考研英語英漢翻譯歷年真題匯編

　　1.1990年英譯漢試題及參考譯文

　　People have wondered for a long time how their personalities，and behaviors are formed.It is not easy to explain why oneperson is intelligent and another is not，or why one is cooperative and another is competitive.

　　Social scientists are，of course，extremely interested in these types of questions.（61）They want to explain why we possess certain characteristics and exhibit certain behaviors.There are no clear answers yet，but two distinct schools of thought on the matter have developed.As one might expect，the two approaches are very different from each other.The controversy is often conveniently referred to asnature vs.nurture.

　?。?2）Those who support thenatureside of the conflict believe that our personalities and behavior patterns are largely determined by biological factors.（63）That our environment has little，if anything，to do with our abilities，characteristics and behavior is central to this theory.Taken to an extreme，this theory maintains that our behavior is predetermined to such a great degree that we are almost completely governed by our instincts.

　　Those who support thenurturetheory，that is，they advocate education，are often called behaviorists.They claim that our environment is more important than our biologically based instincts in determining how we will act.A behaviorist，B.F.Skinner，sees humans as beings whose behavior is almost completely shaped by their surroundings.（64）The behaviorists maintain that，like machines，humans respond to environmental stimuli as the basis of their behavior.

　　Let us examine the different explanations about one human characteristic，intelligence，offered by the two theories.（65）Supporters of thenaturetheory insist that we are born with a certain capacity for learning that is biologically determined.Needless to say，they don’t believe that factors in the environment have much influence on what is basically a predetermined characteristic.On the other hand，behaviorists argue that our intelligence levels are the product of our experiences.（66）Behaviorists suggest that the child who is raised in an environment where there are many stimuli whichdevelop his or her capacity for appropriate responses will experience greater intellectual development.

　　The social and political implications of these two theories are profound.（67）In the United States，blacks often score below whites on standardized intelligence tests.This leads somenatureproponents to conclude that blacks are biologically inferior to whites.（68）Behaviorists，in contrast，say that differences in scores are due to the fact that blacks are often deprived of many of the educational and other environmental advantages that whites enjoy.

　　Most people think neither of these theories can yet fully explain human behavior.

　　1990年英譯漢試題參考譯文

　　長期以來人們完全不知道他們的性格特征和行為模式是怎樣形成的。人們很難解釋一個聰明而另一個人愚蠢的原因，或者也很難解釋一個人有協(xié)作精神，而另一個人有競爭意識的原因。

　　當然，社會科學(xué)家對這類問題極為關(guān)注。（61）他們想要說明，為什么我們具有某些性格特征并表現(xiàn)出某些行為。然而，這些問題尚無明確的答案。但是在這方面已經(jīng)形成了兩個截然不相同的學(xué)派。人們可以預(yù)料，這兩家的看法大不相同。為方便起見，這種爭論通常被稱為天性論與環(huán)境因素論之爭。

　　（62）在這場爭論中，贊成天性一方的那些人認為，我們的性格特征和行為模式大多是由生物因素所決定的。（63）這種理論的核心是，我們的環(huán)境同我們的才能、性格特征和行為即使有什么關(guān)系的話，也是微不足道的。這種理論甚至極端地堅持認為，我們的行為模式在很大程度上是先天決定的;因此，我們幾乎完全受我們的本能所支配。

　　贊成環(huán)境因素論的那些人，即提倡培養(yǎng)教育的人，通常被稱為行為主義者。他們聲稱，在決定我們的行為方式時，環(huán)境比以生理為基礎(chǔ)的本能更為重要。一位名叫B.F.史基納的行為主義者認為，人的行為模式完全是由周圍環(huán)境塑造的。（64）行為主義者堅信，人像機器一樣，對環(huán)境的刺激作出反應(yīng)，這是他們行為的基礎(chǔ)。

