[詞匯類]-考研翻譯必背詞匯

1、考研翻譯必背詞匯（紅色部分為必背詞匯）1990 年英譯漢試題People have wondered for a long time how their personalities，and behaviors are formed. It is not easy to explain w hy one person is intelligent and another is not，or w hy one is cooperative andanother is competitive.Social scientists are，of course，extremely interested i

2、n these types of questions. (61)They w ant 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. T

3、he controversy is oftenconveniently referred to as” nature vs. nurture”.(62)Those who support the “nature” side 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 w ith our abilitie

4、s ，characteristics and behavior is central to this theory. Taken to an extreme ， this theory maintains that our behavior is predetermined to such a greatdegree that w e are almost completely governed by our instincts.Those who support the “nurture” theory，that is，they advocate education ，are often c

5、alled 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 beingswhose behavior is almost completely shaped by their surroundings. The behaviorists maintain that，like machines，h

6、umans 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. Supporters of the “nature” theory insist that we are born w ith a certain capacity for learning that is biologic

7、ally determined. Needless to say ， they dont believe thatfactors in the environment have much influence on w hat is basically a predetermined characteristic. On the other hand，behaviorists argue that our intelligence levels are the product of our experiences. (64)Behaviorists suggest that the child

8、w ho is raised in an environment where there are many stimuli w hich develop his or her capacity for appropriate responses will experience greater intellectual development.The social and political implication s of these two theories are profound. In the United States，blacks often score below whites

9、on standardized intelligence tests. This lead s some “nature” proponents to conclude that blacks are biologically inferior to w hites. (65)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 a

10、dvantages that w hites enjoy.Most people think neither of these theories can yet fully explain human behavior.1991 年英譯漢試題The fact is that the energy crisis ，which has suddenly been officially announced ，has been w ith us for a long time now，and will be with us for an even longer time. Whether Arab o

11、il flow s freely or not，it is clear to everyone that world industry cannot be allow ed 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 w ellsw ill all run dry in thirty years or so at the present rate of use.(72)New sources of en

12、ergy must be found，and this w ill take time，but it is not likely to resultin any situation that w ill ever restore that sense of cheap and plentiful energy w e 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

13、 can advance at all.To make the situation w orse ， there is as yet no sign that any slow ing of the worlds population is in sight. Although the birthrate has dropped in some nations ，including the UnitedStates，the population of the w orld seems sure to pass six billion and perhaps even seven billion

14、 asthe twenty-first century opens.(73)The food supply w ill not increase nearly enough to match this ，w hich means that w e are heading into a crisis in the matter of producing and marketing food.Taking all this into account，w hat might w e reasonably estimate supermarkets to be like in theyear2001?

15、To begin w ith，the world food supply is going to becomesteadily tighter over the next thirty yearseven 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 willfind it difficult to exp

16、and 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 high energy American fashion that makes it possible to combine few farmers with high yields.It seems almost certain that by2001the United Sta

17、tes w ill no longer be a great food exportingnation and that，if necessity forces exports，it w ill be at the price of belt tightening at home.In fact，as food items w ill end to decline in quality and decrease in variety ，there is very likely to be increasing use of flavouring additives. (75)Until suc

18、h time as mankind has the sense to low erits population to the point w here the planet can provide a comfortable support for all ，people willhave to accept more “unnatural food”.1992 年英譯漢試題“Intelligence” at best is an assumptive constructthe meaning of the word has never been clear. (71)There is mor

19、e 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 isone who can grasp ideas readily ，make distinctions，reason logically ，and make use of verbal andmathematical symbols in solv

20、ing 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 toit w as notdesigned for such purposes. (72)To

21、criticise it for such failure is roughly comparable to criticising a thermometer for not measuring wind velocity.The other thing w e have to notice is that the assessment of the intelligence of any subject is essentially a comparative affair.(73)Now since the assessment of intelligence is a comparat

22、ive matter w e must be sure thatthe scale with w hich we are comparing our subjects provides a “valid ” or “fair” comparison. It is here that some of the difficulties w hich interest us begin. Any test performed involves at least three factors: the intention to do ones best，the knowledge required fo

23、r understanding w hat you have to do ，and the intellectual ability to do it. (74)The first two must be equal for all who arebeing compared，if any comparison in terms of intelligence is to be made. In school populations inour culture these assumption s can be made fair and reasonable ， and the value

24、of intelligence testing has been proved thoroughly. Its value lie s，of course，in its providing a satisfactory basisfor prediction . No one is in the least interested in the marks a little child gets on his test; w hat we are interested in is w hether w e can conclude from his mark on the test that t

25、he child will do better or worse than other children of his age at tasks which we think require “general intelligence”. (75)On the whole such a conclusion can be drawn with a certain degree ofconfidence，but only if the child can be assumed to have had the same attitude towards thetest as the others

26、with whom he is being compared，and only if he was not punished by lack of relevant information which they possessed.1993 年英譯漢試題(71)The method of scientific investigation is nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of w orking of the human mind; it is simply the mode by which all phenomena ar

27、e reasoned about and given precise and exact explanation. There is no more difference，but there is just the same kind of difference ， betw een 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 w eighi

28、ng 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 w eights. (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 mann

29、er of w orking; 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 dedu

30、ction ，that by the help of these operations ，they ，in a sort of sense，manage to extract from Nature certain natural law s，and that out of these，by some special skill of their ow n，they build up their theories.(74)And it is imagined by many that the operations of the common mind can be by no means co

