当前位置：文档库 › 新世纪大学英语综合教程4第四册课文原文

新世纪大学英语综合教程4第四册课文原文

Man in the Realm of Nature

Nature nurtures mankind unselfishly with its rich resources. Yet, man is so carried away in his transformation of nature that he is unaware that it also has limitations and needs constant care. Now worn by the excessive demands of mankind, nature is unable to maintain the ecological balance needed. Humanity is faced with the problem of how to stop, or at least to moderate, the destruction of Mother Nature.

Alexander Spirkin

Human beings live in the realm of nature. They are constantly surrounded by it and interact with it. Man is constantly aware of the influence of nature in the form of the air he breathes, the water he drinks, and the food he eats. We are connected with nature by "blood" ties and we cannot live outside nature.

Man is not only a dweller in nature, he also transforms it. Humanity converts nature's wealth into the means of the cultural, historical life of society. Man has subdued and disciplined electricity and compelled it to serve the interests of society. Not only has man transferred various species of plants and animals to different climatic conditions, he has also changed the shape and climate of his environment and transformed plants and animals.

As society develops, man tends to become less dependent on nature directly, while indirectly his dependence grows. Our distant ancestors lived in fear of nature's destructive forces. Very often they were unable to obtain the merest daily necessities. However, despite their imperfect tools, they worked together stubbornly, collectively, and were able to attain results. Nature was also changed through interaction with man. Forests were destroyed and the area of farmland increased. Nature with its elemental forces was regarded as something hostile to man. The forest, for example, was something wild and frightening and people tried to force it to retreat. This was all done in the name of civilisation, which meant the places where man had made his home, where the earth was cultivated, where the forest had been cut down.

But as time goes on mankind becomes increasingly concerned with the question of where and how to obtain irreplaceable natural resources for the needs of production. Science and man's practical transforming activities have made humanity aware of the enormous geological role played by the industrial transformation of the earth.

At present the previous dynamic balance between man and nature and

between nature and society as a whole, has shown ominous signs of breaking down. The problem of the so-called replaceable resources of the biosphere has become particularly acute. It is getting more and more difficult to satisfy the needs of human beings and society even for such a substance, for example, as fresh water. The problem of eliminating industrial waste is also becoming increasingly complex.

Modern technology is distinguished by an ever increasing abundance of produced and used synthetic goods. Hundreds of tho usands of synthetic materials are being made. People increasingly cover their bodies from head to foot in nylon and other synthetic, glittering fabrics that are obviously not good for them. Young people may hardly feel this, and they pay more attention to appearance than to health. But they become more aware of this harmful influence as they grow older.

As time goes on the synthetic output of production turns into waste, and then substances that in their original form were not very toxic are transformed in the cycle of natural processes into aggressive agents. Today both natural scientists and philosophers are asking themselves the question: Is man's destruction of the biosphere inevitable?

The man-nature relation – the crisis of the ecological situation – is a global problem. Its solution lies in rational and wise organization of both production itself and care for Mother Nature, not just by individuals, enterprises or countries, but by all humanity. One of the ways to deal with the crisis situation in the "man-nature" system is to use such resources as solar energy, the power of winds, the riches of the seas and oceans and other, as yet unknown natural forces of the universe.

But to return to our theme, the bitter truth is that those human actions which violate the laws of nature, the harmony of the biosphere, threaten to bring disaster and this disaster may turn out to be universal. How apt then are the words of ancient Oriental wisdom: live closer to nature, my friends, and its eternal laws will protect you!

Extinctions, Past and Present

Man and wildlife are supposed to live in harmony, but human intrusion has driven a large number of species to extinction. It is high time that we took up the cause of wildlife conservation; otherwise, the price for us to pay in the

future will be extremely high. In the following essay, the author calls for a global fund for wildlife conservation.

Richard Leakey

I spent some of the most exciting days of my life working on the eastern shores of Kenya's Lake Turkana searching for the fossilized remains (遗体) of our early ancestors. We did not always find what we wanted, but every day there was much more to discover than the traces of our own ancestors. The fossils, some quite complete, others mere fragments, spoke of another world in which the ancestors of many of today's African mammals (哺乳动物) wandered the rich grassland and forest edges between 1.5 million and 2 million years ago. The environment was not too different from the wetter grasslands of Africa today, but it was full of amazing animals that are now long extinct (绝种的).

That was true not just for Africa. The fossil record tells the same story everywhere. It is estimated that more than 95％ of the species that have existed over the past 600 million years are gone.

So, should we be concerned about the current rate of extinction (灭绝), which has been accelerated by the constant expansion of agriculture and industry? Is it necessary to try to slow down a process that has been going on forever?

I believe it is. We know that the well-being of the human race is tied to the well-being of many other species, and we can't be sure which species are most important to our own survival.

But dealing with the extinction crisis is no simple matter, since much of the world's biodiversity (生物多样性) resides (存在) in its poorest nations, especially in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Can such countries justify setting aside national parks and nature reserves where human intrusion (侵扰) and even access is forbidden? Is it appropriate to spend large sums of money to save some species in a nation in which a considerable percentage of the people are living below the poverty line?

Such questions make me uneasy about promoting wildlife conservation in poor nations. Nonetheless, I believe that we can – and should – do a great deal. It's a matter of changing priorities. Plenty of money is available for scientific field studies and conferences on endangered (将要灭绝的) species. But what about boots and vehicles for park personnel who protect wildlife from illegal hunters? What about development aid to give local people economic alternatives to cutting forests and plowing over the land? That kind of funding is difficult to come by.

People in poor countries should not be asked to choose between their own short-term survival and longer-term environmental needs. If their governments are willing to protect the environment, the money needed should come from international sources. To me, the choice is clear. Either the more wealthy world helps now or the world as a whole will lose out.

For that reason, we need permanent global funds devoted to wildlife protection. The funds should primarily come from the governments of the industrial nations and international aid agencies.

How to use those funds would be a matter of endless debate. Should local communities be entitled to set the agenda, or should outside experts take control? Should limited hunting be allowed in parks, or should they be put off limits? Mistakes will be made, the landscape will keep changing, and species will still be lost, but the difficulty of the task should not lead us to abandon hope. Many of the planet's natural habitats (栖息地) are gone forever, but many others can be saved and in time restored.

A major challenge for the 21st century is to preserve as much of our natural estate as possible. Let us resist with all our efforts any moves to reduce the amount of wild land available for wild species. And let us call upon the world's richest nations to provide the money to make that possible. That would not be a contribution to charity; it would be an investment in the future of humanity – and all life on Earth.

Technology and Happiness

In the present era, all of us are enthusiastically pursuing technological advancement and take it for granted that the development of technology will make us happier. However, little evidence can be found to prove the correlation between technology and happiness once material and technological advances reach a certain level. The text below may provide you with some insights into this issue.

James Surowiecki

In the 20th century, Americans, Europeans, and East Asians enjoyed

material and technological advances that were unimaginable in previous eras. In the United States, for instance, gross domestic product per capita tripled from 1950 to 2000. Life expectancy soared. The boom in productivity after World War II made goods better and cheaper at the same time. Things that were once luxuries, such as jet travel and long-distance phone calls, became necessities. And even though Americans seemed to work extraordinarily hard, their pursuit of entertainment turned media and leisure into multibillion-dollar industries.

By most standards, then, you would have to say that Americans are better off now than they were in the middle of the last century. Oddly, though, if you ask Americans how happy they are, you find that they are no happier than they were in 1946 (which is when formal surveys of happiness started). In fact, the percentage of people who say they are "very happy" has fallen slightly since the early 1970s – even though the income of people born in 1940 has, on average, increased by 116 percent over the course of their working lives. You can find similar data for most developed countries.