　　咱們來考察一下這兩種理論對人的一種性格特征―――智力―――的不同解釋。（65）支持天性論的人堅持說，我們生來就具有一定的學(xué)習才能，這是由生物因素決定的。勿庸說，他們認為，周圍環(huán)境的各種因素并不嚴重影響基本上是先天的性格特征。而行為主義者卻爭辯說，我們的智力水平是我們各種經(jīng)歷相結(jié)合的產(chǎn)物。（66）行為主義者的看法是，如果一個兒童在有許多刺激物的環(huán)境里成長，而這些刺激物能夠發(fā)展其作出適當反應(yīng)的能力，那么，這個兒童將會有更高的智力發(fā)展。

　　這兩種理論所包含的社會和政治內(nèi)涵是意味深長的。（67）在美國，黑人在標準化智力測試中的成績常常低于白人。這就使一些天性論的擁護者得出結(jié)論，黑人在生理上比白人略低一籌。（68）相反，行為主義者認為，成績的差異是由于黑人往往被剝奪了白人在教育及其它環(huán)境方面所享有的許多有利條件。

　　2.1991年英譯漢試題及參考譯文

　　The fact is that the energy crisis，which has suddenly been officially announced，has been with us for a long time now，and will be with us for an even longer time.Whether Arab oil flows freely or not，it is clear to everyone that world industry cannot be allowed to depend on so fragile a base.（71）The supply of oil can be shut off unexpectedly at any time，and in any case，the oil wells will all run dry in thirty years or so at the present rate of use.

　?。?2）New sources of energy must be found，and this will take time，but it is not likely to result in any situation that will ever restore that sense of cheap and plentiful energy we have had in the times past.For an indefinite period from here on，mankind is going to advance cautiously，and consider itself lucky that it can advance at all.

　　To make the situation worse，there is as yet no sign that any slowing of the world’s population is in sight.Although the birthrate has dropped in some nations，including the United States，the population of the world seems sure to pass six billion and perhaps even seven billion as the twentyfirst century opens.

　?。?3）The food supply will not increase nearly enough to match this，which means that we are heading into a crisis in the matter of producing and marketing food.

　　Taking all this into account，what might we reasonably estimate supermarkets to be like in the year2001?

To begin with，the world food supply is going to become steadily tighter over the next thirty years―even here in the United States.By2001，the population of the United States will be at least two hundred fifty million and possibly two hundred seventy million，and the nation will find it difficult to expand food production to fill the additional mouths.（74）This will be particularly true since energy pinch will make it difficult to continue agriculture in the highenergy American fashion that makes it possible to combine few farmers with high yields.

　　It seems almost certain that by2001the United States will no longer be a great foodexporting nation and that，if necessity forces exports，it will be at the price of belttightening at home.

　　In fact，as food items will end to decline in quality and decrease in variety，there is very likely to be incresing use of flavouring additives.（75）Until such time as mankind has the sense to lower its population to the point where the planet can provide a comfortable support for all，people will have to accept moreunnatural food.

　　1991年英譯漢試題參考譯文

　　事實是，雖然官方是突然宣布能源危機的存在，然而長期以來我們一直面臨著能源危機，而且這種情況今后將會持續(xù)更長的時間。不管阿拉伯的石油能否源源不斷地外流，人人都清楚，再也不能讓世界工業(yè)依賴于如此脆弱的能源基礎(chǔ)。（71）石油供應(yīng)可能隨時會被切斷;不管怎樣，以目前這種消費速度，只需30年左右，所有的油井都會枯竭。

　?。?2）必須找到新的能源，這需要時間;而過去我們感覺到的那種能源廉價而充足的情況將不大可能再出現(xiàn)了。在今后的漫長的時間內(nèi)，人類將謹慎前進，而它感到幸運的是它確實能夠前進。

　　使目前狀況糟糕的是，至今尚無跡象表明，世界人口的增長在近期內(nèi)會減慢。雖然包括美國在內(nèi)的一些國家的出生率已經(jīng)下降，但是在21世紀初世界人口似乎肯定會超過60億，或許甚至超過70億。

