婚姻

最為幸福的一年。研究者認為，這是因為此時雙方已經(jīng)適應(yīng)了夫妻關(guān)系并且開始計劃組建家庭?；楹蟮谌暌彩欠驄D開始共同理財?shù)囊荒辍/cn] [en]After the third year, however, couples begin facing more serious challenges. The couples polled reported that the fifth year of marriage was a difficult one due to tiredness, increased [w=workload]workloads[/w], and for some couples, children.[/en][cn]然而第三年之后，夫妻就要開始面對更加難以應(yīng)付的挑戰(zhàn)。參與調(diào)查的夫婦表示，由于厭倦情緒、工作負擔增加、子女撫養(yǎng)等種種問題，婚后第五年是一道難坎。[/cn] [en]Researchers also found that most couples who successfully made it through the first seven years of marriage were more likely to have a long, happy and lasting union.[/en][cn]研究者也發(fā)現(xiàn)，能

人中婚姻時間最短的一個。去年八月，她嫁給了籃球運動員克里斯·亨弗里斯，登上了該雜志的封面。不過僅僅過了72天，她就提出了離婚訴訟。[/cn] [en]The advantages of having a wedding featured in Hello! can include a generous cheque and a [w]formidable[/w] security option to prevent the public - and rival publications - catching a sneak glimpse of the bride.[/en][cn]讓《Hello！》雜志專題報道婚禮有很多好處。雜志不僅會提供一張大額支票，還會提供強大的安保措施，來防止公眾以及競爭對手的出版物偷看新娘。[/cn] [en]Rosie Nixon, editor of the magazine, said: "The 'curse of Hello!' is a ridiculous concept and totally unfounded." But Kay Goddard, a former editor, said: “Perhaps they should put a clause in the contract that celebrity couples who divorce within a certain time should repay some of their fee.”[/en][cn]雜志的編輯羅西·尼克松說：“《hello！》的詛咒這一說法非?；闹?，完全沒有依據(jù)?！?但是雜志的前任編輯凱·戈達德說：“也許他們應(yīng)該在合婚禮照片若是出現(xiàn)在雜志封面上，他們離婚同上附加條款：若名人夫婦在一段時間內(nèi)離婚，需要償還雜志所提供的部分費用?！盵/cn]

騎馬嗎? 4、He is not going to race his horse next week. 他不

英文

常因錯誤的緣由走到一起----因為圖方便、有

婚姻是一個古老的話題,何為幸福的婚姻?每個人都在不斷地尋找著答案.很多人都認為愛情來自于恰到好處的化學(xué)反應(yīng),那我們怎么樣來成就一樁幸福的婚姻,Parker-Pope's 在她的新書中為此開婚姻是一個古老的話題,何為幸福的婚姻?每個人都在不斷地尋找著答案.很多人都認為愛情來自于恰到好處的化學(xué)反應(yīng),那我們怎么出了良方,這處方到底是哪些藥物配制而成的呢?一起來聽聽看吧! 音頻在線播放： >>點擊下載音頻? ROBERT SIEGEL, host: Science and [w]matrimony[/w] meet in a new book by Tara Parker-Pope. It's called "For Better: The Science of a Good Marriage." The author offers practical marital advice based on her own observations as well as interviews with biologists, psychologists and sociologists. Reviewer Susan Jane Gilman says the intentions are good, but "For Better" isn't nearly as good as it could have been. Ms. SUSAN JANE GILMAN (Author): Are you married? If so, how did you meet? According to Tara Parker-Pope, the way you recount this story reveals a lot about the state of your union. If you recall your first date affectionately, chances are your marriage is strong. But if your tale is tinged with bitterness, you're probably in trouble. This isn't Parker-Pope's opinion. It's based on a scientific study. Her new book, "For Better: The Science of a Good Marriage," is a [w]compendium[/w] of such research. Good marriages, she argues, are good for us, and science can help us achieve them. Drawing upon fields from neuroscience to sociology, her book offers prescriptions for marital health - practical strategies to help couples improve their relationship. Parker-Pope paints a statistical [w]portrait[/w] of marriage today. Some of her findings are surprising: Divorce rates in America are actually dropping; married people have more sex than anyone; and the more financially independent women are, the more likely they are to stay married. When it comes to problems, debt and children are obvious culprits, but so is rolling your eyes at your spouse. So is using the [w]pronoun[/w] "you" instead of "we." "For Better" is half myth-buster, half self-help. It's a cleanly written, [w]serviceable[/w] book that can be useful for couples, or even singles contemplating the [w]plunge[/w]. Yet for me, it left something to be desired. To be fair, I approached "For Better" with the same lofty expectations many of us bring to marriage itself. I love the idea that there's a science to marriage, and so I yearned to be swept away by this book, intellectually turned on. As with a great romance, I wanted fireworks. Instead, I got the publishing equivalent of a nice robe and slippers. Well-crafted, comforting, helpful - yes. "For Better" is a good gift for the lovelorn. But while there's illuminating research in it - especially comparing gay and straight marriages - there's also plenty of stuff, frankly, I've heard before. Its relationship quizzes could have come straight from a magazine. "For Better," in short, could be better. Its full potential isn't realized. Marriage has undergone radical changes in America. In the 19th century, women legally became non-people the moment they tied the knot. Once married, they were prohibited from keeping their own money and property, signing contracts or filing lawsuits. Their husbands had the right to abuse them. In fact, [w]spousal[/w] rape wasn't outlawed in all 50 states until 1993. Yet Parker-Pope only notes that marriage used to be an economic and social contract not based on love. She focuses on the science of marriage but ignores its evolution, and her book is flimsier for it. In the end, I wanted "For Better" to go beyond [w]factoid[/w]s and marital aids to become a deeper, more [w]provocative[/w] read. Maybe I'm asking too much or seeking a different book entirely. But "For Better" urges couples to insist on high standards and for better or worse, I've followed its advice. (Soundbite of music) SIEGEL: The book is "For Better: The Science of a Good Marriage," by Tara Parker-Pope. Reviewer Susan Jane Gilman wrote the memoir "Undress Me in the Temple of Heaven."? 直達滬江部落史上最好的聽寫系統(tǒng) 聲明：音視頻均來自互聯(lián)網(wǎng)鏈接，僅供學(xué)習(xí)使用。本網(wǎng)站自身不存儲、控制、修改被鏈接的內(nèi)容。"滬江英語"高度重視知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護。當如發(fā)現(xiàn)本網(wǎng)站發(fā)布的信息包含有侵犯其著作權(quán)的鏈接內(nèi)容時，請聯(lián)系我們，我們將依法采取措施移除相關(guān)內(nèi)容或屏蔽相關(guān)鏈接。 滬江網(wǎng)校夏季課程上線，足不出戶，和滬江網(wǎng)校一起天天向上，共同進步吧！ 2010年12月CET【四級暑期特訓(xùn)班】2010年12月CET【六級暑期特訓(xùn)班】

