昨日阅读时间1小时，累计阅读时间205小时

昨日阅读2小时，累计阅读265小时

昨天阅读3小时，累计阅读1382小时。

昨日阅读1小时，累计阅读253小时

昨日阅读1小时，累计阅读96小时5

昨日阅读1小时，累积阅读181小时

昨日2小时，累计678小时

昨天阅读1小时，总计阅读505小时

昨日阅读1小时，累积阅读163小时

昨日阅读2小时,累计阅读330小时

昨天阅读0.5小时，累计阅读120.5小时

昨日阅读1小时，累计阅读859小时

昨天阅读2小时，总共阅读350小时

昨日阅读0.5小时，累计阅读272小时

20180805昨天阅读1小时，累计阅读40小时。

昨天阅读2小时，累计阅读475小时

如果你愿意，你可以忙得像一只蜜蜂，也可以简单的像一只蜜蜂！

2018.8.5
昨日阅读3.5小时  累计阅读503小时。

2018-08-05

昨日阅读1小时，累计阅读356小时

1. 今天阅读到的有价值的全文内容链接:
Continue Reading “The Elements of Style” by William Strunk Jr.

2. 今天阅读到的有价值的内容段落摘录:
                                

Personalize. A pretentious word, often carrying bad advice. Do not personalize your prose; simply make it good and keep it clean. “a highly personalized affair” → “a highly personal affair”  “Personalize your stationery” → “Design a letterhead”
Personally. Often unnecessary. “Personally, I thought it was a good book.” → “I thought it was a good book.”
Possess. Often used because to the writer it sounds more impressive than have or own. Such usage is not incorrect but is to be guarded against.
Presently. Has two meanings: “in a short while” and “currently”. Because of this ambiguity it is best restricted to the first meaning: “She’ll be here presently” (“soon”, or “in a short time”).
Prestigious. Often an adjective of last resort. It’s in the dictionary, but that doesn’t mean you have to use it.
Refer. See allude.
Regretful. Sometimes carelessly used for regrettable.
Relate. Not to be used intransitively to suggest rapport. “I relate well to Janet.” → “Janet and I see things the same way.” or “Janet and I have a lot in common.”
Respective. Respectively. These words may usually be omitted with advantage.
Secondly, thirdly, etc. Unless you are prepared to begin with firstly and defend it (which will be difficult), do not prettify numbers with -ly. Modern usage prefers second, third, and so on.
Shall (for the first person). Will (for the second and third person).
So. Avoid, in writing, the use of so as an intensifier: : “so good”; “so warm”; “so delightful”.
Sort of. See kind of.
Split infinitive. There is precedent from the fourteenth century down for interposing an adverb between to and the infinitive it governs, but the construction should be avoided unless the writer wishes to place unusual stress on the adverb. “to diligently inquire” → “to inquire diligently”
State. Not to be used as a mere substitute for say, remark. Restrict it to the sense of “express fully or clearly”: “Here refused to state his objections”.
Student body. Nine times out of ten a needless and awkward expression, meaning no mare than the simple word students. “a member of the student body” → “a student”   “popular with the student body” → “liked by the students”
Than. Any sentence with than (to express comparison) should be examined to make sure no essential words are missing.
“I’m probably closer to my mother than my father. (Ambiguous)” → “I’m probably closer to my mother than to my father.” or “I’m probably closer to my mother than my father is”   
“It looked more like a cormorant than a heron.” → “It looked more like a cormorant than like a heron.”
Thanking you in advance. This sounds as if the writer meant, “It will not be worth my while to write to you again”. In making your request, write “Will you please”, or “I shall be obliged”. Then, later, if you feel moved to do so, or if the circumstances call for it, write a letter of acknowledgement.
That. Which. That is the defining, or restrictive, pronoun, which the nondefining, or nonrestrictive.  The use of which for that is common in written and spoken language. Occasionally which seems preferable to that, as in the sentence from the Bible. But it would be a convenience to all if these two pronouns were used with precision. Careful writers, watchful for small conveniences, go which-hunting, remove the defining whiches, and by so doing improve their work.
The foreseeable future. A cliché, and a fuzzy one. How much of the future is foreseeable?
The truth is….The fact is….A bad beginning for a sentence.