The relationship between happiness and technology has been an eternal subject for social critics and philosophers since the advent of the Industrial Revolution. But it's been left largely unexamined by economists and social scientists. The truly groundbreaking work on the relationship between prosperity and well-being was done by the economist Richard Easterlin, who in 1974 wrote a famous paper entitled "Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot?" Easterlin showed that when it came to developed countries, there was no real correlation between a nation's income level and its citizens' happiness. Money, Easterlin argued, could not buy happiness – at least not after a certain point. Easterlin showed that though poverty was strongly correlated with misery, once a country was solidly middle-class, getting wealthier did not seem to make its citizens any happier.

This seems to be close to a universal phenomenon. In fact, one of happiness scholars' most important insights is that people adapt very quickly to good news. Take lottery winners for example. One famous study showed that although winners were very, very happy when they won, their extreme excitement quickly evaporated, and after a while their moods and sense of well-being were indistinguishable from what they had been before the victory.

So, too, with technology: no matter how dramatic a new innovation is, no matter how much easier it makes our lives, it is very easy to take it for granted. You can see this principle at work in the world of technology every day, as things that once seemed miraculous soon become common and, worse, frustrating when they don't work perfectly. It's hard, it turns out, to keep in mind what things were like before the new technology came along.

Does our fast assimilation of technological progress mean, then, that

technology makes no difference? No. It just makes the question of technology's impact, for good or ill, more complicated. Let's start with the downside. There are certain ways in which technology makes life obviously worse. Telemarketing, traffic jams, and identity theft all come to mind. These are all phenomena that make people consciously unhappy. But for the most part, modern critiques of technology have focused not so much on specific, bad technologies as the impact of technology on our human relationships.

Privacy has become increasingly fragile in a world of linked databases. In many workplaces, technologies like keystroke monitoring and full recordings of phone calls make it easier to watch workers. The notion that technology disrupts relationships and fractures community gained

mainstream prominence as an attack on television. Some even say that TV is chiefly responsible for the gradual isolation of Americans from each other. Similarly, the harmful effects of the Internet, which supposedly further isolates people from what is often called "the real world".

This broad criticism of technology's impact on relationships is an interesting one and is especially relevant to the question of happiness, because one of the few things we can say for certain is that the more friends and the closer relationships people have, the happier they tend to be.

Today, technological change is so rapid that when you buy something, you do so knowing that in a few months there's going to be a better, faster version of the product, and that you're going to be stuck with the old one. Someone else, in other words, has it better. It's as if disappointment were built into acquisition from the very beginning.

Daily stress, an annoying sense of disappointment, fear that the government knows a lot more about you than you would like it to – these are obviously some of the ways in which technology reduces people's sense of

well-being. But the most important impact of technology on people's sense of well-being is in the field of health care. Before the Industrial Revolution, two out of every three Europeans died before the age of 30. Today, life expectancy for women in Western Europe is almost 80 years, and it continues to increase. The point is obvious: the vast majority of people are happy to be alive, and the more time they get on earth, the better off they feel they'll be. But until very recently, life for the vast majority of people was nasty, rough, and short. Technology has changed that, at least for people in the rich world. As much as we should worry about the rising cost of health care and the problem of the uninsured, it's also worth remembering how valuable for our spirits as well as our bodies are the benefits that medical technology has brought us.

On a deeper level, what the technological improvement of our health and our longevity emphasizes is a paradox of any discussion of happiness on a national or a global level: even though people may not be happier, even though

they are wealthier and possess more technology, they're still as hungry as ever for more time. It's like that old joke: the food may not be so great, but we want the portions to be as big as possible.

Who to Blame, Technology or the Person Who Uses It?

Nowadays, great concern has arisen over the negative impact of technology on various aspects of life. Who is to blame for the negative impact, technology or the person who uses it? Read the following text and see how the author answers the question.

Spiros Tzelepis

Technology is always a "hot" issue in discussions nowadays. A lot has been said and written about it. The defenders of technology are as many as the opponents of it. Usually each one of these two classes of people stresses the advantages or disadvantages of technology without taking the time to look at the opposite point of view. For those who have no prejudice in favor of or against technology, the truth is to be found somewhere between these two extreme views. Technology is like a knife: we can use it to cut our food, and we can also use it to kill somebody. It depends on what we want to do with technology. Do we want to improve our lives or do we want to destroy them?

Of course, nobody can neglect the fact that our living conditions have been improved due to technology; scientists have been able to cure many diseases; production has been increased, and many products have become obtainable by many more people, because the cost of production has been reduced; human labor has been decreased, and, therefore, people have more free time; people's mental horizons have been broadened; and generally we live longer and better because of technology.

But the other side of the coin has become already visible. We talk about the irrational interference with nature, the exhaustion of natural resources, the consumerism of modern societies, the social responsibility of scientists when their inventions are used for bad ends, and the mechanization of work which leaves man as little more than a machine operator.

Let us use an example from medicine to make matters clearer.

Technology improves people's health. This can be seen if one looks at the possibilities of surgery in technologically developed countries like America as compared to countries which do not have this advantage. On the other hand, the involvement of advanced technical equipment in medicine modified the synthetic and conservative way of thinking into an analytical (分析的) one. The physician can do much, but not on his own. Doctors today have become "good learners", but not "thinkers" as they are used to translating every piece of health data into numbers. A close relationship and human interaction between the doctor and the patient does not exist any more. Patients feel more like objects than persons.

Furthermore, consider biotechnology (生物工艺学). It fascinates man's thoughts. The fact that scientists feel that they can "play" with the secret of life pushes them further and further, promising biological immortality and eternity. People expect miracles from genetic engineering, but nature has its own secret laws. Everything that disturbs them has its cost. The closer people reach nature's truth, the further it eludes (躲避) them. When scientists find the cure for a disease, something worse appears to terrify mankind.

Additionally, think about how much war has changed because of technology. People do not fight hand to hand any more – they fight from a distance; technology makes this possible. Fighting face to face needs some values which do not exist in the case where someone presses a button and directs the modern means.

The problem is certainly not technology, but the direction we have finally given to it. When man has no values, technology cannot be controlled any more. When man has values, technology serves him.

Technology is neither good nor bad. It depends on how we use it. I strongly believe that it is time for us to understand that the responsibility belongs exclusively to humans who have to acquire a social conscience, to respect human beings, nature and its balances.

The Rainbow of Knowledge

The acquisition of knowledge is self-contradictory by nature. The more one knows, the more he knows how little he knows. Reading often leads to more questions than answers. Writing opens things up rather than closes them off. The

author of the following essay regards truth as a rainbow that cannot be really grasped. He urges us to be humble about what we don't know as we pride ourselves on what we know.

Craig Russell

For more than 3/4 of my life – 39 of my 50 years – I've either studied or taught in a school or a college in New York.

You might think, then, that after all this time I'd have some grasp of the situation, that I'd actually know things – that I'd have some positive sense of assurance, of certainty, about knowledge and about life. But I don't. In fact, the more I know, the more I know I don't know.

To say that the more I know, the more I know I don't know is, of course, contradictory. But then, modern physics tells us that reality itself is contradictory. The more scientists look into our physical reality, the more it slips away from them. In a way, the more they learn, the less they know.

Knowledge itself is contradictory. For example, picture your knowledge as a dot, as perhaps the period at the end of this sentence. Notice the tiny circumference of that period, and let that repr esent the interface of the known with the unknown – in other words, your awareness of what you don't know.

But now imagine that little period growing, its blackness consuming more and more of the page. As it grows, so does its circumference. And if that growing blackness represents knowledge, then as it grows, so does the awareness of what remains unknown. In other words, the more you know, the more you know you don't know.

No doubt you have experienced this yourself in your own personal quests for knowledge. At first, you don't even know a field of learning exists. It's been there all along, of course; you just haven't noticed it before. When I got my first computer in 1988, I walked down to the magazine store, hoping to find something about computing and was amazed at the number of choices. Likewise, when I lucked into an opportunity to teach film analysis, I found myself dazzled at the sheer number of books devoted to the subject.