過了“兩情相悅”中的愛情。10年后，愛情馬拉松贏得圓滿。 —Steve Mirsky ---------------------------------------------- 注1：注釋：紐約曼哈頓的“92街Y”是一個聞名全婚姻美的社區(qū)文化中心﹐它有127年的歷史﹐每年所提供的活動項目上千種﹐參加者來自世界各地﹐人數(shù)達30多萬人。 注2：TRIBECA翠貝卡源自美國紐約著名的TRIBECA區(qū)--時尚文化靈魂聚集地的創(chuàng)作靈感，由香港諸多具有聲望的多名設(shè)計師注入全新的設(shè)計理念，使TRIBECA成為時尚女性的新寵，說白了，就是個做衣服的。 點擊進入?yún)⑴c科學(xué)60秒>>>? 聲明：音視頻均來自互聯(lián)網(wǎng)鏈接，僅供學(xué)習(xí)使用。本網(wǎng)站自身不存儲、控制、修改被鏈接的內(nèi)容。"滬江英語"高度重視知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護。當如發(fā)現(xiàn)本網(wǎng)站發(fā)布的信息包含有侵犯其著作權(quán)的鏈接內(nèi)容時，請聯(lián)系我們，我們將依法采取措施移除相關(guān)內(nèi)容或屏蔽相關(guān)鏈接。

理他。 I really like him and I want to get to know him better, but he keeps blowing me off. 我真的很喜歡他，也想進一步了解他， 可是他老晾著我。 2. brush sb. off /br??/ 這個短語不僅僅表示不理對方，而且態(tài)度還極為簡單粗暴，想趕緊把人家打發(fā)走。 I asked him for help, but he just brushed me off. 我請他幫忙，結(jié)果他不理我。 3. cross sb. out 如果單是說“cross out”，這個短語就是“刪除”的意思，可是用在人的情緒上，就是“不搭理某人”。 He always makes jokes on me, so I am crossing him out. 他總是拿我開玩笑，我就不搭理他了。 4. give sb. the cold shoulder 給別人“一個冰冷的肩膀”，意思是雖然你倆認識，但是你的態(tài)度很冷漠，對人家不理不睬。 Most of the other professors gave him the cold shoulder. 其他大部分的教授都怎么不愛搭理他。 5. ignore sb. ignore是動詞“不理”的意思，ignore sb. 表示忽略某人、假裝看不到的意思。 If he tries to start an argument,just ignore him. 如果他想挑事兒，甭理他。 6. look right through sb. 這個短語不是說你看穿了誰，而是要表達你當某人是空氣，不予理會。 He tried to engage the woman next to him in conversation,but she looked right through him. 他總想跟旁邊的女人搭訕，但人家卻視他如無物。 conversation /?k?nv??se??n/ n. 交談，會話 冷戰(zhàn)用英語怎么說?文中應(yīng)該告訴大家了吧!你已經(jīng)學(xué)會了嗎?如果您對英語學(xué)習(xí)感興趣，想要深入學(xué)習(xí)，可以了解滬江網(wǎng)校精品課程，量身定制高效實用的個性化學(xué)習(xí)方案，專屬督導(dǎo)全程伴學(xué)，掃一掃領(lǐng)200暢學(xué)卡。