　?。?3）食品供應(yīng)的增加將遠遠趕不上人口的增長，這就意味著我們在糧食的生產(chǎn)和購銷方面已陷入危機。

　　考慮到所有這些因素，我們可以適當?shù)毓烙嬕幌?001年的超級市場將會是什么樣子呢?首先，今后的30年內(nèi)，世界的食品供應(yīng)日益緊張，甚至美國這里也不例外。到2001年美國人口將至少達到2億5千萬，也可能是2億7千萬。那時，美國將很難擴大食品生產(chǎn)來滿足人口增長的需要。（74）這種困境將是確定無疑的，因為能源的匱乏使農(nóng)業(yè)無法以高能消費這種美國耕作方式繼續(xù)下去了，而這種耕作方式可以投入少數(shù)農(nóng)民就獲得高產(chǎn)。

　　幾乎可以肯定，到2001年美國將再也不是一個食品輸出國;如果必須出口的話，那么其代價就是美國國內(nèi)人民將勒緊褲帶。

　　實際上，由于各種食品往往會質(zhì)量下降、品種減少，這就有可能更多地使用調(diào)味添加物。（75）除非人類終于意識到要把人口減少到這樣的程度，使地球能為所有人提供足夠的飲食，否則人們將不得不接受更多的人造食品。

　　3.1992年英譯漢試題及參考譯文

　　Intellingenceat best is an assumptive construct―the meaning of the word has never been clear.（71）There is more agreement on the kinds of behavior referred to by the term than there is on how to interpret or classify them.But it is generally agreed that a person of high intelligence is one who can grasp ideas readily，make distinctions，reason logically，and make ue of verbal and mathematical symbols in solving problems.An intelligence test is a rough measure of a child’s capacity for learning the kinds of things required in school.It does not measure character，social adjustment，physical endurance，manual skills，or artistic abilities.It is not supposed to―it was not designed for such purposes.（72）To criticise it for such failure is roughly comparable to criticising a thermometer for not measuring wind velocity.

　　The other thing we have to notice is that the assessment of the intelligence of any subject is essentially a comparative affair.

　?。?3）Now since the assessment of intelligence is a comparative matter we must be sure that the scale with which we are comparing our subjects provides avalidorfaircomparison.It is here that some of the difficulties which interest us begin.Any test performed involves at least three factors:the intention to do one’s best，the knowledge required for understanding what you have to do，and the intellectual ability to do it.（74）The first two must be equal for all who are being compared，if any comparison in terms of intelligence is to be made.In school populations in our culture these assumptions can be made fair and reasonable，and the value of intelligence testing has been proved thoroughly.Its value lies，of course，in its providing a satisfactory basis for prediction.No one is in the least interested in the marks a little child gets on his test;what we are interested in is whether we can conclude from his mark on the test that the child will do better or worse than other children of his age at tasks which we think requiregeneral intelligence.（75）On the whole such a conclusion can be drawn with a certain degree of confidence，but only if the child can be assumed to have had the same attitude towards the test as the others with whom he is being compared，and only if he was not punished by lack of relevant information which they possessed.

　　1992年英譯漢試題參考譯文

　　智力充其量只是一個假設(shè)性的概念，因為智力的含義從來就是模糊的。（71）人們對智力所指的不同表現(xiàn)，比對這些表現(xiàn)如何進行解釋或分類，看法更為一致。但是一般認為，智力好的人是能夠迅速領(lǐng)會思想、區(qū)分事物、進行邏輯推理并運用文字和數(shù)字符號來解決問題的人。智力測驗只是粗略衡量一個兒童學(xué)習學(xué)校所要求的不同知識的能力。智力測驗并不測定人的品格、社會適應(yīng)能力、身體耐力、手工技能或藝術(shù)才能。智力測試沒有這樣的任務(wù)，因為它并不是為這樣的用途而設(shè)計的。（72）批評智力測試不反映上述情況，就猶如批評溫度計不測風速一樣。

