科幻小說Luminous

A. 光之美少女幸福精靈各個人物變身時叫什麼

桃園 愛
稱號：Cure Peach
變身時會說：變身 Precure BEAT UP
粉色心靈 愛的印記 新鮮試用 Cure Peach

蒼乃 美希
稱號：Cure Berry
變身時會說：變身 Precure BEAT UP
藍色心靈 希望的印記 新鮮積累 Cure Berry

山吹 祈里
稱號：Cure Pine
變身時會說：變身 Precure BEAT UP
黃色心靈 祈禱的印記 新鮮收獲 Cure Pine

東 剎那
稱號：Cure Passion
變身時會說：變身 Precure BEAT UP
深紅心靈 幸福的證明 新鮮成熟 Cure Passion

B. 獲得雨果獎、星雲獎雙獎的18部作品是哪些要簡介

一、作品：

1966/1965 Dune byFrank Herbert 沙丘 / 弗蘭克-赫伯特
1970/1969 The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le Guin 黑暗的左手 / 勒古恩
1971/1970 Ringworld by Larry Niven 環形世界 / 拉里-尼文
1973/1972 The Gods Themselves by Isaac Asimov 神們自己 / 阿西莫夫
1974/1973 Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke 與拉瑪相會 / 亞瑟-克拉克
1975/1974 The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin 一無所有 / 勒古恩
1976/1975 The Forever War by Joe Haldeman 千年戰爭 / 喬-霍爾德曼
1978/1977 Gateway by Frederik Pohl 通向宇宙之門 / 弗雷德里克-波爾
1979/1978 Dreamsnake by Vonda McIntyre 蜿蜒夢境
1980/1979 The Fountains of Paradiseby Arthur C. Clarke 天堂的噴泉 / 亞瑟-克拉克
1984/1983 Startide Rising by David Brin 星潮洶涌 / 戴維-布林
1985/1984 Neuromancer by William Gibson 神經浪遊者 / 威廉-吉布森
1986/1985 Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card 安德的游戲/ 奧森-斯科特-卡德
1987/1986 Speaker for the Dead by Orson Scott Card 死者代言人 / 奧森-斯科特-卡德
1993/1992 Doomsday Book by Connie Willis 末日之書/ 康妮-威利斯
1998 Forever Peace by Joe Haldeman 永遠的和平 / 喬-霍爾德曼
2002 American Gods by Neil Gaiman 美國眾神/ 尼爾-蓋曼
2004 Paladin of Souls by Lois McMaster Bujold 靈魂騎士/ 路易絲-麥克馬斯特-比約德
2008/2007 The Yiddish Policemen's Union by Michael Chabon 消逝的六芒星
2010/2009 The Winp Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi 發條女孩/ 保羅-巴奇加盧皮
2011/2010 Blackout/All Clear by Connie Willis 燈火管制/空襲警報解除 / 康妮-威利斯
二、簡介（節選）：
1、《沙丘》，是弗蘭克·赫伯特的「沙丘系列」的第一部。「沙丘系列」的故事發生在極為遙遠的未來，那時人類已經進化到把電腦都廢棄了，跨星系的旅行可以通過心靈感應在瞬間完成，人類的足跡遍布整個宇宙。
2、《黑暗的左手》構建了了一個不存在男女，由中性人組成的世界。文本中出現的三種政體的實體，愛庫曼，卡亥德和歐格瑞恩，它們恰恰可以作為民主制，封建制和社會主義公有制的延伸進行解讀。
3、《環形世界》是備受推崇的拉里-尼文最偉大的傑作。活靈活現的人物、栩
栩如生的情節、高度發達的科技，所有的一切都令人嘆為觀止。
4、《神們自己》（THE GODS THEMSELVES），又譯《諸神自身》是2014年由江蘇鳳凰文藝出版社出版的圖書，作者是美國作家艾薩克·阿西莫夫。圖書講述太陽即將毀滅，可是無人傾聽。
5、《與拉瑪相會》（Rendezvous with Rama）是英國作家亞瑟．克拉克於1972年出版的科幻小說。故事敘述在22世紀時有一個五十公里長的圓柱形外星太空船闖入太陽系，人類派出探險隊前去調查的過程，這個外星物體就被命名為「拉瑪」。
6、安納瑞斯是烏拉斯星的衛星，由於一群社會主義運動者脫離烏拉斯星上的政治社會體系，獨自到安納瑞斯上建立純粹以社會主義為藍本的社會，因此安納瑞斯與烏拉斯斷絕聯系，直到安納瑞斯的一位新生代物理學家薛維克，在追求學術真理的熱情下，毅然與烏拉斯星的科學家聯系，並決定到烏拉斯星拜訪，才打開了安納瑞斯封閉的外殼。

