Certainly not by the side a person supported

钰剑乘风UID: 3279007

如题，这句话怎么翻译呢？
原文如下：
The kind of conflict most emphasized by these historians is class conflict. Yet with the Revolutionary War dominating these years, how does one distinguish class conflict within that larger conflict? Certainly not by the side a person supported. Although many of these historians have accepted the earlier assumption that Loyalists represented an upper class, new evidence indicates that Loyalists, like rebels, were drawn from all socioeconomic classes. (It is nonetheless probably true that a larger percentage of the well-to-do joined the Loyalists than joined the rebels.) Looking at the rebel side, we find little evidence for the contention that lower-class rebels were in conflict with upper-class rebels. Indeed, the war effort against Britain tended to suppress class conflicts. Where it did not, the disputing rebels of one or another class usually became Loyalists. Loyalism thus operated as a safety valve to remove socioeconomic discontent that existed among the rebels. Disputes occurred, of course, among those who remained on the rebel side, but the extraordinary social mobility of eighteenth-century American society (with the obvious exception of slaves) usually prevented such disputes from hardening along class lines.

钰剑乘风UID: 3279007

有人知道么？

钰剑乘风UID: 3279007

顶起来

苏梳眠UID: 2717864

要结合how does one distinguish class conflict within that larger conflict?来理解~
a person应该是支持these historians 的观点，但是后面被反问否定了。
这句话理解起来就是明确说these historians 的观点已经不被支持了。

麻倉枼UID: 3376337

The kind of conflict most emphasized by these historians is class conflict. Yet with the Revolutionary War dominating these years, how does one distinguish class conflict within that larger conflict? Certainly not by the side a person supported.

这句话的解释大概就是说,
你不能够看到你支持那方里面的矛盾

钰剑乘风UID: 3279007

麻倉枼 发表于 2012-10-23 22:35
The kind of conflict most emphasized by these historians is class conflict. Yet with the Revolutiona ...

能再说的明确点么？我还是不太明白，那句话是回答那个反问的么？

钰剑乘风UID: 3279007

苏梳眠 发表于 2012-10-23 22:06
要结合how does one distinguish class conflict within that larger conflict?来理解~
a person应该是支持 ...

能再说的明确点么？我还是不太明白，那句话是回答那个反问的么？

麻倉枼UID: 3376337

钰剑乘风 发表于 2012-10-24 23:29
能再说的明确点么？我还是不太明白，那句话是回答那个反问的么？

整句话的解释就是说 (我翻译的不是很好请见谅),

大多数历史研究人员分析的矛盾种类是阶级矛盾..可是在Revolutionary War统治的这几年间, 人们是怎样在那庞大的矛盾 (可能是指R.W)中区别出阶级矛盾呢?那当然不是从一个人支持那边里面区别出来..

我个人见解,欢迎拍砖打醒..
例如 R.W里面有两面派, L 和 R,
里面有许多阶级矛盾,
你支持R派,你是历史研究人员,
你分析了阶级矛盾,
可是你不会从R派里面区别出来,而是从其他地方分析出来..

钰剑乘风UID: 3279007

麻倉枼 发表于 2012-10-24 23:54
整句话的解释就是说 (我翻译的不是很好请见谅),

大多数历史研究人员分析的矛盾种类是阶级矛盾..可是在 ...

好像有点明白了，谢谢~~