Let's say you decide to learn about this topic. You buy one of these books, the best and most complete one you can find (or so you think), or perhaps you borrow it from the library. But you quickly find that your reading, rather than answering questions, only creates more of them.

Earlier this year, for example, I not only had no idea that I had any interest at all in the relationship of technology to freedom; I didn't even realize that a connection between them might exist. So I started reading books and became more and more aware of the relationship between technology and freedom. Then, on the one hand, I now know much more about this topic than I did a few short months ago. But on the other hand, all this reading has made me see how little I really know and how much more I need to read and think and write. Once I've finished reading a book, I always feel that I need to read three more to gain a better grasp of the topic. And I think and write at the same time. In fact, it is my writing that has led me into it. We think often that only people who know and who are sure of themselves write. For me, however, it's just the opposite. Writing doesn't close things off – it opens things up.

For a long time, I, as a writer, was paralyzed by this paradox – the more I know, the more I know I don't know. I was very aware of the teaching from Taoism that said "those who know don't speak; those who speak don't know." I wasn't sure I should write at all, and, even if I did, I didn't believe that I was qualified to do it. I always felt I had to know more first. It took me a long time not to let this paradox freeze me and to believe that it was my writing that would qualify my knowledge, and not the other way around. I think of my work not as articles or as columns but as essays – a word from French, meaning "to try". I do not know truth. I only try to find it.

I don't mean, of course, to suggest that we should not learn, or that we should not read and write and think and talk. I do not mean to sug gest that we should not try. An infinite quest is not a hopeless one. I only suggest that an understanding will inevitably and doubtlessly lead us away from the force and rigidity of dogmatism and toward the flexibility and freedom of the individual. As Taoism teaches, "the stiff and unbending is the disciple of death. The gentle and yielding is the disciple of life."

We must temper our pride in knowing with the humility of not knowing. The truth, as they say, is out there, but, maybe, like the rainbow, we can never really grasp it, never hold it in our hands and truly know it. We can only, as William James said, "live today by what truth we can get today and be ready to call it falsehood tomorrow."

Barriers to Knowledge Transfer

We now have easy access to more information than what we ever possibly dreamed of. Huge amounts of data move around the globe at incredible speed. Yet, knowledge transfer requires more than just technology. Lack of trust and resistance to change are the two major barriers to knowledge transfer.

Victoria Griffith

Everyone is talking about the "knowledge era" these days. Yet what is knowledge? It is a vague concept. Most of us feel knowledge must be more than just data. My two-year-old will tell you that the first president of the United States was George Washington, and that Leonardo da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa. But does she really "know" anything about these men, or art and politics in general? Of course not. Computers, while they excel in performing certain tasks, such as booking airline seats or sorting out bank accounts, are bad at things that come naturally to human beings, such as understanding emotion. But, if knowledge is not pure data, is it experience? Experience is certainly important. It is impossible to learn to ride a bike, for example, simply by hearing someone talk unceasingly about data on the process.

Yet experience alone is not knowledge, either. The ancients experienced the sun rising and setting every day, for instance, but did not know the earth was moving around the sun. They saw people die of various diseases, but had no idea how to prevent such deaths. Knowledge, then, is both experience and information. In the United States, educators battle over the best way to form young minds. Some people believe children should learn facts, such as where the country of Morocco is located. Others believe children should learn how to discover things, like being able to use a map to discover where Morocco is located. In reality, children need to be able to do both. A wise person is one who can combine facts with know-how. Knowledge is a purely human trait because it includes experience.

Unfortunately, humans, the sole vessels of knowledge, are very inefficient at passing it along from one brain to another. In seconds, computers can transfer large quantities of data from one terminal to another. Knowledge is far more difficult to move. There are two major barriers to know ledge transfer: lack of trust and resistance to change. Human beings seem rather stubborn. They only absorb knowledge readily from people they know and trust. In the early 1600s, Galileo argued that the earth and other planets move around the sun. Not only was the knowledge rejected by the general population, but Galileo had to spend the rest of his life under house arrest for his ideas. The Italians three centuries ago trusted the Roman Catholic Church more than they trusted Galileo, so the knowledge transfer was stopped in its tracks.

At times, cultural and language barriers can elevate distrust to such an extent that an exchange of knowledge becomes almost impossible. In 1992, the U.S. National Weather Service predicted devastating rains along the coast of Brazil. The American scientists made little effort to pass the information to Brazil, however. Perhaps they thought it was not their responsibility, or

perhaps they believed the Brazilian scientists had known the situation. While some Brazilian forecasters saw the U.S. bulletins, they failed to pass the information to the public. Perhaps they doubted the accuracy of these reports, or perhaps they did not realize the danger at hand. In any case, the knowledge failed to transfer, and dozens of people died unnecessarily.

Human beings are resistant to change – another major barrier to knowledge transfer. The management theorist Peter Drucker once argued that this very resistance eventually undermines most corporations. New knowledge is always emerging, so to be successful, people must constantly live in a chaotic, changing world, constantly questioning past practices. When this does not happen, the organization collapses. Thus, Digital Equipment Corporation, the once-great computer company, failed to understand and act on knowledge that the personal computer would replace the mainframe (中央处理机). The corporation faltered and was eventually bought by a relative newcomer to the industry – Compaq.

Workers at a Mobil Oil Corporation plant a few years ago came up with a better way to refine oil. The new process saved millions of dollars, and the workers expected it would be readily adopted by its other plants. So they sent a report to the managers of other refineries, explaining the process. Nothing happened. Mobil senior executives took up the issue and sent their own letter out to the managers. Only between ten and twenty percent of the factories installed the new process. So Mobil made a video, interviewing people about the process and explaining how much money it saved. After two years, just 38 percent of the corporation's oil refineries had complied (服从) with the change. Mobil asked why. The most common response was: "It may have worked there, but it won't work here." Lack of trust and resistance to change undermined the knowledge transfer.

As is seen from the above examples, human beings seem accustomed to learning from personal contact with others. Some even p redicted the Internet would reduce travel; however, cyberspace actually appears to have boosted it. That is because many of the basic elements of knowledge transfer are possible mainly through personal contact. Computers and digital communications, while they cannot accomplish knowledge transfer themselves, can ease the way. They can, for instance, put us in touch with experts or colleagues with a shared interest in a specific field. Digital networks might also provide us with reliable data from which to draw conclusions. Yet true knowledge transfer is a human phenomenon, limited by the problems of the human condition – lack of trust and resistance to change. Because it is so difficult, knowledge transfer will continue to be a tough problem, even as we move into the "knowledge era".

Work, Labor, and Play

We go to work every day and we think we are workers. However, after reading Auden's discussion about work, labor, and play, the majority of us may find that we are no longer "workers". What are we then?

Wystan H. Auden

So far as I know, Miss Hannah Arendt was the first person to define the essential difference between work and labor. To be happy, a man must feel, firstly, free and, secondly, important. He cannot be really happy if he is compelled by society to do what he does not enjoy doing, or if what he enjoys doing is ignored by society as of no value or importance. In a society where slavery in the strict sense has been abolished, whether what a man does has social value depends on whether he is paid money to do it, but a laborer today can rightly be called a wage slave. A man is a laborer if the job society offers him is of no interest to himself but he is compelled to take it by the necessity of earning a living and supporting his family.

The opposite to labor is play. When we play a game, we enjoy what we are doing, otherwise we should not play it, but it is a purely private activity; society could not care less whether we play it or not.

Between labor and play stands work. A man is a worker if he is personally interested in the job which society pays him to do; what from the point of view of society is necessary labor is from his own point of view voluntary play. Whether a job is to be classified as labor or work depends, not on the job itself, but on the tastes of the individual who undertakes it. The difference does not, for example, coincide with the difference between a manual and a mental job; a gardener or a cobbler may be a worker, a bank clerk a laborer. Which a man is can be seen from his attitude toward leisure. To a worker, leisure means simply the hours he needs to relax and rest in order to work efficiently. He is therefore more likely to take too little leisure than too much; workers die of heart attacks and forget their wives' birthdays. To the laborer, on the other hand, leisure means freedom from compulsion, so that it is natural for him to imagine that the fewer hours he has to spend labor ing, and the more hours he is free to play, the better.

