Question

帮我修改几个英文句子吧

这几个句子都有错，你可以帮我改下 也可以重新写
写得好的话可以追加分数。

91年的民权法，就是以立法的形式纠正这一倾向。最利害的一招，是该法在美国历史上第一次规定，如果雇员由于其种族，性别，年龄，宗教等等原因受到歧视的话，可以向雇主提出精神伤害的惩罚性赔款
The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was made to curb the tendency.What's more important,the law set an precedence in American history.It provides that employees can get spiritual compensation from employers,if they were discriminated by their employer for their gender,age,religion etc,and had winned the lawsuit.

比如说，雇员告雇主性别歧视，那么，法庭当然需要证据。证据是有两方面的，一是雇员拿出受到歧视的证据，二是雇主拿出没有歧视雇员的证据。如果，法律规定证据的负担是在雇员一方，那么，雇员如果拿不出受到歧视的充足证据，就判雇主无罪。但是，如果法律规定证据的负担是在雇主一方，那么，雇员不必提供充分证据，而是雇主必须拿出充分证据证明自己没有歧视雇员，只要雇主拿不出这样的证据，那么，法庭就可以认定你是有歧视行为的
If the law provides employees should shoulder the responsibility of providing evidence,the employee have to provide sufficient evidences to show the discrimination he or she had suffered.if he or she cannot do that,the employer will be acquitted of a crime.On the contrary,if the burden belongs to the employers, then the employee will have no need to provide sufficient evidence while the employer has to do so to show that he or she has not done that.If he or she could not provide the court with evidences,the judge will decided that he or she is guilty.

雇主不仅被要求不准歧视，必须提供给他们力所能及的工作，还被要求提供必要的条件和设备。
.What's more,besides being asked a ban on discrimination and undertaking the obligation to provide proper job for the disadvantaged person,employers was also required to offer indispensable condition and equipments to them,such as hearing aids,reading aids etc

Answer 1

91年的民权法，就是以立法的形式纠正这一倾向。最利害的一招，是该法在美国历史上第一次规定，如果雇员由于其种族，性别，年龄，宗教等等原因受到歧视的话，可以向雇主提出精神伤害的惩罚性赔款
The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was laid down in the form of legislation to rectify the tendency.What mattered most was that it is the Act that first stipulated employees could ask their emploer for punitive damanges on mental injury caused by discrimination in aspects of race, sex, age and religion and so on.
比如说，雇员告雇主性别歧视，那么，法庭当然需要证据。证据是有两方面的，一是雇员拿出受到歧视的证据，二是雇主拿出没有歧视雇员的证据。如果，法律规定证据的负担是在雇员一方，那么，雇员如果拿不出受到歧视的充足证据，就判雇主无罪。但是，如果法律规定证据的负担是在雇主一方，那么，雇员不必提供充分证据，而是雇主必须拿出充分证据证明自己没有歧视雇员，只要雇主拿不出这样的证据，那么，法庭就可以认定你是有歧视行为的
for instance, when an employee sued his or her employer for the sex discrimination, the court needed relevant evidence, which fell into two parts, one was that the employee provided proof for identifying the occurence of the discrimination, the other was that the employer provided proof for identifying no occurrence of discrimination. therefore, if the Act required the employee to bear the burden of providing proof,the employee failed to provide, the emploer was acquitted. However, if the Act required the employer to bear the burden of providing proof, there was no need for the employee to provide proof and meanwhile the empolyer must provide adequate proof to demonstrate that no discrimination had been committed, otherwise, the court would draw up a verdict that the employer committed discrimination.
雇主不仅被要求不准歧视，必须提供给他们力所能及的工作，还被要求提供必要的条件和设备。
not only was the employer required not to discriminate, but also to provide positions for employees that they were capable of and some essential conditions and facilities.

自己重新翻译的，参考了维基百科和美国法规网站的相关介绍，希望对你有所帮助。

Answer 2

哇。这么专业的

我翻译不好。

就来逛下的。

Answer 3

91年的民权法，就是以立法的形式纠正这一倾向。最利害的一招，是该法在美国历史上第一次规定，如果雇员由于其种族，性别，年龄，宗教等等原因受到歧视的话，可以向雇主提出精神伤害的惩罚性赔款
91 of the civil rights law, is in the form of legislation to correct this tendency. One of the most interest, is the law in the United States provided for the first time in history, if the employees because of their race, gender, age, cause discrimination of religion, and so on, can be submitted to their psychological harm of punitive damages
比如说，雇员告雇主性别歧视，那么，法庭当然需要证据。证据是有两方面的，一是雇员拿出受到歧视的证据，二是雇主拿出没有歧视雇员的证据。如果，法律规定证据的负担是在雇员一方，那么，雇员如果拿不出受到歧视的充足证据，就判雇主无罪。但是，如果法律规定证据的负担是在雇主一方，那么，雇员不必提供充分证据，而是雇主必须拿出充分证据证明自己没有歧视雇员，只要雇主拿不出这样的证据，那么，法庭就可以认定你是有歧视行为的
For example, employees to sue employers gender discrimination, then, the Court requires evidence, of course. Evidence is both, employees come up with evidence of discrimination, and second, employers come up with no evidence of discrimination against employees. If the law, the burden of proof is on the employee side, then, if without sufficient evidence of discrimination of employees, sentenced employers to be innocent. However, if the law provides that the burden of proof is on the employer side, then the employees do not have to provide sufficient evidence, but employers must come up with sufficient evidence to prove that he did not discriminate against employees, as long as the employer without such evidence, then there is discrimination in court can assume you
雇主不仅被要求不准歧视，必须提供给他们力所能及的工作，还被要求提供必要的条件和设备。
Employers were asked not only prohibited discrimination, must be available to them means work, also were asked to provide the necessary conditions and equipment.