　　我們要注意的另一件事是，對任何測試對象的智力評估基本上是比較而言的事。

　?。?3）既然對智力的評估是比較而言的事，那么我們必須確保，在對我們的對象進行比較時，我們所使用的尺度能提供有效的或公平的比較。由此而產(chǎn)生一些引起我們關(guān)注的問題。進行任何測試至少要包含三個因素:盡力考好測試的意向，了解要參加考試所需要的知識，以及做這件事情的智能。（74）如果要從智力方面進行任何比較的話，那么對所有比較對象來說，前兩個因素必須是一樣的。在我們培養(yǎng)的學(xué)生中，上述設(shè)想可以公平合理。這就完全證明了智力測試的價值。它的價值當然就在它對預(yù)測提供了滿意的依據(jù)。沒有人絲毫會對一個兒童在測試中所取得的分數(shù)感興趣。我們感興趣的是，我們能否從他測試的成績中得出結(jié)論:這個兒童和與他年齡相同的其他兒童相比，在完成我們認為需要一般智力的任務(wù)時，他會做得更好還是更差。（75）總的來說，得出這種結(jié)論是有一定程度把握的，但是必須具備兩個條件:能夠假定這個孩子對測試的態(tài)度和與他比較的另一些孩子的態(tài)度相同;他也沒有因為缺乏別的孩子已掌握的有關(guān)知識而被扣分。

　　4.1993年英譯漢試題及參考譯文

　?。?1）The method of scientific investigation is nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind;it is simply the mode by which all phenomena are reasoned about and given precise and exact explanation.There is no more difference，but there is just the same kind of difference，between the mental operations of a man of science and those of an ordinary person，as there is between the operations and methods of a baker or of a butcher weighing out his goods in common scales，and the operations of a chemist in performing a difficult and complex analysis by means of his balance and finely graded weights.（72）It is not that the scales in the one case，and the balance in the other，differ in the principles of their construction or manner of working;but that the latter is much finer apparatus and of course much more accurate in its measurement than the former.

　　You will understand this better，perhaps，if I give you some familiar examples.（73）You have all heard it repeated that men of science work by means of induction（歸納法）and deduction，that by the help of these operations，they，in a sort of sense，manage to extract from Nature certain natural laws，and that out of these，by some special skill of their own，they build up their theories.（74）And it is imagined by many that the operations of the common mind can be by no means compared with these processes，and that they have to be acquired by a sort of special training.To hear all these large words，you would think that the mind of a man of science must be constituted differently from that of his fellow men;but if you will not be frightened by terms，you will discover that you are quite wrong，and that all these terrible apparatus are being used by yourselves every day and every hour of your lives.

　　There is a wellknown incident in one of Moliere’s plays，where the author makes the hero express unbounded delight on being told that he had been talking prose（散文）during the whole of his life.In the same way，I trust that you will take comfort，and be delighted with yourselves，on the discovery that you have been acting on the principles of inductive and deductive philosophy during the same period.（75）Probably there is not one here who has not in the course of the day had occasion to set in motion a complex train of reasoning，of the very same kind，though differing in degree，as that which a scientific man goes through in tracing the causes of natural phenomena.

　　1993年英譯漢試題參考譯文

　?。?1）科學(xué)研究的方法不過是人類思維活動的必要表達方式，也就是對一切現(xiàn)象進行思索并給以精確而嚴謹解釋的表達方式。科學(xué)家的思維活動與普通人的思維活動之間的區(qū)別和面包商或賣肉者用普通磅秤稱貨的操作方法與化學(xué)家在進行艱難而復(fù)雜的分析時用天平和精密刻度的砝碼的操作方法之間的區(qū)別是完全相同的，此外就沒有別的區(qū)別了。（72）這并不是說面包師或賣肉者所用的磅秤和化學(xué)家所用的天平在構(gòu)造原理和工作方式上存在差別，而是說與前者相比，后者是一種更精密得多的裝置，因而在計量上必然更準確得多。

　　要是我給你舉幾個熟悉的例子，或許你會更清楚地理解這一點。（73）你們多次聽說過，科學(xué)家是用歸納法和演繹法工作的，他們用這些方法，在某種意義上說，力求從自然界找出某些自然規(guī)律，然后他們根據(jù)這些規(guī)律，用自己的某種非同一般的本領(lǐng)，建立起他們的理論。（74）許多人以為，普通人的思維活動根本無法與科學(xué)家的思維過程相比，認為這些思維過程必須經(jīng)過某種專門訓(xùn)練才能掌握。聽了上面的夸張言詞后，你會以為，科學(xué)家的思維結(jié)構(gòu)與普通人的思維結(jié)構(gòu)大不相同;但是假如你沒有被這些言詞所嚇倒，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)，你是完全錯了;你還會發(fā)現(xiàn)，所有這些令人望而生畏的說法你自己每時每刻也在使用。