What percentage of the population in a modern technological society are, like myself, in the fortunate position of being workers? At a guess I would say sixteen per cent, and I do not think that figure is likely to get bigger in the future.

Technology and the division of labor have done two things: by

eliminating in many fields the need for special strength or skill, they have made a very large number of paid occupations which formerly were enjoyable work into boring labor, and by increasing productivity they have reduced the number of necessary laboring hours. It is already possible to imagine a society in which the majority of the population, that is to say, its laborers, will have almost as much leisure as in earlier times was enjoyed by the aristocracy. When one recalls how aristocracies in the past actually behaved, the prospect is not cheerful. Indeed, the problem of dealing with boredom may be even more difficult for such a future mass society than it was for aristocracies. The latter, for example, ritualized their time; there was a season to shoot grouse, a season to spend in town, etc. The masses are more likely to replace an unchanging ritual by fashion which changes as often as possible in the economic interest of certain people. Again, the masses cannot go in for hunting, for very soon there would be no animals left to hunt. For other aristocratic amusements like gambling, dueling, and warfare, it may be only too easy to find equivalents in dangerous driving, drug-taking, and senseless acts of violence. Workers seldom commit acts of violence, because they can put their aggression into their work, be it physical like the work of a smith, or mental like the work of a scientist or an artist. The role of aggression in mental work is aptly expressed by the phrase "getting one's teeth into a problem".

Choosing an Occupation or Career

Choosing an occupation is an important decision. When making a decision such as this, it is essential to look critically at yourself, and examine your values, interests, abilities, etc. The following text provides you with some insightful advice on the factors worth considering when choosing an occupation or career.

Gerald Corey

What do you expect from work? What factors do you give the most attention to in selecting a career or an occupation? In my work at a university counseling center I've discovered that many students haven't really thought seriously about why they are choosing a given vocation. For some, parental pressure or encouragement is the major reason for their choice. Others have idealized views of what it will be like to be a lawyer, engineer, or doctor. Many people I've counseled regarding career decisions haven't looked at what they value the most and whether these values can be attained in their chosen vocation. In choosing your vocation or evaluating the choices you've made previously, you may want to consid er which factors really mean the most to you.

Making vocational choices is a process that spans a considerable period of time, rather than an isolated event. Researchers in career development have

found that most people go through a series of stages in choosing the occupation or, more typically, occupations that they will follow. The following factors have been shown to be important in determining a person's occupational

decision-making process: self-concept, interests, abilities, values, occupational attitudes, socio-economic level, parental influence, ethnic identity, gender, and physical, mental, emotional, and social handicaps. Let's consider some of these factors related to career decision making, keeping in mind that vocational choice is a process, not an event. We'll look at the role of self-concept, occupational attitudes, abilities, interests, and values in choosing a career.

Self-Concept

Some writers in career development believe that a vocational choice is an attempt to fulfill one's self-concept. People with a poor self-concept, for example, are not likely to picture themselves in a meaningful or important job. They are likely to keep their ambitions low, and thus their achievements will probably be low also. They may select and remain in a job that they do not enjoy or derive satisfaction from, based on their conviction that such a job is all they are worthy of. In this regard, choosing a vocation can be thought of as a public declaration of the kind of person we see ourselves as being.

Occupational Attitudes

Research indicates that, among the factors that influence our attitudes toward occupational status, education is important. The higher the educational requirements for an occupation, the higher its status.

We develop our attitudes toward the status of occupations by learning from the people in our environment. Typical first-graders are not aware of the different status of occupations. Yet in a few years these children begin to rank occupations in a manner similar to that of adults. Other research has shown that positive attitudes toward most occupations are common among first-graders but that these preferences narrow steadily with each year of school. As students advance to higher grades, they reject more and more occupations as unacceptable. Unfortunately, they rule out some of the very jobs from which they may have to choose if they are to find employment as adults. It is difficult for people to feel positively about themselves or their occupation if they have to accept an occupation they perceive as low in status.

Abilities

Ability, or aptitude, has received as much attention as any of the factors considered significant in the career decision-making process, and it is probably used more often than any other factor. There are both general and specific abilities. Scholastic aptitude, often called general intelligence or IQ, is a general ability typically considered to consist of both verbal and numerica l aptitudes. Included among the specific abilities are mechanical, clerical, and

spatial (空间的) aptitudes, abstract reasoning ability, and eye / hand / foot coordination. Scholastic aptitude is particularly significant because it largely determines who will be able to obtain the levels of education required for entrance into the higher-status occupations.

Interestingly, most studies show little direct relationship between measured aptitudes and occupational performance and satisfaction. This does not mean that ability is unimportant, but it does indicate that we must consider other factors in career planning.

Interests

Interest measurement has become popular and is used extensively in career planning. Interests, unlike abilities, have been found to be moderately effective as predictors of vocational success, satisfaction, and persistence. Therefore, primary consideration should be given to interests in vocational planning. It is important to first determine your areas of vocational interest, then to identify occupations for which these interests are appropriate, and then to determine those occupations for which you have the abilities required for satisfactory job performance. Research evidence indicates only a slight relationship between interests and abilities.

Values

It is extremely important for you to identify, clarify, and assess your values so that you will be able to match them with your career.

In counseling college students on vocational decision making I typically recommend that they follow their interests and values as reliable guides for a general occupational area. If your central values are economic, for example, your career decisions are likely to be based on a desire for some type of financial or psychological security. The security a job affords is a legitimate consideration for most people, but you may find that security alone is not enough to lead to vocational satisfaction. Your central values may be social, including working with people and helping people. There are many careers that would be appropriate for those with a social orientation (取向).

Of course, the factors I've mentioned are only a few of the many considerations involved in selecting a vocation. Since so much time and energy are devoted to work, it's extremely important to decide for ourselves what weight each factor will have in our thinking.

In short, you stand a greater chance of being satisfied with your work if you put time and thought into your choice and if you actively take steps

toward finding a career or an occupation that will bring more enrichment to your life than it will disruption (扰乱). Ultimately, you are the person who can best decide what you want in your work.

Fame

We may all desire to be famous and yearn for the publicity, wealth and power that accompany fame. Few of us, however, realize that fame also has its negative side and, sometimes, it may even destroy one's life. Read the following t ext and you will get to know more about the adverse impact fame can have on one's life.

Melvin Howards

Fame is very much like an animal chasing his own tail who, when he captures it, does not know what else to do but to continue chasing it. Fame and the publicity that accompanies it, force the famous person to participate in his or her own destruction. Ironic, isn't it?

Those who gain fame most often gain it as a result of possessing a single talent or skill: singing, dancing, painting, or writing, etc. The successful performer develops a style that gains some popularity, and it is this popularity that usually convinces the performer to continue performing in the same style, since that is what the public seems to want and to enjoy. But in time, the performer becomes bored singing the same songs in the same way year after year, or the painter becomes bored painting similar scenes or portraits, or the actor is tired of playing the same character repeatedly. The artist becomes the slave of his or her own success because of the public demands. If the artist attempts to change his or her style of writing or dancing or singing, etc., the audience may turn away and look to give the momentary fame to another and then, in time, to another, and so on and so on.

Fame brings celebrity and high regard from loyal fans in each field. A performer can easily come to believe that he or she is as good as his or her press. But most people, most artists do not gain fame and fortune. What about those performers who fail, or anyone who fails? Curiously enough, failure often serves as its own reward for many people. It brings sympathy from others who are delighted not to be you, and it allows family and friends to lower their expectations of you so that you need not compete with those who have more talent and who succeed. And they find excuses and explanations for your inability to succeed and become famous: you are too sensitive, you are not interested in money, you are not interested in the power that fame brings and you are not

interested in the loss of privacy it demands, etc. – all excuses, but comforting to those who fail and those who pretend not to notice the failure.