C. 海明威的小說The killers的讀後感（英文的）

Works of Ernest Hemingway initiated minimalist movement in American fiction and had an enormous influence on the work of Raymond Carver and other minimalist authors. Comparing the style of Ernest Hemingway』s 「The Killers」 and Raymond Carver』s 「What We Talk About When We Talk About Love」, one can notice numerous similarities. The first one can be seen in the description of the setting. Ernest Hemingway writes:
Outside it was getting dark. The street-light came on outside the window. The two men at the counter read the menu. From the other end of the counter Nick Adams watched them. He had been talking to George when they came in. (The Killers)
Raymond Carver』s passage seem to be strikingly similar:
The four of us were sitting around the kitchen table drinking gin. Sunlight filled the kitchen from the big window behind the sink. There were Mel and me and his second wife, Teresa-Terri, we called her-and my wife, Laura. (What We Talk About When We Talk About Love)
Both authors use only few short sentences to introce and enumerate characters, and to describe the atmosphere. They both do it by avoiding pronouns and using the same nouns they have been using in previous sentences. The vocabulary is very simple and devoid of florid excess.
Clarity and precision are also present in the description of characters:
She was a bone-thin woman with a pretty face, dark eyes, and brown hair that hung down her back. She liked necklaces made of turquoise, and long pendant earrings. (What We Talk About When We Talk About Love)
He wore a derby hat and a black overcoat buttoned across the chest. His face was small and white and he had tight lips. He wore a silk muffler and gloves. (The Killers)
Describing characters, both authors employ luminous details which seem to be very carefully chosen. As if according to the saying that 「less is more」, Hemingway and Carver use only two or three sentences for character description. The rest is to be found in action and dialogues since characters are presented dramatically: readers learn about them through their dialogues. The interpretation of character』s tone and feeling is based on the context and other character』s response. This way of presenting characters makes the role of dialogue to be of paramount importance. Especially when the are almost none editorializing instances:
「It gets worse,」 Terri said. 「He shot himself in the mouth. But he bungled that too. Poor Ed,」 she said. Terri shook her head. 「Poor Ed nothing,」 Mel said.
Another thing that can be said about Hemingway and Carver』s style is that they frequently make use of lexical and syntactical repetition. In the example above there are repeatedly used same words and the same structure: 「Terri said」, 「Mel said」. This technique, as the stylistician M.A.K. Halliday observes, generates motivated prominence.
In both „The Killers」 and „What We Talk About When We Talk About Love」 story, which is what we learn about characters and their past, dominates over action, which is what physically happens. It is very different from popular fiction where there is almost only action. Hemingway and Carver do not comment on what happens in the story and let readers interpret the meaning through characters』 dialogues. They are very economic when describing action:
The two of them went out the door. George watched them, through the window, pass under the arc-light and cross the street. In their tight overcoats and derby hats they looked like a vaudeville team. George went back through the swinging-door into the kitchen and untied Nick and the cook. (The Killers)
He poured more gin into his glass. He added an ice cube and a sliver of lime. We waited and sipped our drinks. Laura and I touched knees again. I put a hand on her warm thigh and left it there. (What We Talk About When We Talk About Love)

This story takes place primarily within the confines of Henry's Lunch-Room. As two men enter the establishment, George, the counterman, asks them what they would like to eat. The two men are not sure what they would like and take a few minutes to look at the menu. The only other person at the counter is Nick Adams.

When one of the men orders roast pork tenderloin, George informs him that that item is only available for dinner which will not be served until 6 o'clock. According to the clock in the lunchroom, the time is 5:20. However, George tells the men that the clock is twenty minutes fast.

George then tells the man that he can serve sandwiches, steak or eggs. The man asks for chicken croquettes, but again he is told that that is a dinner item. Frustrated, the man asks for ham and eggs. This man's name is Al, and he is wearing a derby hat, buttoned up, black overcoat, a silk muffler and gloves. Al's companion, who is similarly dressed, asks for bacon and eggs.

As Al and his companion wait for their food, they speak to George and Nick in a condescending manner, referring to them as "bright boys" and making fun of the town in which they live. In the course of the conversation, we learn that the name of Al's companion is Max.

