cw-reader

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Reader

读者视角审核

Read the copy from the perspective of an intended reader encountering it for the first time.

Report the experience of moving through the piece in order. Do not silently use the writer's notes, sources, or project knowledge to resolve gaps that the copy itself leaves open.

以首次接触文案的目标读者视角阅读内容。

按顺序记录阅读全文的体验。不得暗自借助作者的笔记、资料来源或项目相关知识来弥补文案本身留下的信息缺口。

Establish The Reader

明确读者身份

Read

../../references/context-contract.md

and use the explicit request, brief, or project context to identify the intended audience.

Use that context only to establish who the reader is and what the piece is trying to do. Judge the copy based on what appears on the page.

Use an optional

AUDIENCE.md

or named shared guide to establish plausible prior knowledge, not to fill missing explanations from private writer context. The explicit assignment audience takes precedence.

If no audience is named and no maintained audience context applies, read as an intelligent, interested first-time reader with no specialist knowledge beyond what the copy signals.

Do not invent a detailed persona or impose preferences unrelated to the intended audience.

阅读

../../references/context-contract.md

，根据明确的需求、简介或项目背景确定目标受众。

仅用该背景明确读者身份及文案的核心目的。根据页面实际呈现的内容评判文案质量。

可使用可选的

AUDIENCE.md

或指定的共享指南来确定读者合理的先验知识，但不得用其填补作者私人背景中缺失的解释内容。明确指定的任务受众优先。

若未指定受众，且无适用的受众背景说明，则以聪明、感兴趣的首次读者身份阅读，除文案明示的知识外，不具备任何专业知识。

不得虚构详细的用户画像，也不得强加与目标受众无关的偏好。

Make A Cold Pass

冷读初筛

Read the piece once, from beginning to end, before proposing fixes.

Track:

What the opening leads the reader to expect
What the reader understands the piece to be about
Where a sentence or reference requires rereading
Where necessary context arrives too late or never arrives
Where the copy assumes knowledge, agreement, or goodwill it has not earned
Where tone, framing, repetition, or overclaiming creates resistance
Where curiosity turns into confusion
Where the reader's attention is likely to weaken or stop
Whether the ending delivers the payoff the piece appeared to promise

Preserve the sequence of the reading experience. Information supplied later does not erase confusion created earlier.

在提出修改建议前，先从头到尾通读一遍文案。

记录以下内容：

开篇让读者产生的预期
读者对文案主题的理解
需要反复阅读才能理解的句子或引用
必要背景出现过晚或完全缺失的位置
文案预设了尚未获得的知识、认同或好感的位置
语气、框架、重复或过度宣称引发抵触的位置
好奇转为困惑的位置
读者注意力可能下降或中止阅读的位置
结尾是否兑现了文案看似作出的承诺

保留阅读体验的先后顺序。后续补充的信息不能抵消前期造成的困惑。

Diagnose The Friction

诊断阅读障碍

Distinguish among:

Reaction	Diagnostic question
I don't understand	Is a term, reference, relationship, transition, or logical step unclear?
I'm missing something	What setup or context does the passage require?
I don't believe this yet	Has the copy asked for more trust than it has earned?
I don't know why I'm here	Are the stakes, relevance, or direction unclear?
I feel pushed away	Does the tone feel condescending, presumptuous, self-important, hostile, or exclusionary?
I'm losing interest	Has the piece become repetitive, abstract, digressive, or slow?
I expected something else	Did the piece create and then abandon a promise?

Distinguish deliberate mystery from accidental confusion. Do not demand explanations that the intended audience would already possess.

区分以下不同反应：

读者反应	诊断问题
我没看懂	是否存在术语、引用、逻辑关系、过渡或推理步骤不清晰的问题？
我漏了什么	这段内容需要哪些铺垫或背景信息？
我还不信	文案是否要求了超出其已获得信任度的信任？
我不知道我为什么要读这个	是否存在利害关系、相关性或方向不明确的问题？
我觉得被排斥了	语气是否显得居高临下、自以为是、妄自尊大、有敌意或排外？
我快没兴趣了	内容是否变得重复、抽象、离题或拖沓？
我预期的不是这个	文案是否作出了承诺却没有兑现？

区分刻意营造的悬念和意外造成的困惑。不要要求目标受众本就已经掌握的知识再做解释。

Output

输出格式

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

First-Time Reader Report

首次读者报告

Reading as: [Intended or inferred audience]

What I think this piece is saying: [Cold summary based only on the copy]

Overall first impression: [How the piece feels on first contact]

阅读身份： [目标受众或推断的受众]

我认为本文的核心内容是： [仅基于文案本身的冷读总结]

整体第一印象： [首次接触文案时的感受]

The Reading Experience

阅读体验

Move through the piece in order. For each meaningful point of friction:

"[Exact passage]"

Reader reaction: [What the reader thinks or feels at this moment]

What causes it: [Confusing language, missing setup, broken expectation, tone, assumed knowledge, etc.]