History has sufficiently proven that some failure for some people at certain times in their lives does indeed motivate them to strive even harder to succeed and to continue believing in themselves. Thomas Wolfe, the American novelist, had his first novel Look Homeward, Angel rejected 39 times before it was finally published and launched his career and created his fame. Beethoven overcame his cruel and harsh father and grudging acceptance as a musician to become the greatest, most famous musician in the world, and Thomas Edison was thrown out of school in fourth grade, at about age 10, because he seemed to the teacher to be quite dull and ill-behaved. Many other cases may be found of people who failed and used the failure to motivate them to achieve, to succeed, and to become famous. But, unfortunately, for most people failure is the end of their struggle, not the beginning. There are few, if any, famous failures.

Well then, why does anyone want fame? Do you? Do you want to be known to many people and admired by them? Do you want the money that usually comes with fame? Do you want the media to notice everything you do or say both in public and in private? In some areas it is very obvious that to be famous is to be the target of everyone who disagrees with you as well as of the media. Fame turns all the lights on and while it gives power and reputation, it takes the you out of you: you must be what the public thinks you are, not what you really are or could be. But why does anyone want fame? Several reasons come to mind: to demonstrate excellence in some field; to gain the admiration and love of many others; to be the one everyone talks about; to show family and friends you are more than they thought you were. Probably you can list some other reasons, but I think these are reasonably common.

I say to those who desperately seek fame and fortune, celebrity: good luck. But what will you do when you have caught your tail, your success, your fame? Keep chasing it? If you do catch it, hang onfor dear life. See you soon famous and almost famous!

The Right Kind of Success

It is hard to be successful and even harder to achieve true and lasting success. You may have a new understanding of success after reading the following text about the right kind of success and its three attributes.

John C. Bogle

Good afternoon and congratulations to each one of you for having the brains, the courage, and the determination to earn your bachelor's degree from this great American university. You have earned the right to at least a few moments of pride, and I know that your families, here supporting you today, are proud as well.

Doubtless most of you will soon be entering the world of business, seeking success in whatever careers you find your calling. So I'd like to spend a few moments reflecting on what we mean by success, and how we measure it. To be frank, I think that achieving the right kind of success is a far loftier (崇高的) goal than would be suggested by its conventional definition.

When I graduated from Princeton University, I sought "success", and its going definition then – "wealth, fame and power" – seemed reasonable enough to me. While a half-century-plus has passed since then, I see little reason to believe that wealth, fame, and power do not remain the three main attributes of success, but not in the conventional way in which I defined them all those years ago. I have come to realize that wealth is ill-measured by using mere dollars; that fame is ill-measured by public notoriety (恶名); and that power is

ill-measured solely by control over others.

Financial wealth, in fact, is a shallow measure of success. If we accept dollars as our standard, then "money is the measure of the man", and what could be more foolish than that? So how should wealth be measured? What about a life well-lived? What about a family closely bound by love? Who could be wealthier than a man or woman whose calling provides benefits to mankind, or to fellow citizens, or even to a community or neighborhood?

It is not that money doesn't matter. Who among us would not seek resources sufficient to fully enjoy our life and liberty? The security of freedom from want, the ability to pursue our chosen careers, the tuition to educate our children. But how much wealth does that require?

Fame, too, is a flawed measure of success. It certainly is the great ego-builder of our age. But from what source, and to what avail (好处)? The fleeting fame of our sports heroes and the glittering fame of our entertainers give us the joy of seeing human beings at the very peak of their potential, but in the fast-paced world of today, much of that glow rarely lasts very long. Fame for real accomplishment is one thing, but fame that is ill-deserved, and fame that is used for base purposes are quite different things. And please never forget that many – indeed most – of those who make the greatest contributions to the daily working of our society never experience even a moment of fame.

And that brings us to power. Sure, power to run an enterprise is a thrill, and power over the person and power over the corporate purse are fun. But when power is used carelessly and arbitrarily, society as a whole is the loser.

What we ought to respect is power for a worthy purpose – the power of the intellect (智力), the power of morality, the power to enable the people with whom we work to grow in skill and spirit alike; power that assures respect for the humblest to the highest souls who dedicate themselves to an enterprise; power to help one's fellow man. That's power worth seeking.

So what are we to make of all of these mixed measures of success? Perhaps the famed economist Joseph Schumpeter can help. Ambitious people are driven, he suggested, by "the joy of creating, of getting things done, of simply exercising one's energy and ingenuity (足智多谋); and by the will to conquer, the impulse to fight, to succeed for the sake, not of the fruits of success" – i.e. wealth, fame, and power – "but of success itself".

Such success cannot be measured in monetary (金钱的) terms, nor in terms of the amount of power one may exercise over others, nor in the illusory fame of inevitably short-lived public notice. But it can be measured in our contributions to building a better world, in helping our fellow man, in bringing up children who themselves become loving human beings and good citizens.

In this quest, those of us who select business as our calling carry a special burden. For in our society today it is in business and finance that the most people make the most money, hold the most power, and enjoy an astonishing level of fame. So, as you go out into the dog-eat-dog competitive arena (竞技场) of commerce, earn the right kind of success, maintaining your values, your ethics, and your integrity.

In today's business world, I fear, our leaders have sought the wrong kind of success, and indeed have too often engaged in over-reaching what is unethical and often illegal.

For your generation, our failure is your opportunity – the opportunity of a lifetime. We're all in the human race together, and those of us who are lucky enough to earn a good living through our business careers must, as we run the long race of a life well lived, do our best to serve our fellow men.

For half a century plus, business has been my calling. As I continue

新世纪大学英语4课后答案

Text A compelled 迫使destruction 破坏eternal 永恒的output 产量retreat 撤退threaten 威胁transfer 转移Text B bare 赤裸consumed 耗尽have emerged 出现hollow 空心mass 大量miracle 奇迹pile 一堆scrape擦spark 火星thereby 由此tipped 顶端trigger 触发 1. If you had had a spark of consideration for your family ,you wouldn't have taken so many stupid risks. 如果你有为你的家人多一点考虑，你就不会有那么多愚蠢的风险。 2. Due to the lack of labor force, even women in this village were compelled to work in the coal mines. 由于缺乏劳动力这个村的妇女甚至被迫在煤矿工作。 3. We went through lovely countryside with great mountains, some of them beautiful and green and wooded, while others bare and wild. 我们穿过了美丽的农村巨大的群山，其中一些美丽的绿色和繁茂的，而其他人赤裸的和野生。 4. The cleaner took off his coat and began to scrape the ashes from the furnace with his bare hands. 清洁脱掉外套，开始擦去炉上的灰烬随着他的赤裸的双手。 5. People in that area are already threatened with environmental destruction since 60% of the forest there has been destroyed. 人们已经感受到环境破坏方面的威胁，因为有60％的森林已被破坏 6. The auto company has seen a huge increase in the output of private can this year due to the improved working efficiency. 汽车公司已经看到了今年由于提高了工作效率，私人产量大幅增加。 7. Under the severe attack from enemy aircraft, the troops were forced to retreat from front. 在敌机的严厉打击下，前面的部队被迫撤退。 8. When I came up to a giraffe lying on the grasses, I found that it had been killed with a spear tipped with poison. 当我来到一个长颈鹿躺在草，我发现它已经被带毒尖矛杀死。 9. He stayed eight days in an open boat with no food, and he was still alive; his survival was a(n) miracle. 他在无遮档的小船上呆了八天,又无食物,还活下来了,这真是个奇迹。 10. Survival of the Fittest is an eternal truth of nature. 适者生存是一个自然界的永恒的真理。 11. His hear sank when he saw the fresh pile of mails, memos and telephone messages on his desk. 他听到沉没时，他看到邮件的新的一堆，在他的书桌上的备忘录和电话留言。 12. The military government refused to transfer power to a democratically elected civilian government. 军事政府拒绝将权力移交给一个民选的文官政府. 13. In that area nearly six million people are affected by the drought and the civil war, and there is a real danger of mass starvation. 在那个地区近六百万人受到干旱和内战的影响，并有大规模饥荒的一个真正的危险。 14. Postal service personnel who are severely irresponsible purposely delay sending mail, thereby giving rise to great loss of public trust. 谁是严重不负责任的邮政服务人员故意延迟发送邮件，致使公共信任的巨大损失。 15. With the increase in the number of foreign funded enterprises, various kinds of financial disputes have emerged. 随着外资企业的增加，各类经济纠纷的出现。 16. The earthquake may trigger landslides that cause great damage and loss of life. 地震可能引发的山体滑坡造成巨大的破坏和生命损失。 17. Deforesting and global warming threaten to ruin the current and future state of our environment. 毁林和全球变暖的威胁破坏我们的环境的当前和未来的态。 18. It was reported that almost 7 million liters consumed during the 16-day beer festival in Germany that year. 据报道，每年大约7000000 公升的啤酒节的16 天在德国消耗。 19. On a bitterly cold night, the only shelter he could find was the hollow trunk of a great tree. 在一个寒冷的夜晚，他能找到的唯一的栖身之处是空心的大树的树干。

