Question

帮忙翻译一篇英文！谢谢！

通过在线翻译之后的译文看了后气的头痛，哪位高手能帮忙翻译一下这篇文章，真的很急。

Review of Standard Forms or Terms Under the Vienna Convention (Excerpts)

IV. Language Is Not Dispositive
The situations most obviously calling for review by drafters occur when the language is silent, relying on the provisions of the applicable law to supplement it. In what areas is the Convention less satisfactory than, for example, the Code as a source of supplementary rules? Three situations come to mind.
One situation is risk of loss. While the Convention lays down general rules for dealing with risk of loss, it contains nothing comparable to the Code's provisions regarding the effect on risk of such common trade terms as C.I.F., F.O.B., and F.A.S. The drafters of the Convention, unlike those of the Code, thought such detail inappropriate for legislation intended to withstand changes in commercial practices. Article 67(1) of the Convention states the basic rule on risk where the contract involves carriage of the goods. If the seller is bound to hand the goods over at a particular place, risk does not pass until the goods are handed over at that place; if the seller is not so bound, then risk passes when the goods are handed over to the first carrier. This wording might suggest that under a "C.I.F. Buyer's City" contract, risk would not pass until the goods are handed over at Buyer's City, contrary to the Code rule and the universal understanding that in C.I.F. contracts transit risks fall on the buyer.The fact that the price paid by the buyer includes the cost of insurance should suffice, however, to show the intention of the parties to put the transit risk on the buyer, a rationale used to reach that result at common law and that seems equally appropriate under article six. The Convention's lack of specific C.I.F. rules comparable to those of the Code nevertheless makes it imperative for contracting parties to provide such rules themselves, whether by incorporation of the International Chamber of Commerce's INCOTERMS or otherwise.

Answer 1

审查的标准形式或条件下的维也纳公约（摘编）

四。语言是不处分
情况最明显的要求审查，由起草时出现的语言是沉默的，依靠的规定，适用的法律，以补充它。在哪些方面是该公约不如人意的比，例如，代码作为一个来源的补充规则？三种情况下想到。
一种情况是，亏损的风险。虽然该公约规定的一般规则处理损失的风险，它包含了什么可比该守则的规定，关于效果的风险，例如常见的贸易条件，作为到岸价格，离岸价格，和Fas起草该公约的，不像那些该守则的，思想等详细不适当的立法原意承受的变化的商业惯例。第67 （ 1 ）该公约的国家的基本规则的风险如果合同涉及到货物的运输。如果卖方是必然，一方面货物超过在某一特定地点，风险不通过，直至货物交给在那个地方;如果卖方并非如此约束，然后通过风险当货物移交给第一承运人。这一措辞可能意味着下一个“到岸价格买方的城市”的合同，风险不会通过，直至货物交给在买方的城市，相反，该守则的规则和普遍的理解是，在到岸价格合同运输的风险，属于对buyer.the的事实，所付出的代价，买方包括保险费用应已足够，不过，以示当事方的意图，把过境的风险，买方，理用来达到这一结果在共同的法律和认为这似乎是同样适当的根据第6 。该公约的，缺乏具体的c.i.f.规则相若，该守则的，但它必须为缔约各方提供这种规则本身，是否纳入国际商会的商业的术语或以其他方式。

Answer 2

我是一只狐狸