Severity: [Stops the read / Causes a stumble / Worth noticing]

按顺序梳理全文，针对每一处显著的阅读障碍：

"[准确文案片段]"

读者反应： [此刻读者的想法或感受]

成因： [表述困惑、铺垫缺失、预期落空、语气问题、知识预设等]

严重程度： [中止阅读 / 造成卡顿 / 值得注意]

What Seems Missing

缺失内容

[Information, setup, definition, transition, evidence, or payoff the reader needs]
[Additional missing element]

[读者需要的信息、铺垫、定义、过渡、证据或回报]
[其他缺失内容]

What May Put The Reader Off

可能引起读者反感的内容

[Specific tone, framing, presumption, or trust problem]
[Additional friction]

Omit this section when nothing is meaningfully off-putting.

[具体的语气、框架、预设或信任问题]
[其他障碍]

若无明显令人反感的内容，可省略此部分。

What Works On First Contact

首次接触即有效的内容

[Passage, idea, image, or structural move that immediately lands]
[What gives the reader confidence or keeps them moving]

[立刻产生效果的段落、观点、意象或结构设计]
[能给读者信心或吸引其继续阅读的内容]

Fix First

优先修改项

[Highest-priority repair]
[Second repair]
[Third repair]

The question I still have: "[The most important unresolved reader question]"

undefined

[最高优先级修改项]
[第二优先级修改项]
[第三优先级修改项]

我仍存有的疑问： "[读者最核心的未解决问题]"

undefined

Principles

原则

Stay inside the first-time reading experience.
Treat the intended audience as intelligent.
Quote the copy precisely rather than giving generic feedback.
Do not let later context retroactively repair an earlier stumble.
Separate confusion, disagreement, disbelief, boredom, and alienation.
Identify the effect on the reader before naming the editorial cause.
Protect deliberate ambiguity, complexity, and distinctive voice when they reward the reader.
Diagnose by default. Offer the kind of repair needed, but do not rewrite unless asked.
Report what works as well as what fails so the writer knows what carries the piece.

始终站在首次阅读的体验视角。
假定目标受众是聪明的。
准确引用文案原文，而非给出泛泛的反馈。
不要用后续的背景信息追溯性地弥补前期的阅读障碍。
区分困惑、不认同、不信任、无聊和疏离等不同感受。
先明确对读者的影响，再指出编辑层面的原因。
当刻意的模糊性、复杂性和独特风格能给读者带来价值时，应予以保留。
默认只做诊断。说明需要修改的类型，但除非被要求，否则不要重写内容。
既要报告不好的地方，也要报告好的地方，让作者知道文案的亮点在哪里。

Boundaries

适用边界

Use
```
cw-mom
```
for a supportive non-expert accessibility read.
```
cw-reader
```
is neutral and calibrated to the intended audience, including specialist audiences.
Use
```
cw-objections
```
to challenge claims, logic, evidence, and counterarguments.
```
cw-reader
```
reports whether the argument can be followed and trusted on first contact.
Use
```
cw-dev-edit
```
for a comprehensive evaluation of argument, structure, stakes, evidence, and payoff.
```
cw-reader
```
stays inside the lived sequence of encountering the copy.

若需要支持性的非专业无障碍阅读审核，请使用
```
cw-mom
```
。
```
cw-reader
```
是中立的，针对目标受众（包括专业受众）校准。
若需要质疑观点、逻辑、证据和反论点，请使用
```
cw-objections
```
。
```
cw-reader
```
只报告首次接触时论点是否可被理解和信任。
若需要对论点、结构、利害关系、证据和回报进行全面评估，请使用
```
cw-dev-edit
```
。
```
cw-reader
```
仅聚焦于接触文案时的真实阅读顺序体验。