無錫市第五屆翻譯比賽決賽試題及參考答案
瀏覽: 6178發(fā)布: 2012-10-30
無錫市第五屆翻譯比賽決賽考試，于10月27日在江南大學(xué)和無錫商業(yè)職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院兩個考點(diǎn)順利進(jìn)行。當(dāng)天雖陰雨綿綿，但考生的參賽心情并未受到影響，依然認(rèn)真準(zhǔn)時參加考試。目前由無錫市翻譯協(xié)會組成的專家考察組正在閱卷，請各個院校耐心等待比賽結(jié)果?，F(xiàn)發(fā)出本次決賽的試題及參考答案，考生可自行參考。
無錫市第五屆翻譯比賽決賽試題及參考答案（本科組）
一、 英譯中
【試題】1.
Is e-mail a blessing or a curse? Last month, after a week’s vacation, I discovered 1,218 unread e-mail messages waiting in my IN box. I pretend to be dismayed, but secretly I was pleased. This is how we measure our wired worth in the late 1990s — if you aren’t overwhelmed by e-mail, you must be doing something wrong.
E-mail is enabling radically new forms of worldwide human collaboration. Those 225 million people who can send and receive it represent a network of potentially cooperating individuals dwarfing anything that even the mightiest corporation or government. Mailing-list discussion groups and online conferencing allow us to gather together to work on a multitude of projects that are interesting or helpful to us — to pool our collective efforts in a fashion never before possible. The most obvious place to see this collaboration right now is in the world of software. For decades, programmers have used e-mail to collaborate on projects. With increasing frequency, this collaboration is occurring across company lines, and often without even the spur of commercial incentives. It’s happening largely because it can — it’s relatively easy for a thousand programmers to collectively contribute to a project using e-mail and the Internet. Perhaps each individual contribution is small, but the scale of the Internet multiplies all efforts dramatically.
【參考答案】
電子郵件是福是禍？上個月，在一周休假之后，我在收件箱中發(fā)現(xiàn)了1,218封未讀郵件。我假裝氣惱，卻暗自竊喜。如果你沒被電子郵件淹沒，你一定是出了問題 —— 這就是20世紀(jì)90年代末我們衡量自身有線價值的方式。
電子郵件使全球范圍內(nèi)人際合作的全新模式成為可能。那2億2千5百萬能夠收發(fā)郵件的人群代表了一個可能參與合作的眾多個體的網(wǎng)絡(luò)。該網(wǎng)絡(luò)聚集人數(shù)之多使得任何大公司或政府機(jī)構(gòu)相形見絀。收件人討論小組以及在線會議使我們能就許多有趣或有助的項(xiàng)目通力合作，以一種全新的方式集思廣益。目前這種合作最易發(fā)生在計算機(jī)的程序系統(tǒng)里。幾十年來，編程員利用電子郵件在各個項(xiàng)目上相互協(xié)作。隨著合作日趨頻繁，合作本身已超越公司的界線，而且常常不受商業(yè)利誘的驅(qū)使。這是因?yàn)槌砂偕锨У木幊虇T通過電子郵件或網(wǎng)絡(luò)就一項(xiàng)目全力協(xié)作相對來說要容易些。個人的力量也許很渺小，但是因特網(wǎng)的規(guī)模使得眾人的力量無限放大。
【試題】2.
Well-being, not just wealth, should mark the progress of our societies. It is hard to escape the fact that in developed societies, despite progress, innovation and prosperity, there is something not quite right. In some cases, it is hard for people to put a finger on it: a feeling of emptiness and not belonging, a lack of defined relationships and solid social structures. In other respects, it is really quantifiable: rates of drug abuse, violent crime and depression and suicide are rocketing. Why are we so unhappy? It seems that the Enlightenment brought forth unparalleled liberty in economic, social and political life, but we are now undergoing a midlife crisis. The politics of happiness is nothing new. Aristotle said that eudemonia or happiness is the goal of life. But for me, the person who brings the great conundrum of personal happiness alive is Robert Kennedy. In a beautifully crafted speech, he said what “makes life worthwhile” is “the health of our children, the quality of their education, the joy of their play,” “the strength of our marriages … our devotion to our country” and our “wit … wisdom and courage.” And he pointed out that none of these could be measured by gross national product.