3. 今天阅读的自我思考点评感想
As one of the best book available on writing good English, the misused words summary is useful.  Note that the book's purism, atavism, and personal eccentricity is not completely underpinned by the modern English grammar. For young writers, I recommend them to read the book with a critical thinking to match their personalized needs.

<div align=\"left\"  >阅读1小时，总计579小时，第544日。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >阅读《论法的精神》至78%<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >西班牙宗教裁判所有一大弊病：两个被控犯有同一罪行的人，拒不认罪的那一个被判死刑，认罪的那一个则免于一死。这种做法源于僧侣的一种观念，他们认为，拒不认罪就是拒不忏悔，所以应该严加惩处，认罪则表明有忏悔之心，因而可以获救。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >查士丁尼为了敛财，指控一些人崇敬多位神明，指控另一些人为异端，玩弄男童，糟蹋修女，煽动叛乱，参与绿党，犯下了大逆罪等等。他设置一种叫做宗教裁判官的职务，专门负责查找违背人类本性的罪行和具有非正统宗教情感的人。宗教裁判官将没收来的财产供皇帝享用，宗教裁判官既不需要告发者，也不需要证人，这就是当今宗教裁判所的形象。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >必须保存自己的武装力量，不能像希腊城市那样不向雅典人送交船只而支付金钱；应该像拉丁人那样，在战争中始终追随罗马人，并最终迫使他们把自己纳入他们的共和国。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >共和政体最宜于向外殖民。这类国家人口众多，减少一些不易为人察觉。贫穷的公民非常危险，尤其因为他们在民主政体中占有话语权，所以，向外殖民往往可以因贫穷的公民外迁而让国家感到轻松。这些殖民地组成独立国家后，都支持宗主国，宗主国通常并不扩大自己的势力范围和统治新的国家，因而也不会更换政体。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >为防止不良法律的恶果而必须制定更坏的法律，大致情形就是这样。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >专制政体下没有任何贵族概念，所以收养没有任何意义。在共和政体下，收养是一件好事。没有子嗣的人可以通过收养而拥有一个继承人，由此人继承分给每个公民的土地。就此而言，这就不是为了个人而收养，而是为了共和国而收养。在君主政体下，收养也可以成为一件好事，因为家族因此而不至于灭绝，姓氏因此而得以延续，国家的各个等级因此而得以保持。不过，无论在何种政体下，收养都应该受到严格的限制。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >刑事行为不同于民事行为。公民们尽一切可能让有关契约的协议为他人所知，却尽一切可能遮盖罪行和就罪行达成的协议。所以，想要得到犯罪的书面证据十分困难，而且应该想到，罪犯会千方百计隐匿书面证据。因此，还得求助于证人。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >有人赞扬中国的国家粮仓，然而，当我们了解底细之后就明白了，原来那只是一种漂亮的理论，实际却糟得无以复加，饥馑就在那些粮仓周围肆虐。在君主政体下，人民的生计应该由人民自己解决，绝对不应让他们觉得自己的性命朝不保夕，这是一条法则。这并不妨碍执政者把使农民和工匠的生计与地主的生计紧密相连作为自己的主要目标。<br>

</div><br>

<div align=\"left\"  >贵族不就是长久享有的尊贵吗？在一个穷兵黩武的国家里，尊贵始终与荣耀相连，所以贵族容易代代相传；在一个已经建立税务机构的商业国家里，尊贵与不停地变动的财富相联，所以贵族不容易代代相传。在此类国家里，纵然把永久性采地依附在大家族身上也是徒劳，采地很快就转到别人手中，从而失去其尊贵。<br>

</div><br>

閱讀一小時 累計239小時

昨日阅读1小时，累计阅读271小时。

昨日阅读时间1小时，累计阅读时间284小时

昨日阅读6小时，累计阅读256小时。

今天读了3小时，累计231小时