郭慶民考研英語(yǔ)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(zhǎng)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

　?。跜］ 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 .

　　［A］ ignores the conditions under which the output is generated

　?。跙］ fails to take into consideration the environmental costs of production

　　［C］ 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

　?。跜］ 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

　?。跙］ 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(gòu)造，創(chuàng)立

　　5.press n.報(bào)刊；通訊社

　　6.Gross National Product(ion) 國(guó)民生產(chǎn)總值(GNP)

　　7.convert vt.轉(zhuǎn)換；使改變信仰

　　8.evaluate vt.評(píng)價(jià)，評(píng)估

　　9.incur vt.招致，引起，惹起

　　10.aspect n.方面

　　11.handle vt.處理，運(yùn)用

　　12.per capita 每人的，人均的

　　13.assumption n.假定，設(shè)想；承擔(dān)

　　14.other things equal 假定其他情況不變的話

　　15.account for 說(shuō)明；占

　　16.prevail vi.盛行；勝過(guò)，占優(yōu)勢(shì)

　　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(xiāo)售

　　21.consensus n.一致意見(jiàn)，共識(shí)

　　22.compute vt.計(jì)算，估計(jì)

　　1.enormously非常，巨大地

　　2.desirability愿望，希求

　　3.determinant決定因素

　　4.real cost實(shí)際成本

　　5.involuntarily不情愿地，無(wú)意地

　　6.vitally極為，生死攸關(guān)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(jí)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(chēng))。ignoring … to be和suggesting … into one 是兩個(gè)分詞短語(yǔ)，邏輯主語(yǔ)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(jí)的翻譯對(duì)考生來(lái)說(shuō)是難點(diǎn)，請(qǐng)仔細(xì)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(cè)量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，尺度”。our output must satisfy是一個(gè)定語(yǔ)從句，修飾the need。

　　5.One aspect … well off.(第三段)

　　handle根據(jù)上一句應(yīng)該理解為“測(cè)量(……的變化)”。that引導(dǎo)的從句作assumption的同位語(yǔ)。other things (being) equal是一個(gè)習(xí)語(yǔ)，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(guó)的一條河流，伊利湖是介于美國(guó)和加拿大之間的五大湖之一。

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

　　that引導(dǎo)的從句作consensus的同位語(yǔ)，given表示假設(shè)。

　　如果有一個(gè)單一的、普遍接受的指標(biāo)，用以衡量美國(guó)人的經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)福利，那將是極其方便的。只要看一下這個(gè)指標(biāo)，就知道我們的狀況每年是變得更好還是變得更壞，通過(guò)詢(xún)問(wèn)某項(xiàng)措施將會(huì)提高還是降低這個(gè)指標(biāo)，我們就可以判定這個(gè)被提出的措施的好壞。最近的某些討論認(rèn)為，這種指標(biāo)是可以設(shè)計(jì)出來(lái)的。流行的新聞報(bào)刊甚至載文批評(píng)將國(guó)民生產(chǎn)總值當(dāng)做指數(shù)，認(rèn)為它不是一個(gè)完全反映福利狀況的指數(shù)，但是，這些批評(píng)一方面忽視了人們從來(lái)也沒(méi)有想把它當(dāng)做一個(gè)這樣的指數(shù)，另一方面，這些批評(píng)似乎又認(rèn)為：經(jīng)過(guò)合理修正以后，它可以被用做這樣一個(gè)指數(shù)。

　　可用來(lái)滿(mǎn)足我們需求的產(chǎn)量是決定福利的一個(gè)重要因素。無(wú)論我們關(guān)注哪些需要、需求或社會(huì)問(wèn)題，如果產(chǎn)量大而且在不斷增長(zhǎng)，我們通常能夠更容易地找到資源來(lái)滿(mǎn)足或解決它們，否則就不容易。國(guó)民生產(chǎn)總值(GNP)是測(cè)量產(chǎn)量的很好的尺度，但要測(cè)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(gè)指數(shù)，用于測(cè)量生產(chǎn)涉及的實(shí)際成本，因?yàn)槿绻覀冇幂^低成本獲取同樣的產(chǎn)值，這說(shuō)明我們更富有。用工時(shí)來(lái)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(shí)從60小時(shí)提高到65小時(shí)，與將8個(gè)男人每周的工時(shí)從40小時(shí)提高到45小時(shí)，或甚至雇用一個(gè)非自愿失業(yè)的人每周工作40小時(shí)，增加的負(fù)擔(dān)是一樣的。要計(jì)算實(shí)際的勞動(dòng)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(shí)間用在工作上，因此，我們花費(fèi)這些時(shí)間的環(huán)境對(duì)我們的福利有重大影響。

　　為了測(cè)量福利狀況，我們需要一個(gè)尺度，測(cè)量產(chǎn)量必須滿(mǎn)足的需求的變化。其中一個(gè)方面——人口變化——通過(guò)將產(chǎn)量換算為人均占有量加以測(cè)量，這種做法基于如下假設(shè)：假定其他條件不變，如果人口增長(zhǎng)一倍，所需要的產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)也應(yīng)該增長(zhǎng)一倍，才能保障生活在同樣水平上。但測(cè)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(duì)生活的不同要求；國(guó)防需要的變化；天氣變化對(duì)我們的需求的影響。這項(xiàng)指數(shù)必須告訴我們?cè)谀硞€(gè)基年滿(mǎn)足我們的需求所花費(fèi)的成本，然后再與其他各年份的環(huán)境下同樣滿(mǎn)足我們需求的成本作比較。

　　測(cè)量“需求”最終會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)化為測(cè)量我們生活的人類(lèi)環(huán)境和自然環(huán)境。我們都在極大程度上受到周?chē)说挠绊憽Ｎ覀兛梢圆挥煤ε率艿焦舳ト魏巫约合肴サ牡胤絾?？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(cè)量這些東西需要準(zhǔn)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(quán)衡各種因素，例如，在犯罪指標(biāo)中將盜竊與兇殺做綜合考慮；在水污染指標(biāo)中將波特馬可河和伊利湖的污染做綜合考慮；然后，我們?cè)賹⒎缸锖臀廴竞喜槟硞€(gè)綜合指數(shù)。但是，這些測(cè)算結(jié)果除個(gè)人的偏好以外沒(méi)有其他基礎(chǔ)。

　　還存在更多的問(wèn)題。要測(cè)定福利狀況，我們需要一個(gè)指數(shù)來(lái)表示收入分配的好壞。人們肯定有這樣一個(gè)共識(shí)：同樣總數(shù)的收入和產(chǎn)量，如果能使更少的家庭處于貧困之中，將會(huì)更好，但是，怎么樣分配才理想呢？即使我們能設(shè)計(jì)出測(cè)量產(chǎn)量、實(shí)際成本、需求、環(huán)境狀況的各種指數(shù)，我們也計(jì)算不出福利指數(shù)，因?yàn)槲覀內(nèi)狈Π阉鼈兙C合在一起的權(quán)重體系。

???