【參考答案】
人們身心的健康與快樂，并非財富，才是我們社會進(jìn)步的標(biāo)志。人們很難擺脫這樣一種事實(shí)：在發(fā)達(dá)的社會，盡管社會進(jìn)步，改革日新月異，物質(zhì)富足，卻總覺得有些事情不大對勁。有時候，人們難以明確地指出到底為何：空虛，沒有歸屬感，沒有穩(wěn)定明確的人際關(guān)系以及穩(wěn)固的社會結(jié)構(gòu)。在其他方面，問題可以明確量化地表述：濫用毒品、暴力犯罪、經(jīng)濟(jì)蕭條以及自殺身亡的比率在急劇增加。我們?yōu)楹稳绱瞬豢鞓?？啟蒙運(yùn)動帶給我們無可比擬的經(jīng)濟(jì)、社會以及政治生活的自由，而我們現(xiàn)在正經(jīng)受著“中年”危機(jī)。探討幸福的內(nèi)涵古已有之。亞里士多德曾指出：幸福是人生的目標(biāo)?？晌乙詾?，將個人幸福這一難題談得沸沸揚(yáng)揚(yáng)的是羅伯特?肯尼迪。在他言辭精妙的演講中，他闡述道：使“生活有意義”的是“孩子們的健康，兒童的教育質(zhì)量以及他們玩耍游戲的快樂”，是“我們穩(wěn)固的婚姻……對祖國的熱愛與忠誠”，是我們的“睿智……英明與勇氣”。他還指出，這一切沒有一樣能夠用國民生產(chǎn)總值來衡量。
二、中譯英（考生從下面兩段中自主選擇一段作答即可）
【試題】1
不能簡單地用“軟”和“硬”來界定中國的外交。國際上特別是西方一些人指責(zé)中國外交強(qiáng)硬了，不像過去好說話。但是國內(nèi)一些輿論又說我們的外交太軟，主張“亮劍”，要求教訓(xùn)一些國家。這本身就表明，從不同的角度看中國外交可能會得出不同的結(jié)論。不能說動槍動炮才是硬，通過對話談判解決分歧就是軟。中國人講剛?cè)嵯酀?jì)，也就是說，“柔”和“剛”是一枚硬幣的兩個面。就像一個人有溫和的時候也有發(fā)怒的時候，一支軍隊(duì)有勇往直前的時候也有迂回周旋的時候。斗爭和妥協(xié)都不是外交的目的，也不是評判外交好壞的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，而只是實(shí)現(xiàn)外交目標(biāo)的方式和選項(xiàng)。這就要求我們該斗爭時斗爭，該合作時合作，該周旋時周旋。智慧比拳頭更重要。
【參考答案】
China's diplomacy cannot be labeled simply as "soft" or "hard-line". Some people in the world, especially in Western countries, accuse China of becoming more assertive in diplomacy not as easygoing as before. But some in China say that China's diplomacy is too "soft" and should "show our sword" to teach certain countries a lesson. We can see that different perspectives can lead people to different conclusions. I don't think only the use of force can make diplomacy strong, or dialogue and negotiation only make diplomacy "soft". We Chinese believe in combining firmness and flexibility, which is to say that "firmness" and "flexibility" are two sides of a coin. A man may be gentle at one time but angry at another time. Sometimes an army needs to march forward bravely while at other times it needs to avoid a direct confrontation. Confrontation and compromise are not the goals of diplomacy, nor are they the yardstick for our diplomatic work. They are just means to achieve our diplomatic goals or options we can choose from. This means we just know when to fight, when to cooperate and when to avoid direct confrontation. Wisdom is way more important than fists.
【試題】2
我總覺得，凡是為了非傾吐不可而寫的作品，都是充滿了真情實(shí)感的。反之，只是為寫作而寫作，如上之為應(yīng)付編輯朋友，下之為多拿稿費(fèi)，這類文章大都是盡量地往長里寫，結(jié)果是即便有一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)的感情，也被沖洗到水分太多、淡而無味的地步。
當(dāng)由一個人物，一樁事跡，一幅畫面而發(fā)生的真情實(shí)感，向你襲來的時候，它就像一根扎到你心尖上的長針，一陣卷到你面前的怒潮，你只能用最真切、最簡練的文字，才能描畫出你心尖上的那一陣劇痛和你面前的那一霎驚惶。
【參考答案】
I always believe that anything written with an irresistible inner urge to unbosom oneself must be full of genuine feelings. On the contrary, if one writes simply for the sake of writing----say, to humor one's editor friends, or worse still, to earn more remuneration, one will most probably make his writings unnecessarily long until they become, despite what little feelings they may contain, inflated and wishy-washy.