31、mpared w ith these processes，and that they have to be acquired by a sort of special training . To hear all these large words，you w ould think that the mind of a man of science must be constituted differently from that of his fellow men; but if you w ill not be frightened by terms ， you w ill discove

32、r that you are quite wrong ， and that all these terrible apparatus are being used byyourselves every day and every hour of your lives.There is a w ell-known incident in one of Molieres plays ，w here the author makes the hero express unbounded delight on being told that he had been talking prose（散文）d

33、uring the whole of his life. In the same w ay，I trust that you will take comfort，and be delighted w ith 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 w ho has not in the course

34、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 naturalphenomena.1994 年英譯漢試題According to the new school of scientists, technology is an overlooked force in

35、 exp andin g the horizons of scientific knowledge. (71)Science moves forward, they say, not so much through theinsights 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 w

36、e call it, was largely the improvement and invention and use of a series of instruments that expanded the reach of science in innumerable directions.” (73) Over the years, tools andtechnology themselves as a source of fundamental innovation have largely been ignored by historians andphilosop hers of

37、 science. The modern school that hails technology argues that such masters as Galileo, Newton, Maxwell, Einstein, and inventors such as Edison attached great imp ortance to, and derived great benefit from, craft information and technological devices of different kinds that were usable in scientific

38、exp eriments. Thecenterp iece of the argument of a technology -yes, genius-no advocate was an analy sis 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

39、 the center of all heavenly motions. (74)Galileo's greatestglory 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

40、 of scientists, was the long evolution in the imp rovement of machinery for making eyeglasses.Federal policy is necessarily involved in the technology vs. genius dispute. (75)Whether theGovernment should increase the financing of pure science at the expense of technology or vice versa often depends

41、on the issue of which is seen as the driving force.The standardized educational or psychological tests that are widely used to aid in selecting, classify ing,assigning, or promoting students, emp loy ees, and military personnel have been the target of recent attacks in books, magazines, the daily pr

42、ess, and even in congress. (71) The target is wrong, for in attacking the tests, critics divertattention from the fault that lies with ill-informed or incomp etent users. The tests themselves are merely tools, withcharacteristics that can be measured with reasonable precision under specified conditi

43、ons. Whether the results willbe valuable, meaningless, or even misleading depends partly upon the tool itself but largely upon the user.All informed predictions of future performance are based upon some knowledge of relevant past performance: school grades research productive, sales records, or what

44、ever is ap propriate. (72) How well the predictions will be validated by later performance dep ends upon the amount, reliability, and ap propriateness of the information used and on the skill and wisdom with which it is interpreted. Anyone who keep s careful score knows that the information availabl

45、e is always incomplete and that the predictions are always subject to error.Standardized tests should be considered in thiscontext . They provide a quick, objective method of getting some kids of information about what a person learned, the skills he has develop ed, or the kinds of person he is. The

46、 information so obtained has, qualitatively , the same advantages and shortcomings as other kinds ofinformation. (73) Whether to use tests, other kinds of information, or both in a particular situation dep ends,therefore, upon the evidence from exp erience concerning comp arative validity and upon s

47、uch factors as cost and availability.(74)In general, the tests work most effectively when the qualities to be measured can bemost precisely defined and least effectively when what is to be measured or predicted can not be well defined.Properly used, they provide a rap id mean s of getting comp arabl

48、e information about many peop le. Sometimes they identify students whose high potential has not been previously recognized, but there are many things they do not do. (75) For examp le, they do not comp ensate for gross social inequality, and thus do not tell how able an underp rivileged youngster mi

49、ght have been had he grown up under more favorable circumstances.The differences in relative growth of various areas of scientific research have several causes. (71)Some ofthese causes are completely reasonable results of social needs. Others are reasonable consequences of particular advances in sci

50、ence being to some extent self-accelerating. Some,however, are less reasonable processes of different growth in which preconcep tions of the form scientific theoryought to take, by persons in authority, act to alter the growth pattern of different areas. This is a new problem probably not yet unavoi

51、dable; 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, tha

52、t from time to time questions will arise which will require specificscientific answers. It is therefore generally valuable to treat the scientific establishment as a resource or machine to be kep t in functional order. (73)This seems mostly effectively done by supporting a certain amount of research

53、 not related to immediate goals but of possible consequence in the future.This kind of support, like all government support, requires decisions about the ap propriate recip ients offunds. Decisions based on utility as opposed to lack of utility are straightforward. But a decision among projectsnone

54、of which has immediate utility is more difficult. The goal of the supporting agencies is the praisable one of supporting “good ” as opposed to “bad” science, but a valid determination is difficult to make. Generally , the idea of good science tends to become confused with the capacity of the field i

55、n 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 world's 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

56、 the past, giving rise to new standards of elegance.考研英語 1997 年英譯漢試題Do animals have rights? This is how the question is usually put. It sounds like a useful, ground-clearing way to start. (71)Actually , it isn't, because it assumes that there is an agreed account of human rights, which is someth

57、ing the world does not have.On one view of rights, to be sure, it necessarily follows that animals have none. (72)Some philosop hers argue that rights exist only within a social contract, as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements. Therefore, animals cannot have rights. The idea of punishing

58、a tiger that kills somebody is absurd; for exactly the same reason, so is the idea that tigers have rights. However, this is only one account, and by no means an uncontested one. It denies rights not only to animals but also to some peoplefor instance, to infants, the mentally incap able andfuture generations. In addition, it is unclear what for