在莫里哀的一個劇本中有這樣一個著名的插曲:作者讓主人公得知他在整個一生中一直在說散文后，表現(xiàn)出無限的喜悅。同樣，我認為，當你一旦發(fā)現(xiàn)你在一生中一直在按歸納法和演繹法的哲理辦事時，你也會感到欣慰和陶醉。（75）大概這里不會有人一整天都沒有機會進行一連串復(fù)雜的思考活動，這些思考活動與科學(xué)家在探索自然現(xiàn)象原因時所經(jīng)歷的思考活動，盡管復(fù)雜程度不同，但在類型上是完全一樣的。

　　5.1994年英譯漢試題及參考譯文

　　According to the new school of scientists，technology is an overlooked force in expanding the horizons of scientific knowledge.（71）Science moves forward，they say，not so much through the insights of great men of genius as because of more ordinary things like improved techniques and tools.（72）In short，a leader of the new school contends，the scientific revolution，as we call it，was largely the improvement and invention and use of a series of instruments that expanded the reach of science in innumerable directions.

　?。?3）Over the years，tools and technology themselves as a source of fundamental innovation have largely been ignored by historians and philosophers of science.The modern school that hails technology argues that such masters as Galileo，Newton，Maxwell，Einstein，and inventors such as Edison attached great importance to，and derived great benefit from，craft information and technological devices of different kinds that were usable in scientific experiments.

　　The centerpiece of the argument of a technologyyes，geniusno advocate was an analysis of Galileo’s role at the start of the scientific revolution.The wisdom of the day was derived from Ptolemy，an astronomer of the second century，whose elaborate system of the sky put Earth at the center of all heavenly motions.（74）Galileo’s greatest glory was that in 1609 he was the first person to turn the newly invented telescope on the heavens to prove that the planets revolve around the sun rather than around the Earth.But the real hero of the story，according to the new school of scientists，was the long evolution in the improvement of machinery for making eyeglasses.

　　Federal policy is necessarily involved in the technology vs.genius dispute.（75）Whether the Government should increase the financing of pure science at the expense of technology or vice versa（反之）often depends on the issue of which is seen as the driving force.

　　1994年英譯漢試題參考譯文

　　新學(xué)派的科學(xué)家認為，技術(shù)是擴大科學(xué)知識的范圍中被忽視的力量。（71）他們說，科學(xué)的發(fā)展與其說源于天才偉人的真知灼識，不如說源于改進了的技術(shù)和工具等等更為普通的東西。（72）新學(xué)派的一位領(lǐng)袖人物堅持說:簡言之，我們所稱謂的科學(xué)革命，主要是指一系列器具的改進、發(fā)明和使用，這些改進、發(fā)明和使用使科學(xué)發(fā)展的范圍無所不及。

　?。?3）工具和技術(shù)本身作為根本性創(chuàng)新的源泉多年來在很大程度上被科學(xué)史學(xué)家和科學(xué)思想家們忽視了。為技術(shù)而歡呼的現(xiàn)代學(xué)派爭辯說，像伽利略、牛頓、麥克斯威爾、愛因斯坦這樣的科學(xué)大師和像愛迪生這樣的發(fā)明家十分重視科學(xué)實驗中能使用的各種不同的工藝信息和技術(shù)裝置并從中受益匪淺。

　　鼓吹技術(shù)第一、天才第二的論據(jù)的核心是分析了科學(xué)革命初期伽利略的作用。那時的聰明才智取自第二世紀的天文學(xué)家托勒密;了精心創(chuàng)立的太空體系把地球置于所有天體運動的中心。（74）伽利略的最光輝的業(yè)績在于他在1609年第一個把新發(fā)明的望遠鏡對準天空，以證實行星是圍繞太陽旋轉(zhuǎn)，而不是圍繞地球。但是，在新學(xué)派科學(xué)家看來，這件事中真正重要的因素是制造鏡片的機械長期以來不斷的改進和發(fā)展。

