有哪位亲能帮我翻译一下这段文章！！！谢谢！！！

Question

要要通顺一点的，不要像翻译器一样读不通的，非常感谢！！！
Applied linguistics is essentially a problem-driven discipline, rather than a theory-driven one, and the community of applied linguists has characterised itself in the historiography of the discipline by variety and catholicism of theoretical orientation. This is in contrast to linguistics, where association with particular schools of thought or theories tends to exert considerably greater centripetal force.

Applied linguistics can (and should) not only test the applicability and replicability of linguistic theory and description, but also question and challenge them where they are
found wanting. In other words, if the relationship between linguistics and its applications is to be a fruitful partnership and neither a top-down imposition by theorists on practitioners nor a bottom-up cynicism leveled by practitioners against theoreticians, then both sides of the linguistics/applied linguistics relationship ought to be accountable to and in regular dialogue with each other with regard to theories as well as practices.

Accountability can discomfit both communities, and abdication of accountability is sometimes the easier line to adopt. Here bi-directional accountability will be considered an important constraining influence on both the applicability of linguistics and the evaluation of applied linguistic solutions. Accountability will centre on a set of responsibilities falling on the shoulders of linguists and applied linguists in turn. These include: the responsibility of linguists to build theories of language that are testable, which connect with perceived realities and which are not contradicted or immediately refuted when they confront those realities; the responsibility of linguists to offer models, descriptions and explanations of language that satisfy not only intellectual rigor but intuition, rationality and common sense; the responsibility of applied linguists not to misrepresent theories, descriptions and models; the responsibility of applied linguists not to apply theories, descriptions and models to ill-suited purposes for which they were never intended; the responsibility of applied linguists not simply to ―apply linguistics‖ but to work towards ―relevant models‖ of language description; the responsibility of applied linguists to provide an interface between linguists and practitioners where appropriate, and to be able to talk on equal terms to both parties; the responsibility on both sides to adopt a critical position vis-a-vis the work of their peers, both within and across the two communities; the responsibility of both communities to exchange experience with front-end practitioners such as language teachers, psychologists or social workers, who may not have a training in linguistics nor the time or resources to ―to do applied linguistics‖ themselves, but who may be genuinely eager to communicate with both groups.

Answer 1

应用语言学是一个问题驱动的纪律，而不是理论驱动的一个，和应用语言学家社区本身的特点在品种和天主教学科史学理论取向。这是在对比语言学，与特定的思想流派或理论往往会产生相当大的向心力。
应用语言学可以（也应该）不仅测试的适用性和语言理论研究和描述的可重复性，但也质疑和挑战他们他们在哪儿
发现自己的不足。换句话说，如果语言学及其应用之间的关系是一个卓有成效的伙伴关系，既不是自上而下强加的从业者也不是自下而上的犬儒主义理论家夷为平地的从业者对理论家，然后双方的语言学、应用语言学的关系应该负责与有关理论的相互定期对话好的做法。
责任可以扰乱社会，并放弃责任有时是容易线采用。这里的双向责任可能被认为是一个重要的限制的影响上的适用性和应用语言学的语言解决方案，评价。问责制将在一系列的责任落在语言学家的肩膀反过来应用语言学中心。这些措施包括：语言学家的责任建立语言测试的理论，这与感知现实而不是立即反驳反驳或当他们面对这些现实；语言学家的责任提供模型，描述和语言，不仅满足知识严谨而直观的解释，理性和常识；应用语言学家的责任不歪曲理论，描述和模型；应用语言学家的责任不适用的理论，描述和模型不适合的目的，他们从来没有打算；应用语言学家责任不只是―应用语言学‖而努力―相关模型‖语言描述；应用语言学责任提供适当的语言学家和从业人员之间的接口，并能对双方平等的条件；双方采取的关键职位的职责与他们的同龄人的工作，在不同的两个社区；两个社区的责任与前端的从业者如语言教师交流经验，心理学家或社会工作者，他可能没有在语言学方面的训练也没有时间或资源来―做应用语言学‖本身，但谁可以真正渴望的与这两个群体沟通。