Microsoft and Apple are currently embroiled in a fairly ridiculous court case over whether Apple should be allowed to trademark the phrase "App Store"。
In the latest salvo, Microsoft has continued its opposition to Apple with testimony from linguist, Dr Ronald R Butters, PhD, arguing that app store just means "store at which apps are offered for sale". Butters has been employed to to refute testimony for Apple by Dr Robert A. Leonard, PhD, which argued App Store was a proper noun that had become associated with Apple. Or something like that. It's all a bit complicated, semantic even。
微软引用语言学家Ronald R Butters的意见，称"App Store"这个词组意为“出售应用软件的商店”，是通用词汇(就跟“五金店”一样，没人会用这种词来注册商标)，不能用来当商标的名字。苹果那边则聘请 Robert A. Leonard教授辩护，后者认为App Store是专有名词，而且一说就使人联想到苹果，当然可以拿来做商标名。从语义学上看的确蛮复杂。
As an aside, it's funny how both linguists have a middle initial in their name - do you think that's something common to linguists or only to linguists that provide expert testimony to computer companies engaged in trademark rows?
Quite why a company that trademarked the word Windows should have an issue with a company that has trademarked the word Apple seeking to do the same for App Store is a bit odd. Was Microsoft planning to follow in Apple's footsteps by launching its own "store at which apps are offered for sale" and calling it the App Store?
到底为什么一家用windows这个词注册了商标的公司会和一家用apple这个词注册了商标的公司，会就app store这个词能不能用来注册商标吵起来?难倒微软也想弄一个“出售应用软件的商店”的品牌，并取名叫app store?
A bit of common sense might have been better employed from both sides rather than paying lawyers and linguists. Sadly, there isn't an app for that。
Passage Twenty-five (Exploration of the Titanic) After resting on the ocean floor, split asunder and rusting, for nearly three-quarters of a century, a great ship seemed to
Passage Twenty-seven (Analysis and Interpretation of the News) The newspaper must provide for the reader the facts, unalloyed, unslanted, objectively selected facts. But in