215119 et seq.), or any other provision of law. 疑問三：原始版的關鍵字個數與文法（現在式）比較簡單。但是通過版為何另用一個treat ？若仍用designate在意思上仍跟用treat一樣嗎？ 我的意思是，所謂退讓，到底是出現在用了treat，或是後方的though上面？ 因為片語as though意思是好像（本文先不特別指涉as，只論though這個字），感覺就不是 那麼（跟其他非北約盟友）完全等同....？也就是若是像下方那麼寫的意思是否一樣： ..shall be designated as though it were designated a ....以及若是這麼寫呢： ..shall be treated as it were designated a ....以及若是這麼寫呢： ..shall be designated as it were designated a .... 疑問四：as though（反土黃色處）需一起連帶理解而被當作通過版何以被外界認為被稍微 弱化（因為我以為as though片語的意思是「好像是」而非「就是」）？ 或是though it were designated是個副詞子句（上方畫波浪底線處）可先省略不管， 因此主要句子結構是Taiwan shall be treated as amajor non-NATO ally,..？ 疑問五：就算要退讓且通過版既有用字不可如本文請益的像上方試擬的變動，但是文法上 ，若是直接用現在式來書寫法條，會不改變議員們修改的意思嗎？譬如寫成： ..Taiwan is/should be treated as though it were a non-NATO ally,....可以嗎？ 疑問六：從通過版的條文用字看，「以前」美國直接把台灣當成非北約的盟友（were a non-NATO ally），但現在卻稍微倒退為shall be treated as though a non-NATO ally， 這反而在總步數上是倒退了一步？（台北代表處的改名是國會原先算是進兩步，被國務院 溝通後退一步改為讓國務院裁量，總步數仍可算進一步）這是段落意思在閱讀理解角度 的疑惑。 以上諸點疑惑，感謝指點說明～ --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 101.137.78.220 (臺灣) ※ 文章網址: https://webptt.com/m.aspx?n=bbs/Eng-Class/M.1663450100.A.A4C.html ※ 編輯: PTTHappy (101.137.78.220 臺灣), 09/18/2022 05:36:01