　　聯(lián)邦政府的政策必然要卷入到技術(shù)與天才之爭中去。（75）政府究竟是以減少對技術(shù)的經(jīng)費投入來增加對純理論科學(xué)的經(jīng)費投入，還是相反，這往往取決于把哪一方看作是驅(qū)動力量。

　　6.1995年英譯漢試題及參考譯文

　　The standardized educational or psychological tests that are widely used to aid in selecting，classifying，assigning，or promoting students，employees，and military personnel have been the target of recent attacks in books，magazines，the daily press，and even in Congress.（71）The target is wrong，for in attacking the tests，critics divert attention from the fault that lies with illinformed or incompetent users.The tests themselves are merely tools，with characteristics that can be measured with reasonable precision under specified conditions.Whether the results will be valuable，meaningless，or even misleading depends partly upon the tool itself but largely upon the user.

　　All informed predicitions of future performance are based upon some knowledge of relevant past performance:school grades，research productivity，sales records，or whatever is appropriate.（72）How well the predictions will be validated by later performance depends upon the amount，reliability，and appropriateness of the information used and on the skill and wisdom with which it is interpreted.Anyone who keeps careful score knows that the information available is always incomplete and that the predictions are always subject to error.

Standardized tests should be considered in this context.They provide a quick objective method of getting some kinds of information about what a person learned，the skills he has developed，or the kind of person he is.The information so obtained has，qualitatively，the same advantages and shortcomings as other kinds of information.（73）Whether to use tests，other kinds of information，or both in a particular situation depends，therefore，upon the evidence from experience concerning comparative validity and upon such factors as cost and availability.

　?。?4）In general，the tests work most effectively when the qualities to be measured can be most precisely defined and least effectively when what is to be measured or predicated can not be well defined.Properly used，they provide a rapid means of getting comparable information about many people.Sometimes they identify students whose high potential has not been previously recognized，but there are many things they do not do.（75）For example，they do not compensate for gross social inequality，and thus do not tell how able an underprivileged youngster might have been had he grown up under more favorable circumstances.

　　1995年英譯漢試題參考譯文

　　標準化教育測試或心理同在廣泛應(yīng)用于協(xié)助選拔、委派或提拔學(xué)生、雇員和軍事人員;這些測試一直是某些人近年來在書本、雜志、日報，甚至國會中進行抨擊的目標。（71）把標準化測試作為抨擊目標是錯誤的，因為在抨擊這類測試時，批評者沒有注意到其弊病來自測試使用者對測試不解或使用不當。這些測試本身只是一種工具。它的各種特性可以在規(guī)定條件下用適當?shù)木葋頊y定。測試的結(jié)果是在有價值的、無意義的、還是誤導(dǎo)的，部分取決于這種工具本身，但主要取決于測試使用者。

　　所有對未來表現(xiàn)的有見識地的預(yù)測都是以在某種程度上了解有關(guān)過去的表現(xiàn)為基礎(chǔ)的:學(xué)校學(xué)習成績、研究效益、銷售記錄或任何符合需要的信息。（72）這些預(yù)測在多大程度上為的后來的表現(xiàn)所證實，這取決于所采用信息的數(shù)量、可靠性和適宜性，以及解釋這些信息的技能和才智。任何仔細記分的人都知道，所得到的信息總是不完全的，而且這些預(yù)測也總是會有錯誤的。

　　應(yīng)該根據(jù)這種觀點去考察標準化測試。標準化測試提供了快速、客觀地得到某些信息的方法，這些信息是有關(guān)一個人所學(xué)到的知識、他所獲得的技能，或者他是屬于哪一類型的人。這樣得到的信息，從性質(zhì)上講，與其它種類的信息一樣具有優(yōu)點或缺點。（73）因此，在某一特定情況下，究竟是采用測試還是其他種類的信息，或是兩者兼用，須憑有關(guān)相對效度的經(jīng)驗依據(jù)而定，也取決于諸如費用和有無來源等因素。

