不論用正職非正職的二分法，或者使用precarious的概念作為分析的

不論用正職非正職的二分法，或者使用precarious的概念作為分析的工作，學者們嘗試努力做的事情是更精確地捕捉變化中的勞雇關係及新興的勞動型態及樣貌。然而，值得我們深思的是，同樣的非正職工作或precarious work，在不同社會當中所隱含的社會風險程度可能具有很大的差異。主要是勞動市場條件的變化從來不是不僅受工作本質決定，它更受到社會因素的強烈影響，包含經濟文化歷史的形塑，最明顯的就是社會福利的角色含程度(Anderson & Pontusson, 2007; Esping-Andersen, 1999)。

結果 (英文) 1:

Whether as job analysis, and scholars trying to do is to try things more accurately capture changes in the employee-employer relationship and emerging patterns of labor and non-appearance dichotomy principal chief, or use the concept of precarious. However, it is worth pondering is that the same non-full-time job or precarious work, in different societies implied by the degree of social risk can be a big difference. Mainly changes in labor market conditions has never been decided not only by the nature of the work, it is more strongly influenced by social factors, including economic and cultural history of shaping, the most obvious is the role of social welfare degree with (Anderson & Pontusson, 2007; Esping -Andersen, 1999).

結果 (英文) 2:

Whether using the non-proper dicora or the use of the concept of perre as an analytical work, what scholars are trying to do is to capture more precisely the changing labor relationships and the emerging labor patterns and appearances. However, it is worth pondering that the same non-regular job or work-work, in different societies, the degree of social risk implied may be very different. The main change in labour market conditions has never been determined not only by the nature of the job, but also by the strong influence of social factors, including the shape of economic and cultural history, the most obvious is the role of social welfare (Anderson and Pontusson, 2007; Esping-Andersen, 1999.

結果 (英文) 3:

No matter using the dichotomy of the principal and the non principal, or using the concept of precarious as the analysis work, what scholars try to do is to more accurately capture the changing labor employment relationship and emerging labor patterns and appearances. However, it is worth pondering that the degree of social risk implied by the same informal work or precarious work may vary greatly in different societies. The main reason is that the change of labor market conditions is not only determined by the nature of work, but also strongly influenced by social factors, including the shaping of economic and cultural history. The most obvious is the role of social welfare (Anderson & pontusson, 2007; esping Anderson, 1999).