新世纪大学英语第三册原文每段翻译U

新世纪大学英语第三册原文每段翻译U UNIT 6：Culture Shock |文化冲击| Kalervo Oberg We might almost call culture shock an occupational disease of people who have been suddenly transplanted abroad. Like most ailments it has its own cause, symptoms, and cure. 1 我们不妨把文化冲击称为突然置身国外的人们所得的职业病。和大部分疾病一样，这种病有其独特的起因、症状和疗法。 Culture shock is precipitated by the anxiety that results from losing all our familiar signs and symbols of social intercourse. These signs or cues include the thousand and one ways in which we orient ourselves to the situations of daily life: when to shake hands and what to say when we meet people, when and how to give tips, how to give orders to servants, how to make purchases, when to accept and when to refuse invitations, when to take statements seriously and when not. These cues which may be words, gestures, facial expressions, customs, or norms are acquired by all of us in the course of growing up and are as much a part of our culture as the language we speak or the beliefs we accept. All of us depend for our peace of mind and our efficiency on hundreds of these cues. 2 文化冲击是因为我们失去熟悉的社会交往标记和符号而产生的焦虑所促成。这些标志或暗示包括我们应付日常生活各种情境时使用的诸多方式方法：与人会面时何时握手、该说些什么；在什么时间、以什么方式付小费；如何吩咐佣人；怎样购物；何时该接受、何时该拒绝他人的邀请；别人说的话，何时该当真，何时不该当真。这些暗示可以是语言、手势、面部表情、风俗习惯或社会行为标准。我们在成长的过程中获得了这些暗示，就像我们的语言和我们所接受的信仰一样，它们已经成为我们文化的一部分。我们所有的人都依赖成百上千个这样的暗示才能拥有宁静的心境，过上高效率的生活。 Now when an individual enters a strange culture, all or most of these familiar cues are removed. He or she is like a fish out of water. No matter how broad-minded you may be, a series of props have been knocked from under you, followed by a feeling of frustration and anxiety. People react to the frustration in much the same way. First they reject the environment which causes the discomfort: a€?The ways of the host country are bad because they make us feel bad.a€? When Americans or other foreigners in a strange land get together to complain about the host country and its people a€”you can be sure they are suffering from culture shock. Another phase of

全新版大学英语综合教程2课文原文及翻译

One way of summarizing the American position is to state that we value originality and independence more than the Chinese do. The contrast between our two cultures can also be seen in terms of the fears we both harbor. Chinese teachers are fearful that if skills are not acquired early, they may never be acquired; there is, on the other hand, no comparable hurry to promote creativity. American educators fear that unless creativity has been acquired early, it may never emerge; on the other hand, skills can be picked up later. However, I do not want to overstate my case. There is enormous creativity to be found in Chinese scientific, technological and artistic innovations past and present. And there is a danger of exaggerating creative breakthroughs in the West. When any innovation is examined closely, its reliance on previous achievements is all too apparent (the "standing on the shoulders of giants" phenomenon). But assuming that the contrast I have developed is valid, and that the fostering of skills and creativity are both worthwhile goals, the important question becomes this: Can we gather, from the Chinese and American extremes, a superior way to approach education, perhaps striking a better balance between the poles of creativity and basic skills?

新世纪大学英语系列教程第版综合教程答案

Unit Two Optimism and Positive Thinking Enhance Your Language Awareness Words in Action ■ Working with Words and Expressions 1. In the box below are some of the words you have learned in this unit. Complete the following sentences with them. Change the form where necessary. ■ Answers: positive startled perspective harden shape address crises curse incredible 10) conversely 11) issue 12) response 13) prior 14) rare 15) accomplish 2. In the box below are some of the expressions you have learned in this unit. Do you understand their meanings? Do you know how to use them in the proper context? Now check for yourself by doing the blank-filling exercise. Change the form where necessary. ■ Answers: get the hang of have lived through makes a difference have no idea concerned with slipped over ran into in reverse mull over ■ I ncreasing Your Word Power 1. D ecide whether “do ”, “make ”or “take ”is needed to complete each of the following sentences. Change the verb form where necessary. ■ A nswers: does make take do make Take done taken making ))))))))) ))))))))) ))))))))) 10) took

新世纪大学英语综合教程2课文翻译

陌生人的善意 1. 一年夏天，我从家乡加利福尼亚州的塔霍城开车前往新奥尔良。在沙漠深处，我碰到一个年轻人站在路旁。他一只手打出拇指向外的手势，另一只手里拿着一个汽油罐。我直接从他身边开过去了。别人会停下来的，我想。再说，那汽油罐只是个让车停下、好抢劫司机的幌子而已。在这个国家，曾有那么一段时间，你要是对需要帮助的人置之不理，大家会认为你是混蛋，而如今你要是帮了你就是笨蛋。到处潜伏着犯罪团伙、吸毒上瘾者、杀人犯、强奸犯、盗窃犯还有劫车犯，为什么要冒险呢？“我不想卷进去”已经成为全国性的信条。 2. 开过了几个州以后，我还在想着那个想搭便车的人。把他一个人留在沙漠中倒并没有让我有多么不安。让我不安的是，我多么轻易地就做出了这个决定。我甚至根本没把脚从油门上抬起来。我很想知道，现在还有人会停车吗？ 3. 我想到我此行的目的地——新奥尔良。那里是田纳西·威廉姆斯的剧作《欲望号街车》的背景地。我回想起布兰奇·杜波依斯的名句：“我总是依赖陌生人的善意。” 4. 陌生人的善意。听起来好怪。如今这年头还有谁能指望陌生人的善意吗？ 5. 要验证这一点，一个办法是一个人从东海岸旅行到西海岸，不带一分钱，完全依靠美国同胞的善意。他会发现一个什么样的美国？谁会给他饭吃、让他歇脚、捎他一程呢？ 6. 这个念头激起了我的好奇心。但谁会这么不切实际、愿意去尝试这样一次旅行呢？好吧，我想，那不如我来试试？ 7. 满37岁那个星期，我意识到我这辈子还从没冒过什么险呢。所以我决定来个观念的跨越，美洲大陆那么宽——从太平洋去大西洋，不带一分钱。要是有人给我钱，我会拒绝。我只接受搭顺风车、提供食物和让我歇脚的帮助。这将是穿越这片金钱至上的土地上一次无钱的旅行。我的最终目的地是北卡罗来纳州的“恐惧角”（即开普菲尔），它象征着我沿途必须克服的所有恐惧。 8. 1994年9月6日，我早早起床，背起一个50磅重的包，朝金门桥走去。我从背包里拿出一个牌子，向过路的车辆展示我的目的地：“美利坚”。 9. 司机们隔着挡风玻璃念出这个词，然后笑了。两个女人骑自行车经过。“有点含混，”其中一个说。一名带有德国口音的年轻男士走上前来问，“你这个‘美利坚’在哪儿？”10. 实际上，整整六个星期的时间里我试图找出答案。我搭了82次便车，行程4223英里，穿越了14个州。在旅途中，我发现其他人跟我一样有担心。人们总是在警告我当心别的某个地方。在蒙大拿州，他们叫我留神怀俄明州的牛仔，而在内布拉斯加州，人们提醒我说艾奥瓦州的人可不如他们友好。 11. 然而，在我所去的每个州，我都受到了友善的对待。我诧异于美国人执意帮助陌生人的能力，甚至于在看来与自己的最大利益相冲突时他们也绝不袖手旁观。有一天，在内布拉斯加，一辆四门小轿车在路肩停下。我走到车窗边，看到两位穿着节日盛装的瘦小老妇人。12. “我知道这年头不该带搭便车的，但这里前不着村后不着店的，不停车感觉真不好。”自称“维”的司机说。她和姐姐海伦是去内布拉斯加的安斯沃思看眼疾的。 13. 她们为我停了车，我都不知道是该亲吻她们呢还是该责备她们。这个女人是在告诉我，她宁肯冒生命危险也不愿意因为没为一个站在路边的陌生人停车而感到内疚。她们在一个高速路口把我放下时，我望着维。我们俩异口同声地说，“小心。” 14. 有一次我在雨中没能搭上便车。一名长途卡车司机停了车，他把刹车踩得那么重，车子都在草地路肩上滑行了一段。司机告诉我他有一次被搭便车的人持刀抢劫了。“但我不愿意看到有人在雨里站着。”他补充说，“现在大家都没有良心了。” 15. 然而，我发现，总体而言，人们还是挺有同情心的。艾奥瓦州一对中年夫妇为了帮我找宿营地领着我走了一个小时。在南达科他州，一个女人让我在她家住了一晚之后递给我两张