When true emotions aroused by a person, an event or a scene come upon you like a pin pricking your heart or an angry tide surging threateningly before you, all you can do is use the most vivid and succinct language to describe the severe pain in your heart or the momentary feelings of panic caused by the angry tide.
無錫市第五屆翻譯比賽決賽試題及參考答案（?？平M）
一、 英譯中
【試題】 1. Andrew Carnegie
Andrew Carnegie, known as the King of Steel, built the steel industry in the United States, and, in the process, became one of the wealthiest men in America. His success resulted in part from his ability to sell the product and in part from his policy of expanding during periods of economic decline, when most of his competitors were reducing their investments. Carnegie believed that individuals should progress through hard work, but he also felt strongly that the wealthy should use their fortunes for the benefit of society. “He who dies rich, dies disgraced,” he often said. Among his contributions to society are those that bear his name, including the Carnegie Institute of Pittsburgh, which has a library, a museum of fine arts, and a museum of national history. He also founded a school of technology that is now part of Carnegie-Mellon University. Other philanthropic gifts are the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace to promote understanding between nations, the Carnegie Institute of Washington to fund scientific research, and Carnegie Hall to provide a center for the arts. Few Americans have been left untouched by Andrew Carnegie’s generosity.
【參考答案】(安德魯?卡內(nèi)基)
被稱作鋼鐵大王的安德魯?卡耐基在美國建立了鋼鐵工業(yè)。在這個過程中，他變成了美國最富有的人之一。他的成功，部分源于他銷售產(chǎn)品的能力，部分源于他在經(jīng)濟(jì)蕭條時期的擴(kuò)充策略，而當(dāng)時他的多數(shù)對手都在縮減投資?？突J(rèn)為個人應(yīng)該通過努力工作來獲得進(jìn)步，但他也強(qiáng)烈地認(rèn)為有錢人應(yīng)該運(yùn)用他們的財富來為社會謀取福利?？突?jīng)常說：“富有著死去的人死得可恥?！彼麑ι鐣闹匾暙I(xiàn)都以他的名字命名，其中包括匹茲堡卡耐基學(xué)校。這個學(xué)校有一個圖書館，一個美術(shù)館和一個國家歷史博物館；他還創(chuàng)立了一所技術(shù)學(xué)校，這所學(xué)?，F(xiàn)在是卡耐基-梅隆大學(xué)的一部分；其他的慈善捐贈有為促進(jìn)國家間了解的“卡耐基國際和平基金”，為科學(xué)研究提供經(jīng)費(fèi)的華盛頓卡耐基學(xué)院以及給各種藝術(shù)活動提供活動中心的卡耐基音樂廳。安德魯?卡耐基的慷慨大度幾乎影響到每個美國人的生活。
【試題】2.
Is e-mail a blessing or a curse? Last month, after a week’s vacation, I discovered 1,218 unread e-mail messages waiting in my IN box. I pretend to be dismayed, but secretly I was pleased. This is how we measure our wired worth in the late 1990s — if you aren’t overwhelmed by e-mail, you must be doing something wrong.
E-mail is enabling radically new forms of worldwide human collaboration. Those 225 million people who can send and receive it represent a network of potentially cooperating individuals dwarfing anything that even the mightiest corporation or government. Mailing-list discussion groups and online conferencing allow us to gather together to work on a multitude of projects that are interesting or helpful to us — to pool our collective efforts in a fashion never before possible. The most obvious place to see this collaboration right now is in the world of software. For decades, programmers have used e-mail to collaborate on projects. With increasing frequency, this collaboration is occurring across company lines, and often without even the spur of commercial incentives. It’s happening largely because it can — it’s relatively easy for a thousand programmers to collectively contribute to a project using e-mail and the Internet. Perhaps each individual contribution is small, but the scale of the Internet multiplies all efforts dramatically.
