Question

翻译下谢谢在线等

New York’s WCBS puts it in a way that just can’t be better expressed: “It was an accident waiting to happen.”
15-year-old Alexa Longueira was wandering along the street in Staten Island, obliviously tapping text messages into her phone as she walked. Distracted by her phone, she failed to notice the open manhole (下水道窖井) in her path, and plunged into it, taking an unprepared bath of raw sewage(污水) along with receiving moderate injuries. Longueira called the dive “ really gross, shocking and scary.”
It’s not all Longueira’s fault. The manhole shouldn’t have been left uncovered and unattended, and no warning signs or hazard cones had been set up near the work site. A worker with New York’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), who was preparing to flush the sewage, helped her out, and the department later issued a formal apology for the incident.
Nonetheless, observers are harshly divided over who is to blame here. The DEP is certainly at fault for failing to secure the manhole, but to what extent should the girl be held accountable for failure to be aware of her surroundings? If she had stepped into traffic and been hit by a car, would her reaction (that is: anger and a potential lawsuit) be any different?
Detachment from one’s environment due to electronic devices is a growing problem--- and a dangerous one. The government is even trying to get involved , with multiple laws on the books across the country outlawing cell phone use and text messaging while operating a motor vehicle in the wake of serious accidents involving distracted drivers. New York Senator Kruger even tried to criminalize the use of handheld devices (including phones, music players, and game players) by pedestrians while they are crossing streets in major New York cities, due to concerns over the number of auto vs. pedestrian accidents.
Following a substantial outcry, that legislation appears never to have been formally introduced. But did Kruger have a point?
What interested me, at least, is the end of the story above that Longueira lost a shoe in the sewage. But since other things are not reported as lost, I’m guessing she appears to have managed to keep her grip on her phone during the accident.

Answer 1

对这件事，纽约世界台球联盟的评论似乎最贴切：这是一场迟早会发生的事故。
当时15岁的Alexa Longueira正在斯塔顿岛的一条街上散步，忘我的边走边用她的手机发着短信。手机分散了她的注意力，所以她并没有注意到路上的打开的下水道窖井，一脚就陷了进去，洗了个毫无预备的污水澡，受了些伤。Longueira说这次栽倒“实在恶心，让人感到震惊，恐惧。”
这也不仅仅是Longueira的错。那个窖井既没有遮盖，也没人看管，在待检修的窖井附近也没有任何的警告标志或危险锥。Longueira是被一个纽约环保局的工作人员救上来的，那时他正准备冲洗污水。此后该部门对该事件表示了正式道歉。
尽管如此，关注的人们仍在就谁是最大的责任者分成了几派。毫无疑问，环保局没有做好保护窖井的工作是应该受到谴责的，但那女孩因为没注意她周围的情况的责任又有多大呢？假使那天她一脚走上了车流中，然后被车撞了，那她的反应（现在是愤怒和可能诉讼）是不是会有所不同？
因电子设备而使人对所处环境注意力分散的问题正越来越严重，并成为危害人安全性的问题，连政府都已尝试干涉了。全国各地许多的法律条文都将在行驶车辆时用手机打电话、打短信使司机注意力分散而造成的交通事故列在法律保护范围之外。鉴于行人机车事故发生率高，纽约参议员Kruger甚至想要将那些在纽约市区内过马路时使用手持设备的行人治罪，这些设备主要包括手机，音乐播放器和游戏机。
这个提议遭到了实质性的抗议，那项法律貌似也再未正式的提出。但Kruger是不是也有他的正确之处呢？
至少，这件事吸引我的一点是，故事的最后，除了在下水道里Longueira丢了一只鞋之外，并未见其它东西报道丢失。我想她应该在事情发生的时候肯定成功的抓紧了她的手机？

有些地方是意译的，希望能帮到你。

Answer 2

纽约wcbs把它的方式，不能更好地表示：“那是等待发生的事故。”15岁的灼longueira正沿着大街徘徊在史泰登岛，会利用短信到她的电话她走着。分散了她的电话，她没有注意到打开的人孔（下水道窖井）在她的路径，并陷入了它，以准备沐浴的污水（污水）随着接受中度损伤。longueira称为“潜水”真恶心，令人震惊和可怕的。”不是所有的longueira故障。沙井不被发现和无人值守，并没有警告标志或危害锥已经成立不久，工作地点。一个工人与纽约环境保护处（部），谁是准备冲洗排污，帮助她，和部随后发布正式道歉的事件。然而，观察员是严厉的分歧是谁的责任在这里。环保局的当然是故障未能确保井盖，但在何种程度上的少女应该追究未能意识到她周围的？如果她走到交通和被车撞了，将她的反应（即：愤怒和一个潜在的诉讼）有什么不同？入定与某人的环境，由于电子设备是一个日益严重的问题，而且是危险的。政府甚至试图介入，与多个法律上的书籍在全国禁止使用手机和短信同时经营的车辆在发生严重意外涉及司机分心。纽约参议员克鲁格甚至试图将使用手持设备（包括手机，音乐播放器，以及游戏玩家）的行人过街时在纽约主要城市，由于担心一些汽车与行人事故。经过大量的抗议，立法似乎从来没有被正式介绍。但克鲁格有一点？我对什么感兴趣，至少，是故事的结束，longueira丢了一只鞋在污水。但由于其他事情没有报告为丢失，我猜她似乎已经设法让她抓住她的手机在事故。