After George serves the men their food, he steps back and watches them eat, noting that neither man removes their gloves. Max, uncomfortable with being watched, lashes out at George. Returning to their food, Al asks Max if he knows the name of the young man at the other end of the counter. Max calls out to Nick and tells him to join George on the other side of the counter. Nicks asks why they want him to do this, but does not get a reply.

Next, Al asks if there is anyone in the kitchen. George replies that Sam, the Negro cook is there. When Max tells him to bring Sam into the lunchroom, George asks why. Sensing that George is suspicious of them, Al assures him they will not be hurt and asks again for Sam to join them. When Sam enters the lunchroom, Al gets off his stool and takes Nick and Sam back to the kitchen, leaving Max and George alone at the counter. When George again asks Max to explain what is going on, Max responds by asking George to tell him what he thinks is going on. George does not have an answer.

Meanwhile, Al asks the two men to move from where they are standing. Again, Max asks George to tell him what he thinks is going on. When George does not respond, Max tells him that he and Al are there to kill Ole Andreson, a man that normally comes to the diner at six o'clock for dinner.

In an attempt to get him to change the subject, Max asks George if he has seen any movies recently. Rather than answer Max's question, George asks what Ole has done to the two men that has caused them to want to kill him. Max replies that they have never met Ole; rather, they have been hired to assassinate him. Al thinks that Max is providing too much information and suggests to Max that perhaps he should keep quiet. He tells Max that he has Nick and Sam tied up in the kitchen.

Max instructs George to tell anyone that enters the lunchroom that the cook is off for the evening. Further, George is to cook whatever the person orders. As he agrees to do this, George asks what is going to happen to them. Max tells him that he really cannot predict his fate.

Shortly after this, a man enters the lunchroom for supper. When George tells him that Sam has gone out, the man decides to go to another establishment. Max compliments George on his handling of the situation and once again refers to him as a "bright boy."

By five minutes to seven, Ole still has not arrived. George tells Max that if Ole has not arrived by now, he will not be there that night. Al decides they should wait five more minutes. While they wait, another man comes in, and upon hearing that Sam is not there to cook, he abruptly leaves.

After five minutes have passed, Max suggests to Al that it is time to leave. Al wonders what they should do with George, Nick and Sam. Max tries to assure him that they do not need to harm them; Al is not totally convinced as he thinks Max as told them too much.

Even so, the two men leave the lunchroom. George goes back to the kitchen and unties Nick and Sam. While Nick is somewhat dazed, Sam is clearly shaken by the experience. George tells them why the men were there and suggests that Nick go find Ole Andreson to tell him the two men want to kill him. Sam tries to dissuade Nick from doing this, but Nick goes anyway.

Nick arrives at the boarding house where Ole lives to find him lying on his bed, fully dressed. (Ole had been a heavyweight prizefighter in his younger years.)

Nick reports the evening's events to Ole. When he does not get a response, he tells Ole that George suggested Ole might want to know about what happened. Ole says that there is nothing he can do about the two men who want to kill him. He thanks Nick for coming to tell him. He also refuses Nick's offer to alert the police.

Before Nick leaves, Ole says that he has not been able to bring himself to leave his room all day. Nick asks if he can do anything to alleviate Ole's troubles, but Ole tells him that he has taken the wrong path and nothing can change the past. Ole thanks Nick again for coming and Nick leaves.

On his way out of the boarding house, Nick runs into the landlady and they discuss Ole's reluctance to leave his room. Nick returns to the lunchroom and reports what has happened to George. Sam hears him enter, but once Nick starts to speak, he retreats to the kitchen saying that he does not want to hear what Nick has to say.

Nick tells George that he told Ole that the men were looking for him so that he could kill them. He also tells George that Ole does not intend to protect himself. The two men agree that Ole will wind up dead. The two men wonder what Ole did to get himself into so much trouble. Nick decides that he wants to leave town; knowing that Ole is sure to be killed the moment he leaves his room is too much for him to handle. George agrees that this is probably a wise thing for Nick to do.

Sentences are short and simple. They are often joined by coordinate conjunction 「and」, which is a characteristic of paratactic style. Neither Hamingway nor Carvver explain relation or connection between sentences. Lack of subordinate sentences gives effect of clarity and directness. By saying less, both authors leave their readers with the freedom to interpret the text and to imply their own meaning.
The other thing worth mentioning is the choice of vocabulary. Both authors use everyday language in characters』 dialogues, which makes them appear very realistic.

字數夠嗎