【參考答案】
電子郵件是福是禍？電子郵件是福是禍？上個月，在一周休假之后，我在收件箱中發(fā)現(xiàn)了1,218封未讀郵件。我假裝氣惱，卻暗自竊喜。如果你沒被電子郵件淹沒，你一定是出了問題 —— 這就是20世紀(jì)90年代末我們衡量自身有線價值的方式。
電子郵件使全球范圍內(nèi)人際合作的全新模式成為可能。那2億2千5百萬能夠收發(fā)郵件的人群代表了一個可能參與合作的眾多個體的網(wǎng)絡(luò)。該網(wǎng)絡(luò)聚集人數(shù)之多使得任何大公司或政府機(jī)構(gòu)相形見絀。收件人討論小組以及在線會議使我們能就許多有趣或有助的項(xiàng)目通力合作，以一種全新的方式集思廣益。目前這種合作最易發(fā)生在計算機(jī)的程序系統(tǒng)里。幾十年來，編程員利用電子郵件在各個項(xiàng)目上相互協(xié)作。隨著合作日趨頻繁，合作本身已超越公司的界線，而且常常不受商業(yè)利誘的驅(qū)使。這是因?yàn)槌砂偕锨У木幊虇T通過電子郵件或網(wǎng)絡(luò)就一項(xiàng)目全力協(xié)作相對來說要容易些。個人的力量也許很渺小，但是因特網(wǎng)的規(guī)模使得眾人的力量無限放大。
二、中譯英 （考生從下面兩段中自主選擇一段作答即可）
【試題】1.
中國是一個發(fā)展中國家，人口眾多、經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展水平低、氣候條件復(fù)雜、生態(tài)環(huán)境脆弱，易受氣候變化的不利影響。氣候變化對中國自然生態(tài)系統(tǒng)和經(jīng)濟(jì)社會發(fā)展帶來了現(xiàn)實(shí)的威脅，主要體現(xiàn)在農(nóng)牧業(yè)、林業(yè)、自然生態(tài)系統(tǒng)、水資源等領(lǐng)域以及沿海和生態(tài)脆弱地區(qū)，適應(yīng)氣候變化已成為中國的迫切任務(wù)。同時，中國正處于經(jīng)濟(jì)快速發(fā)展階段，面臨著發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)、消除貧困和減緩溫室氣體排放的多重壓力，應(yīng)對氣候變化的形勢嚴(yán)峻，任務(wù)繁重。
【參考答案】
As a developing country with a large population, a relatively low level of economic development, a complex climate and a fragile eco-environment, China is vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, which has brought substantial threats to the natural ecosystems as well as the economic and social development of the country. These threats are particularly pressing in the fields of agriculture (farming), livestock breeding (husbandry), forestry, natural ecosystems and water resources, and in the coastal and eco-fragile zones. Therefore, China's priority task at present is to adapt itself to climate change. The multiple pressures of developing the economy, eliminating poverty and mitigating the emissions of greenhouse gases constitute difficulties for China in its efforts to cope with climate change, since the country is undergoing rapid economic development.
【試題】2
不能簡單地用“軟”和“硬”來界定中國的外交。國際上特別是西方一些人指責(zé)中國外交強(qiáng)硬了，不像過去好說話。但是國內(nèi)一些輿論又說我們的外交太軟，主張“亮劍”，要求教訓(xùn)一些國家。這本身就表明，從不同的角度看中國外交可能會得出不同的結(jié)論。不能說動槍動炮才是硬，通過對話談判解決分歧就是軟。中國人講剛?cè)嵯酀?jì)，也就是說，“柔”和“剛”是一枚硬幣的兩個面。就像一個人有溫和的時候也有發(fā)怒的時候，一支軍隊(duì)有勇往直前的時候也有迂回周旋的時候。斗爭和妥協(xié)都不是外交的目的，也不是評判外交好壞的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，而只是實(shí)現(xiàn)外交目標(biāo)的方式和選項(xiàng)。這就要求我們該斗爭時斗爭，該合作時合作，該周旋時周旋。智慧比拳頭更重要。
【參考答案】
China's diplomacy cannot be labeled simply as "soft" or "hard-line". Some people in the world, especially in Western countries, accuse China of becoming more assertive in diplomacy not as easygoing as before. But some in China say that China's diplomacy is too "soft" and should "show our sword" to teach certain countries a lesson. We can see that different perspectives can lead people to different conclusions. I don't think only the use of force can make diplomacy strong, or dialogue and negotiation only make diplomacy "soft". We Chinese believe in combining firmness and flexibility, which is to say that "firmness" and "flexibility" are two sides of a coin. A man may be gentle at one time but angry at another time. Sometimes an army needs to march forward bravely while at other times it needs to avoid a direct confrontation. Confrontation and compromise are not the goals of diplomacy, nor are they the yardstick for our diplomatic work. They are just means to achieve our diplomatic goals or options we can choose from. This means we just know when to fight, when to cooperate and when to avoid direct confrontation. Wisdom is way more important than fists.
