promotion image of download ymail app
charlene asked in 社會與文化語言 · 1 decade ago


1.Why is it that the qualities that seemingly were a great asset to Fiorina and HP─energy, enthusiasm, charisma, vision, tenacity, aggressiveness─ became liabilities?Does this case contradict the view that personality is important? Explain.


2.Some have argued that Fiorina failed because her personality was“too big”and that she became more focused on herself than on the nuts-and-bolts of business.Can a person’s personality be too strong?How so?


3.Some have argued that her firing is an example of the double standard that being aggressive and forceful works for men but backfires for women. Do you think gender had anything to do with Fiorina’s firing?


4.Fiorina had to complete a 2-hour, 900-question personality test as part of the process to select her as CEO. Does this suggest that personality testing has little value?



這篇文章共有三段.這是問題的部份..第一段.第二段因字數限制.所以有另外post 出來..請大家也幫個忙..

或直接mail 給我 我把整份文寄給你們

1 Answer

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    1. 這句的意思應該是說,原本看起來是資產的那些特質「為何成了累贅(liabilities,這裡不翻成「責任」)」。主要句子是"Why is it that the qualities became liabilities",中間的"that seemingly..."只是用來描述這些qualities。另外「積極」兩字後不需再加「性」。

    2. 此句無太大問題。"nuts and bolts"指的是一件事最根本最小的環節,可說是「基本功」,你可就此想法稍稍修飾這個字的翻法。

    3. 此句中間的"works"是動詞而非名詞,在這裡是「有效」的意思。所以說是「男人being aggressive and forceful就可以,而女人這樣子反而會造成反效果」。

    4. 這邊我建議把Fiorina的名字放前面,而不要一開始說「HP選"他"…」,這樣像是英式中文。

    Source(s): 我自己
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.