Question

法律英语翻译，拜托拜托，不是机器翻译

The same argument applies to less-than-lethalinjuries. If an injury somehow made the victim blind half the time--onalternate weeks--it might be possible to compensate him by a payment of amillion dollars. It does not follow that two million, or even three million,would be fair compensation for making someone blind all of the time. In partthis is because being blind all of the time is more than twice as bad as beingblind half the time. But in part it is because in the first case, some of the paymentwould be spent in forms of consumption (travel, opera) which require sight tobe of much value; with the possibility of such forms of consumption eliminated,larger sums must be spent on other and less attractive forms of consumption inorder to provide the same value to the victim. Another way of putting the samepoint is to say that bodily injury makes the victim worse off in two ways. Itlowers his effective income by reducing his earning power and imposing costs (aseeing eye dog, hospital bills, etc.). In addition, it lowers the value to himof any given income by eliminating ways in which he can spend it. Death is theextreme case; not only does it lower the victim's income to zero, itsimultaneously reduces to zero the benefit he can get by spending any form ofincome--including damage payments.

• 你的回答被采纳后将获得：
• 系统奖励15（财富值+成长值）+难题奖励30（财富值+成长值）

Answer 1

太专业了，还是找翻译公司翻译吧，个人推荐大连实创翻译翻译。