郭慶民考研英語閱讀第一篇及譯文與疑難解析_跨考網(wǎng)

　　郭慶民閱讀理解第一篇及譯文與疑難長句注解和題解

　　It would be enormously convenient to have a single, generally accepted index of the economic and social welfare of the people of the United States. A glance at it would tell us how much better or worse off we had become each year, and we would judge the desirability of any proposed action by asking whether it would raise or lower this index. Some recent discussion implies that such an index could be constructed. Articles in the popular press even criticize the Gross National Production because it is not such a complete index of welfare, ignoring, on the one hand, that it was never intended to be, and suggesting, on the other hand, that with appropriate changes it could be converted into one.

　　The output available to satisfy our wants and needs is one important determinant of welfare. Whatever want, need, or social problem engages our attention, we ordinarily can more easily find resources to deal with it when output is large and growing than when it is not. GNP measures output fairly well, but to evaluate welfare we would need additional measures which would be far more difficult to construct. We would need an index of real costs incurred in production, because we are better off if we get the same output at less cost. Use of just man?hours for welfare evaluation would unreasonably imply that to increase total hours by raising the hours of eight women from 60 to 65 a week imposes no more burden than raising the hours of eight men from 40 to 45 a week, or even than hiring one involuntarily unemployed person for 40 hours a week. A measure of real costs of labor would also have to consider working conditions. Most of us spend almost half our waking hours on the job and our welfare is vitally affected by the circumstances in which we spend those hours.

　　To measure welfare we would need a measure of changes in the need our output must satisfy. One aspect, population change, is now handled by converting output to a per capita basis on the assumption that, other things equal, twice as many people need twice as many goods and services to be equally well off. But an index of needs would also account for differences in the requirements for living as the population becomes more urbanized and suburbanized; for the changes in national defense requirements; and for changes in the effect of weather on our needs. The index would have to tell us the cost of meeting our needs in a base year compared with the cost of meeting them equally well under the circumstances prevailing in every other year.

　　Measures of “needs” shade into measure of the human and physical environment in which we live. We all are enormously affected by the people around us. Can we go where we like without fear of attack? We are also affected by the physical environment—purity of water and air, accessibility of park land and other conditions. To measure this requires accurate data, but such data are generally deficient. Moreover, weighting is required: to combine robberies and murders in a crime index; to combine pollution of the Potomac and pollution of Lake Erie into a water pollution index; and then to combine crime and water pollution into some general index. But there is no basis for weighting these beyond individual preference.

　　There are further problems. To measure welfare we would need an index of the “goodness” of the distribution of income. There is surely consensus that given the same total income and output, a distribution with fewer families in poverty would be the better, but what is the ideal distribution? Even if we could construct indexes of output, real costs, needs, state of the environment, we could not compute a welfare index because we have no system of weights to combine them.

　　1. The author?s primary concern is to .

　?。跘］ refute arguments for a position［B］ make a proposal and defend it

　　［C］ show defects in a proposal ［D］ review literature relevant to a problem

　　2. The author implies that man?hours is not an appropriate measure of real cost because it .

　?。跘］ ignores the conditions under which the output is generated

　　［B］ fails to take into consideration the environmental costs of production

　?。跜］ is not an effective method for reducing unemployment

　?。跠］ was never intended to be a general measure of welfare

　　3. The most important reason why a single index of welfare cannot be designed is that .

　?。跘］ the cost associated with producing the index would be prohibitive

　　［B］ considerable empirical research would have to be done regarding output and needs

　?。跜］ any weighting of various measures into a general index would be inherently subjective

　?。跠］ accurate statistics on crime and pollution are not yet available

　　4. An adequate measure of need must take into account all of the following EXCEPT .

　?。跘］ change effects on people of the weather

　?。跙］ differences in needs of urban and suburban populations

　　［C］ changing requirements for governmental programs such as defense

　?。跠］ accessibility of park land and other premises

　　5. The author regards the idea of a general index of welfare as .

　?。跘］ an unrealistic dream

　　［B］ an important contribution

　?。跜］ a future necessity

　　［D］ a desirable change

　　1.index n.指數(shù)

　　2.welfare ?n.福利

　　3.well off 富裕的，順利的

　　4.construct vt.構造，創(chuàng)立

　　5.press n.報刊；通訊社

　　6.Gross National Product(ion) 國民生產總值(GNP)

　　7.convert vt.轉換；使改變信仰

　　8.evaluate vt.評價，評估

　　9.incur vt.招致，引起，惹起

　　10.aspect n.方面

　　11.handle vt.處理，運用

　　12.per capita 每人的，人均的

　　13.assumption n.假定，設想；承擔

　　14.other things equal 假定其他情況不變的話

　　15.account for 說明；占

　　16.prevail vi.盛行；勝過，占優(yōu)勢

　　17.accessibility n.可接近性，獲得的可能性

　　18.deficient a.缺乏的；不完善的

　　19.robbery n.搶劫，盜竊

　　20.distribution n.分配，分發(fā)；銷售

　　21.consensus n.一致意見，共識

　　22.compute vt.計算，估計

　　1.enormously非常，巨大地

　　2.desirability愿望，希求

　　3.determinant決定因素

　　4.real cost實際成本

　　5.involuntarily不情愿地，無意地

　　6.vitally極為，生死攸關地

　　7.urbanize使都市化

　　8.suburbanize使市郊化

　　9.shade into逐漸變?yōu)?/p>

　　1.A glance at it would … index.(第一段)

　　better off是well off(富裕的，處境好的)的比較級形式，worse off與之意思相反。

　　2.Articles in the popular … into one.(第一段)

　　press指the collecting and publishing or broadcasting of news; journalism in general(新聞事業(yè)，新聞的收集、出版或播送；新聞業(yè)的總稱)。ignoring … to be和suggesting … into one 是兩個分詞短語，邏輯主語都是articles in the popular press。