　?。?4）一般來說，當所要測定的特征能很精確界定時，測試最為有效;而當所要測定或預(yù)測的東西不能明確地界定時，測試的效果則最差。這些測試如能恰當使用，就能提供一種快速的方法來獲得有關(guān)許多人的可比性信息。有時這些測試能鑒別出一些學(xué)生，他們很高的潛在能力過去一直沒有被承認。但是也有入場多事情這些測試是不能勝任的。（75）例如，測試并不彌補明顯的社會不公;因此，它們不能說明一個物質(zhì)條件差的年輕人，如果在較好的環(huán)境下成長的話，會有多大才干。

　　7.1996年英譯漢試題及參考譯文

　　The differences in relative growth of various areas of scientific research have several causes.（71）Some of these causes are completely reasonable results of social needs.Others are reasonable consequences of particular advances in science being to some extent self-accelerating.Some，however，are less reasonable processes of different growth in which preconceptions of the form scientific theory ought to take，by persons in authority，act to alter the growth pattern of different areas.This is a new problem probably not yet unavoidable;but it is a frightening trend.（72）This trend began during the Second World War，when several governments came to the conclusion that the specific demands that a government wants to make of its scientific establishment cannot generally be foreseen in detail.It can be predicted，however，that from time to time，questions will arise which will require specific scientific answers.It is therefore generally valuable to treat the scientific establishment as a resource or machine to be kept in functional order.（73）This seems mostly effectively done by supporting a certain amount of research not related to immediate goals but of possible consequence in the future.

　　This kind of support，like all government support，requires decisions about the appropriate recipients of funds.Decisions based on utility as opposed to lack of utility are straight forward.But a decision among projects none of which has immediate utility is more difficult.The goal of the supporting agencies is the praisable one of supportinggoodas opposed tobadscience，but a valid determination is difficult to make.Generally，the idea of good science tends to become confused with the capacity of the field in question to generate an elegant theory.（74）However，the world is so made that elegant systems are in principle unable to deal with some of the worlds more fascinating and delightful aspects.（75）New forms of thought as well as new subjects for thought must arise in the future as they have in the past，giving rise to new standards of elegance.

　　1996年英譯漢試題參考譯文

　　科學(xué)研究的各種領(lǐng)域的相關(guān)發(fā)展，存在若干原因。（71）在這些原因中，有些完全是自然而然地來自社會需求。另一些則是由于科學(xué)在一定程度上自我加速而產(chǎn)生某些特定發(fā)展的必然結(jié)果。然而，有些發(fā)展速度的差異其原因就不盡合理，這是因為某些權(quán)威人干對科學(xué)理論研究應(yīng)采取何種形式有先入為主的想法，這些想法起了改變不同科學(xué)領(lǐng)域的發(fā)展模式的作用。這是一個新問題，也許并非是不可避免的問題，但其趨勢卻令人擔憂。（72）這種趨勢始于第二次世界大戰(zhàn)期間，當時一些國家的政府得出結(jié)論:政府要向科研機構(gòu)提出的具體要求通常是無法詳盡預(yù)見的。然而，人們可以預(yù)見，往往會出現(xiàn)一些問題要求科學(xué)做出具體的回答。因此，將科研機構(gòu)視為一種資源或一臺機器，應(yīng)維持其良好的運行狀態(tài)。這樣做通常是很有價值的。（73）給某些與當前目標無關(guān)但將來可能產(chǎn)生影響的科研以支持，看來通常能有效地解決這個問題。

　　此種資助也與所有政府資助一樣，需要決定合適的投資對象。根據(jù)某一項目是否有效來做出決策是明確無誤的。但是在幾個都沒有直接效用的項目中，要做出抉擇就特別困難。資助機構(gòu)的目標是支持好的科學(xué)，而不資助壞的科學(xué)，那是值得贊揚的。然而要做出正確的抉擇卻是困難的。人們往往將好科學(xué)與該科學(xué)是否有能力提出一套完美的理論混淆起來。（74）然而，世界就是如此，完美的體系一般是無法解決世上某些更加引人入勝的課題的。（75）同過去一樣，將來必然會出現(xiàn)新的思維方式和新的思維對象，給完美以新的標準。

[1] [2]