全新版大学英语第二版综合教程2课文

BOOK2课文译文 UNIT1 TextA 中国式的学习风格 1987年春，我和妻子埃伦带着我们18个月的儿子本杰明在繁忙的中国东部城市南京住了一个月，同时考察中国幼儿园和小学的艺术教育情况。然而，我和埃伦获得的有关中美教育观念差异的最难忘的体验并非来自课堂，而是来自我们在南京期间寓居的金陵饭店堂。我们的房门钥匙系在一块标有房间号的大塑料板上。酒店鼓励客人外出时留下钥匙，可以交给服务员，也可以从一个槽口塞入钥匙箱。由于口子狭小，你得留神将钥匙放准位置才塞得进去。本杰明爱拿着钥匙走来走去，边走边用力摇晃着。他还喜欢试着把钥匙往槽口里塞。由于他还年幼，不太明白得把钥匙放准位置才成，因此总塞不进去。本杰明一点也不在意。他从钥匙声响中得到的乐趣大概跟他偶尔把钥匙成功地塞进槽口而获得的乐趣一样多。我和埃伦都满不在乎，任由本杰明拿着钥匙在钥匙箱槽口鼓捣。他的探索行为似乎并无任何害处。但我很快就观察到一个有趣的现象。饭店里任何一个中国工作人员若在近旁，都会走过来看着本杰明，见他初试失败，便都会试图帮忙。他们会轻轻握牢本杰明的手，直接将它引向钥匙槽口，进行必要的重新定位，并帮他把钥匙插入槽口。然后那位“老师”会有所期待地对着我和埃伦微笑，似乎等着我们说声谢谢——偶尔他会微微皱眉，似乎觉得我俩没有尽到当父母的责任。我很快意识到，这件小事与我们在中国要做的工作直接相关：考察儿童早期教育（尤其是艺术教育）的方式，揭示中国人对创造性活动的态度。因此，不久我就在与中国教育工作者讨论时谈起了钥匙槽口一事。两种不同的学习方式

我的中国同行，除了少数几个人外，对此事的态度与金陵饭店工作人员一样。既然大人知道怎么把钥匙塞进槽口——这是走近槽口的最终目的，既然孩子还很年幼，还没有灵巧到可以独自完成要做的动作，让他自己瞎折腾会有什么好处呢？他很有可能会灰心丧气发脾气——这当然不是所希望的结果。为什么不教他怎么做呢？他会高兴，他还能早些学会做这件事，进而去学做更复杂的事，如开门，或索要钥匙——这两件事到时候同样可以（也应该）示范给他看。我俩颇为同情地听着这一番道理，解释道，首先，我们并不在意本杰明能不能把钥匙塞进钥匙的槽口。他玩得开心，而且在探索，这两点才是我们真正看重的。但关键在于，在这个过程中，我们试图让本杰明懂得，一个人是能够很好地自行解决问题的。这种自力更生的精神是美国中产阶级最重要的一条育儿观。如果我们向孩子演示该如何做某件事——把钥匙塞进钥匙槽口也好，画只鸡或是弥补某种错误行为也好——那他就不太可能自行想方设法去完成这件事。从更广泛的意义上说，他就不太可能——如美国人那样——将人生视为一系列的情境，在这些情境中，一个人必须学会独立思考，学会独立解决问题，进而学会发现需要创造性地加以解决的新问题。把着手教回想起来，当时我就清楚地意识到，这件事正是体现了问题的关键之所在——而且不仅仅是一种意义上的关键之所在。这件事表明了我们两国在教育和艺术实践上的重要差异。那些善意的中国旁观者前来帮助本杰明时，他们不是简单地像我可能会做的那样笨拙地或是犹犹豫豫地把他的手往下推。相反，他们极其熟练地、轻轻地把他引向所要到达的确切方向。我逐渐认识到，这些中国人不是简单地以一种陈旧的方式塑造、引导本杰明的行为：他们是在恪守中国传统，把着手教，教得本杰明自己会愉快地要求再来一次。

新世纪大学英语综合教程1翻译答案(全)

(1)这个婴儿还不会爬(crawl)，更不要说走了。(let alone) The baby can’t even crawl yet, let alone walk! (2)威尔声称谋杀案发生时他正在与一群朋友吃饭,但是我认为他在说谎。(claim, in one’s opinion） Will claimed he was dining with a group of friends at the time of the murder, but in my opinion he told a lie. (3)一定程度上阅读速度与阅读技巧密切相关；有了阅读技巧，你就可以更好地应对课外阅读了。(to a certain extent, relate …to …, cope with） To a certain extent the speed of reading is closely related to reading skills; and with reading skills you can cope with outside class reading better. (4)根据规则他俩都可以参加比赛。(according to） According to the regulation/rule, they both can play the game/participate in the game. (5)有些人想当然地认为日语(Japanese)中的每一个词在汉语中都有对应的词语。(assume, equivalent) Some people assume that there is a Chinese equivalent for every Japanese word. (6)我们已将所有的相关信息告知了警方。(relevant) We have passed all relevant information on to the police. (7)关于那件事你问我再多的问题也没用，因为我是不会回答你的。(it’s no use) There is no use asking me any more questions about that matter because I won't answer. (8)事先没有仔细阅读合同(contract)就签了名是吉姆的错误。(on one’s part) It was a mistake on Jim's part to sign the contract without reading it carefully. (9)他们拒绝向我们提供所需要的全部信息。(provide …with) They refused to provide us with all the information we need. (10) 这起事故与三年前发生的一起事故极为相似。(similar to) This accident is very similar to the one that happened three years ago. (11)这部影片是根据莎士比亚的戏剧改编的。(base on) The film is based on a play by Shakespeare (12)如果你的英语和电脑技能都掌握得好，那么你在谋职时就一定比别人更有优势。(have an advantage over) If you have a good command of English and computer skills, you will surely have an advantage over others in finding a job.

