2011年11月CATTI二级笔译实务真题与参考译文
2011年11月【英译汉】
Passage 1
Can we have our fish and eat it, too? An unusual collaboration of marine
ecologists and fisheries management scientists says the answer may be yes.
In a research paper published in the journal science, the two groups, long
at odds with each other, offer a global assessment of the world’s saltwater fish
and their environments .Their conclusions are at once gloomy and upbeat –
over-fishing continues to threaten many species, but a combination of steps can
turn things around.
Because antagonism between ecologists and fisheries management experts has
been intense, many familiar with the study say the most important factor is that
it was done at all. They say they hope the study will inspire similar
collaborations between scientist whose focus is safely exploiting specific
natural resources and those interested mainly in conserving them .``This paper
starts to bridge that gap.”
The collaboration began in 2006 when Boris Worm, a marine ecologist at
Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and other scientists made an
alarming prediction: if current trends continue, by 2048 over-fishing will have
destroyed most commercially important populations of saltwater fish.
Ecologists applauded the work. But among fisheries management scientists,
reactions ranged from skepticism to fury over what many called an alarmist
report . Among the most prominent critics was Ray Hilborn , a professor of
aquatic and fishery sciences at the university of Washington in Seattle .Yet the
disagreement did not play out in a typical scientific fashion with ,as Dr.
Hilborn put it ,``researchers firing critical papers back and forth .”Instead,
he and Dr .worm found themselves debating the issue on National Public
Radio.
``We started talking and found more common ground than we had expected,” Dr
.Worm said .Dr .Hilborn recalled thinking that Dr .worm`` actually seemed like a
reasonable person.” The two decided to work together on the issue.
Because the new paper represents the views of both camps, its conclusions
are likely to be influential .Getting a strong statement from those communities
that there is more to agree on than to disagree on helps build confidence.
【参考译文】
在我们有鱼吃的同时，鱼类又不至于灭绝，两者可以得兼吗?海洋生物学家和渔业管理科学家在经历史无前例的合作后得出了肯定的答案。
海洋生物学家和渔业管理科学家长期以来都存在着分歧，不过双方在《美国自然科学杂志》上发表的研究论文对地球上咸水鱼及其生活环境提供了一个全球性的评估。他们得出的结论立马是情况变得既黯淡又令人乐观—过度对渔业资源的捕捞会继续威胁到很多的物种，但是综合运用各种手段能使扭转形势。
由于生态学家和渔业管理专家之间的分歧一直都比较尖锐，很多熟悉此项研究的人都认为最重要的因素已经是这样了。他们说他们希望此项研究能够激励那些焦聚与安全开采特殊自然资源以及那些主要对保护自然资源感兴趣的科学家采取类似的合作。
该合作开始于2006年。当时加拿大新斯科舍省哈利法克斯戴豪斯大学的一个叫鲍里斯·沃姆的海洋生物学家和其他的科学家做出了一个令人震惊的预测：如果任当前趋势继续下去，到2048年过渡捕鱼将会破坏以捕获咸水鱼为生的渔民的生意。
生态学家对此项工作大加赞赏，但是在渔业管理科学家之间对此的反应却不同，对于这所谓的危言耸听的报告有的持怀疑态度，有的表示愤怒。其中最著名的批评家莫过于雷·希尔伯恩了。他是西雅图华盛顿大学水产和渔业科学系教授。正如希尔博尔博士所言，该分歧并不是以一种典型的科学方式结束的，把评论文章
沃姆博士说道：“我们开始讨论并且发现了更多的共同点，超出了我们之前的预计。”希尔伯恩博士回忆到，沃姆博士实际上看起来像一个讲道理的人。两个人决定在这个问题上采取合作。
由于报纸代表了两大正营的观点，它的结论很有可能会很有影响力。从这些群体中得到一个强有力的论点，及合作远大于分歧，这有助于建立信心。
Passage 2
When in Australia recently, I visited a eucalyptus forest that was once the
scene of an appalling wildfire. Perhaps naively, I had expected to find that
many trees had been killed .They hadn’t. They had blackened bark, but were
otherwise looking rather well, many of them wreathed in new young leaves. This
prompted me to consider fire and the role it plays as a force of nature.
Fossil charcoals tell us that wildfires have been part of life on the earth
for as long as there have been plants on land. Fire was here long before such
plants as grasses; it predated the first flowers. And without wanting to get
mystical about it, fire is ,in many respects , a kind of animal, albeit an
ethereal one .Like any animal, it consumes oxygen .Like a sheep, it eats plants.