　　3.Whatever want … it is not.(第二段)

　　when it is not是when it is not large and growing的省略形式，其中，it指output。比較級的翻譯對考生來說是難點，請仔細研究本句的譯文處理方式。

　　4.To measure welfare … satisfy.(第三段)

　　measure此處意為“測量標準，尺度”。our output must satisfy是一個定語從句，修飾the need。

　　5.One aspect … well off.(第三段)

　　handle根據(jù)上一句應該理解為“測量(……的變化)”。that引導的從句作assumption的同位語。other things (being) equal是一個習語，意為“在其他各方面因素保持不變的情況下”。

　　6.Moreover, weighting is … general index.(第四段)

　　波拖馬可河是美國的一條河流，伊利湖是介于美國和加拿大之間的五大湖之一。

　　7.There is surely consensus … distribution?(第五段)

　　that引導的從句作consensus的同位語，given表示假設。

　　如果有一個單一的、普遍接受的指標，用以衡量美國人的經(jīng)濟和社會福利，那將是極其方便的。只要看一下這個指標，就知道我們的狀況每年是變得更好還是變得更壞，通過詢問某項措施將會提高還是降低這個指標，我們就可以判定這個被提出的措施的好壞。最近的某些討論認為，這種指標是可以設計出來的。流行的新聞報刊甚至載文批評將國民生產總值當做指數(shù)，認為它不是一個完全反映福利狀況的指數(shù)，但是，這些批評一方面忽視了人們從來也沒有想把它當做一個這樣的指數(shù)，另一方面，這些批評似乎又認為：經(jīng)過合理修正以后，它可以被用做這樣一個指數(shù)。

　　可用來滿足我們需求的產量是決定福利的一個重要因素。無論我們關注哪些需要、需求或社會問題，如果產量大而且在不斷增長，我們通常能夠更容易地找到資源來滿足或解決它們，否則就不容易。國民生產總值(GNP)是測量產量的很好的尺度，但要測量福利，我們還需要其他尺度，而建立這樣的尺度要難得多。我們需要一個指數(shù)，用于測量生產涉及的實際成本，因為如果我們用較低成本獲取同樣的產值，這說明我們更富有。用工時來衡量福利狀況是不合理的，這意味著：將8名婦女每周的總工時從60小時提高到65小時，與將8個男人每周的工時從40小時提高到45小時，或甚至雇用一個非自愿失業(yè)的人每周工作40小時，增加的負擔是一樣的。要計算實際的勞動力成本，還要考慮工作條件。我們絕大多數(shù)人把約一半醒著的時間用在工作上，因此，我們花費這些時間的環(huán)境對我們的福利有重大影響。

　　為了測量福利狀況，我們需要一個尺度，測量產量必須滿足的需求的變化。其中一個方面——人口變化——通過將產量換算為人均占有量加以測量，這種做法基于如下假設：假定其他條件不變，如果人口增長一倍，所需要的產品和服務也應該增長一倍，才能保障生活在同樣水平上。但測量“需求”要考慮下列因素：隨著人口的城市化和市郊化，人們對生活的不同要求；國防需要的變化；天氣變化對我們的需求的影響。這項指數(shù)必須告訴我們在某個基年滿足我們的需求所花費的成本，然后再與其他各年份的環(huán)境下同樣滿足我們需求的成本作比較。

　　測量“需求”最終會轉化為測量我們生活的人類環(huán)境和自然環(huán)境。我們都在極大程度上受到周圍人的影響。我們可以不用害怕受到攻擊而去任何自己想去的地方嗎？自然環(huán)境也影響著我們——水和空氣的純凈、公園用地和其他條件的可獲得性等，測量這些東西需要準確數(shù)據(jù)，但是這些數(shù)據(jù)通常是不充分的。而且，還需要權衡各種因素，例如，在犯罪指標中將盜竊與兇殺做綜合考慮；在水污染指標中將波特馬可河和伊利湖的污染做綜合考慮；然后，我們再將犯罪和污染合并為某個綜合指數(shù)。但是，這些測算結果除個人的偏好以外沒有其他基礎。

　　還存在更多的問題。要測定福利狀況，我們需要一個指數(shù)來表示收入分配的好壞。人們肯定有這樣一個共識：同樣總數(shù)的收入和產量，如果能使更少的家庭處于貧困之中，將會更好，但是，怎么樣分配才理想呢？即使我們能設計出測量產量、實際成本、需求、環(huán)境狀況的各種指數(shù)，我們也計算不出福利指數(shù)，因為我們缺乏把它們綜合在一起的權重體系。

???