二十一世纪大学实用英语综合教程第四册第一单元习题答案和课文翻译

基础英语Book 4 第一单元学习资料 Ⅰ.Exercise 9. Take a close look at the following picture. Think about it for one minute. Then give a two-minute oral presentation to explain to the class what you think it means. Questions: 1.What does the man fill his mind with, knowledge or money? 2.What dose the man fill his pocket, knowledge or money? 3.What should we do first ?To fill our mind with knowledge or to fill our pocket with money? Preparation: 1. We have been taught the importance of independence. Actually, we are learning to be independent while we are living on campus as college students. Upon graduation, we will look for a jo b and earn a living in the world of competition on our own. 2. First thin gs first. We are supposed to fill our…………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………… 3. We are living in the age of knowledge economy ………………………………………………. ……………………………………………….. 4. Today, we are college students with empty pockets. ………………………………………….. .............................................................................. Ⅱ.Language points for Paragraph 11-14 of Text B 1. e.g.新的经济发展正推动着变革。 The change is being propelled by the new economic development. 2. e.g. His speech is more of a public-relations gimmick than a genuine commitment. 他的讲话只是一种公关手腕，而不是真正的承诺。 3. If pride in a good name keeps families and neighborhoods straight, a sense of self-respect is the reverse side of that coin. 如果说，对好名声的自豪感能使家庭及邻里保持正直，那么，自尊感也能从相反的方向起到同样的作用。 4. attribute : vt. consider as being the result of, as coming from 把…归因于；把…归咎于attribute…to…: believe (sth.) to be the result of 把…归因于；把…归咎于 be attributed to…归因于;…归咎于 be attributable to ……可能归因于…… e.g. David attributed his company’s success to the hard work of all the staf f. 大卫把他公司的成功归因于全体员工的努力工作。 e.g. The price is attributable to a sharp reductionin demand. 价格下跌可能归因于需求量的大幅度减少。 Note: attribute to (含有较多的客观性)把…归因于;把…归咎于 ascribe to (主观臆断成分较重）把……归功于 accredit to (一般只用于好事,不用于坏事)把……归因于 impute to(则多用于坏事）把……归因于/归咎于/转嫁于 e.g. The commentator attributed the rising production to the new policy. 评论家认为是一项新政策促使生产上升 The Romans ascribed their victories to the blessing of the goods.

新世纪大学英语课文翻译

UNIT1 人在自然界 1) 人类生活在大自然的王国里。他们时刻被大自然所包围并与之相互影响。人类呼吸的空气、喝下的水和摄入的食物，无一不令人类时刻感知到大自然的影响。我们与大自然血肉相连，离开大自然，我们将无法生存。 2) 人类不仅生活在大自然之中，同时也在改变着大自然。人类把自然资源转变为各种文化，社会历史的财富。人类降服并控制了电，迫使它为人类社会的利益服务。人类不仅把各种各样的动植物转移到不同的气候环境，也改变了他生活环境的地貌和气候并使动植物因之而发生转变。 3) 随着社会的发展，人类对大自然的直接依赖越来越少，而间接的依赖却越来越多。我们远古的祖先生活在大自然的威胁及破坏力的恐惧之中，他们常常连基本的生活物资都无法获取。然而，尽管工具不甚完备，他们却能同心协力，顽强工作，并总是有所收获。在与人类的相互作用中，大自然也发生了改变。森林被破坏了，耕地面积增加了。大自然及其威力被看成是和人类敌对的东西。譬如，森林被认为是野性的和令人恐惧的，因此人类便想方设法使其面积缩小。这一切都是打着“文明”的旗号进行的，所谓“文明”，就是人类在哪里建立家园，耕耘土地，哪里的森林就被砍伐。 4) 然而，随着岁月的流逝，人类越来越关注的是在何处得到和如何得到生产所需的不可替代的自然资源的问题。科学与人类改变大自然的实践活动已经使人类意识到了工业在改变地球的进程中对地质产生的重大影响。 5) 目前，人与自然以及自然与社会整体之间过去存在的动态平衡，已呈现崩溃的迹象。生物圈中所谓可替代资源的问题变得极为尖锐。人类和社会的需求，即便是简单得像淡水一样的物质，也变得越来越难以满足。清除工业废物的问题也变得日益复杂。 6) 现代技术的特征是生产和使用日益丰富的人工合成产品。人们生产成千上万的人工合成材料。人们越来越多地用尼龙和其他人造纤维把自己从头到脚地包裹起来，这些绚丽的织物显然对他们无益。年轻人或许很少注意到这一点，他们更关注的是外表，而不是健康。但是上了年岁之后，他们就会感受到这种有害的影响。 7) 久而久之，这些合成物质转变成废弃物，那些原本毒性不大的物质在自然循环中变为极其有害的物质。自然科学家和哲学家如今都在问自己这样一个问题：人类对生物圈的破坏难道是无法避免的吗？

全新版大学英语综合教程unit课文翻译

Globalization is sweeping aside national borders and changing relations between nations. What impact does this have on national identities and loyalties? Are they strengthened or weakened? The author investigates. 全球化正在扫除国界、改变国与国之间的关系。这对国家的认同和对国家的忠诚会带来什么影响呢？它们会得到加强还是削弱？作者对这些问题进行了探讨。 In Search of Davos ManPeter Gumbel 1. William Browder was born in Princeton, New Jersey, grew up in Chicago, and studied at Stanford University in California. But don't call him an American. For the past 16 of his 40 years he has lived outside the ., first in London and then, from 1996, in Moscow, where he runs his own investment firm. Browder now manages $ billion in assets. In 1998 he gave up his American passport to become a British citizen, since his life is now centered in Europe. "National identity makes no difference for me," he says. "I feel completely international. If you have four good friends and you like what you are doing, it doesn't matter where you are. That's globalization." 寻找达沃斯人彼得·甘贝尔威廉·布劳德出生于新泽西州的普林斯顿，在芝加哥长大，就读于加利福尼亚州的斯坦福大学。但别叫他美国人。他今年40岁，过去16年来一直生活在美国以外的地方，先是在伦敦，1996年后在莫斯科经营他自己的投资公司。布劳德如今掌管着价值16亿美元的资产。1998年，他放弃美国护照，成为英国公民，因为他现在的生活中心在欧洲。“国家认同对我来说不重要，”他说，“我觉得自己完全是个国际人。如果你有四个朋友，又喜欢你所做的事情，那么你在哪儿无关紧要。这就是全球化。” 2. Alex Mandl is also a fervent believer in globalization, but he views himself very differently. A former president of AT&T, Mandl, 61, was born in Austria and now runs a French technology company, which is doing more and more business in China. He reckons he spends about 90% of his time traveling on business. But despite all that globetrotting, Mandl who has been a . citizen for 45 years still identifies himself as an American. "I see myself as American without any hesitation. The fact that I spend a lot of time in other places doesn't change that," he says. 亚历克斯·曼德尔也是全球化的狂热信徒，但他对自己的看法与布劳德不同。61岁的曼德尔曾任美国电报电话公司总裁。他出生于奥地利，现在经营着一家法国技术公司，该公司在中国的业务与日俱增。他估计自己几乎90%的时间都花在出差上。然而，尽管曼德尔全球到处跑，已经做了45年美国公民的他还是认为自己是个美国人。“我毫不迟疑地把自己当作美国人。我在其他地方度过很多时间，但是这一事实不能改变我是美国人，”他说。 3. Although Browder and Mandl define their nationality differently, both see their identity as a matter of personal choice, not an accident of birth. And not incidentally, both are Davos Men, members of the international business élite who trek each year to the Swiss Alpine town for the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, founded in 1971. This week, Browder and Mandl will join more than 2,200 executives, politicians, academics, journalists, writers and a handful of Hollywood stars for five days of networking, parties and endless earnest discussions about everything from post-election Iraq and HIV in Africa to the global supply of oil and the implications of nanotechnology. Yet this year, perhaps more than ever, a hot topic at Davos is Davos itself. Whatever their considerable differences, most Davos Men and