Sometimes, it merely nibbles a few leaves; sometimes it kills grown trees.
Sometimes it is more deadly and destructive than a swarm of locusts.
The shape-shifting nature of fire makes it hard to study. Some fires are
infernally hot; others, relatively cool. Some stay at ground level; others climb
trees. Moreover, fire is much more likely to appear in some parts of the world
than in others. Satellite images of the earth show that wildfires are rare in,
say, Northern Europe, and common in parts of Central Africa and Australia.
Once a fire gets started, many factors contribute to how it will behave.
The weather obviously has a huge effect: winds can fan flames, rains can quench
them. The lie of the land matters, too: fire runs uphill more readily than it
goes down. But another crucial factor is what type of plants the fire has to
eat.
It’s common knowledge that plants regularly exposed to fire tend to have
features that help them cope with it, such as thick bark, or seeds that only
grow after being exposed to intense heat or smoke.
【参考译文】
最近在澳大利亚我参观了一片桉树林，那里刚刚发生了一场可怕的火灾。我之前曾经天真地认为很多树肯定都被烧死了，不过没有。树皮都被烧黑了，但是看起来这些桉树长得却相当好，很多书都长处了很多新叶子。这促使我想到了那场大火以及它作为自然力量所发挥的作用。
石炭告诉我们，野火在陆地上出现植物后就一直是地球生命的一部分。火在草这类植物存在前很久就存在;而且吞噬了第一批花朵。因为不想把它变得很神秘，所以说火在很多方面是一种动物，尽管是种飘渺不定的动物。像任何一种动物一样，它消耗氧气。它像绵羊一样吞食植物。它有时仅仅咬掉几片叶子，有时却烧死长成的大树。有时它比成群的蝗虫更加致命，更具破坏力。
火不断变换形态的性质使它很难研究。有些火焰像地狱般炙热;有些则相当凉爽。有些火焰呆在地面上;另一些则爬上了树。此外，世界上有些地方的火灾比其他地方要频繁地多。地球的卫星成像显示如欧洲北部这样的地方很少出现野火，而非洲中部的一些地方和澳大利亚则常有野火。
火焰一旦燃起，其行动就会受到很多因素的影响。很明显，天气对此有着极大的影响：
风能煽起火焰，雨则能扑灭火焰。陆地的走势也有影响：火焰顺山势而上比沿山坡向下要快得多。但另一个关键因素是：火焰将吞噬哪类植物。
有一项常识：那些经常接受火焰考验的植物会拥有有助它们应对火灾的特征——如厚厚的树皮或只有经过烈火和浓烟的磨练才会生长的种子。
【汉译英】
Passage 1
中国的国民储蓄约相当于国内生产总值的55%，其中19%为家庭储蓄，11%为政府储蓄，25%为企业储蓄。高储蓄为促进国内投资的快速增长提供了充足的资金，而高投资反过来又促进了国民经济的快速增长。
高储蓄率主要归因于中国计划生育政策下的人口结构，以及经济快速增长背景下家庭消费习惯改变缓慢等因素。尽管中国家庭平均收入随着整体经济增长而迅速增加，但个人消费习惯可能需要几年甚至好几十年才能改变。正是这种“文化因素”常常被认为是中国高储蓄率的原因。
在“过度储蓄优点”的影响下，中国已经并可能继续保持高增长，低通胀。在一个高储蓄的环境中，任何通胀压力都不可能持续很久，而且只要继续保持高储蓄率，就能保证充裕的资金供给，中国经济就足以抵御来自外部的冲击。
Passage2
尽管中国在控烟和禁烟方面做了大量工作，但其控烟形式依然严峻。
目前，中国的烟草和烟制品的生产和消费占世界第一，因吸烟造成疾病的死亡率也占世界第一。中国现有3.5亿烟民，其中青少年吸烟人数达1.8亿，而被动吸烟人数高达5.4亿。中国每年死于与烟草相关疾病的人数高达100万，占全部死亡人数的12%。
控烟难，一方面是由于一些地方政府部门的消极态度，因为烟草和烟制品可以创造大量税收和财政收入，带来地方GDP增长。另一方面是来自烟民的某些错误观念，许多烟民认为，吸烟可以消除疲劳、振奋精神、促进社交联谊、启发思考等。甚至有些烟民还认为吸烟能以毒攻毒，消除某些病害。
中国承诺将在2011年实现室内工作场所、公交交通工具、室内公共场所全面禁烟。要实现这一目标，中国仍面临严峻的考验。
全国新东方英语课程搜索
页:
[1]