2014年硕士研究生入学考试初试专业课211翻译硕士英语试题

When writer James Truslow Adams coined the phrase in 1931 he called the American dream “that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement.” So it was all about opportunity, which largely has disappeared amid a poor job market, heavy debts, and wages that have stalled for 25 years.

In more recent times, the American dream became closely identified with home ownership. But that idea suffered a blow in the housing bust. Just 65% of Americans own their home, down from 69% pre-bust, and four out of five Americans are rethinking the reasons they’d want to buy a house.

Perhaps the newest definition of the American dream comes from the National Endowment for Financial Education, which found that nearly half of adults define the dream as a comfortable retirement. Most just want to quit work at 65 or 67 and not worry. That’s their dream, which far outpaces the 17% who cling to homeownership as the embodiment of Adam’s vision.

Now we see yet another blow to yet another version of the American dream, which at times has been described as each generation doing better than the last. Seven in 10 Americans say that when today’s children are adults, they’ll have less financial security than adults today, according to an Allstate/National Journal Heartland Monitor poll.

Adults overwhelmingly believe childhood and parenthood were better for earlier generations; 79% say it was better to have been a child when they were young. Most believe today’s kids will have a poorer chance of holding a steady job and owning a home without too much debt, and that their children will have less opportunity to achieve a comfortable retirement.

The downbeat view doesn’t stop here. Adults also believe that today’s children will display less patriotism, a poorer work ethic, and less civic responsibility when they come of age.

All this pessimism would be deadly troublesome if not for one thing: young people aren’t buying it. More than half of teens in the poll say it’s better to be a kid today, and nearly half say that when they are their parents’ age they will have more opportunity—not less.

Maybe that’s because young people learned a lot during the Great Depression. They saw their parents get socked. But with no real assets at risk themselves they came through it unscathed, financially speaking, and yet took the lessons to heart and are more conscious about spending and debt than Mom and Dad have been.

Maybe that’s because they’ve seen stocks come roaring back and the housing market begin to recover. Mom and Dad may not be whole yet, and still stinging. But those who began their careers in the past five years and were smart enough to sign up for a 401 (k) have been building wealth steadily.

Maybe that’s because, stereotypes be damned, they know something about their work ethic that boomers and other elders do not: Millennials are pretty darned committed to their careers—they just see it in different terms.

Or maybe it’s just because young people can’t imagine life without the internet or smartphones or, well, reality TV. Toddlers today play on iPads. With mobile

9

technology, young professionals can get their jobs done at the beach. By comparison, older generations grew up in the dinosaur age. We had outrageous long-distance bills, three channels and a TV with rabbit ears. Dude, what’s so great about that?

11. What is the passage mainly about?

12. What specific aspects about American dream are discussed in the passage?

13. How do you interpret the first sentence in paragraph eight: “All the pessimism would be deadly troublesome if not for one thing: young people aren’t buying it.”?

14. What is the author’s attitude towards the issue being discussed?

15. Could you give a title to the passage?

Passage Four

It’s an exciting notion that one’s very self could be broadened by the mastery of two or more languages. In obvious ways (exposure to new friends, literature and so forth) the self-reality is broadened. Yet it is different to claim—as many people do—to have a different personality when using a different language. A former colleague, for example, reported being ruder in Hebrew than in English. So what is going on here?

Benjamin Lee Whorf, an American linguist who died in 1941, held that each language encodes a worldview that significantly influences its speakers. Often called “Whorfinanism”, this idea has its skeptics. But there are still good reasons to believe language shapes thought.

This influence is not necessarily linked to the vocabulary or grammar of a second language. Significantly, most people are not symmetrically bilingual. Many have learned one language at home from parents, and another later in life, usually at school. So bilinguals usually have different strengths and weaknesses in their different languages—and they are not always best in their first language. For example, when tested in a foreign language, people are less likely to fall into a cognitive trap (answering a test question with an obvious-seeming but wrong answer) than when tested in their native language. In part this is because working in a second language slows down the thinking. No wonder people feel different when speaking them. And no wonder they feel looser, more spontaneous, perhaps more assertive or funnier or blunter, in the language they were reared in from childhood.

What of “crib” bilinguals, raised in two languages? Even they do not usually have perfectly symmetrical competence in their two languages. But even for a speaker whose two languages are very nearly the same in ability, there is another big reason that person will feel different in the two languages. This is because there is an important distinction between bilingualism and biculturalism.

10

Many bilinguals are not bicultural. But some are. And of those bicultural bilinguals, we should be little surprised that they feel different in their two languages. Experiments in psychology have shown the power of “priming”—small unnoticed factors that can affect behavior in big ways. Asking people to tell a happy story, for example, will put them in a better mood. The choice between two languages is a huge prime. Speaking Spanish rather than English, for a bilingual and bicultural Puerto Rican in New York, might conjure feelings of family and home. Switching to English might prime the same person to think of school and work.

So there are two very good reasons that make people feel different speaking their different languages. We are still left with a third kind of argument, though.

People seem to enjoy telling tales about their languages’ inherent properties, and how they influence their speakers. A group of French intellectual worthies once proposed, rather self-flatteringly, that French be the sole legal language of the EU, because of its supposedly unmatchable rigor and precision. Some Germans believe that frequently putting the verb at the end of a sentence makes the language especially logical. We also see some unsurprising overlap with national stereotypes and self-stereotypes: French, rigorous; German, logical; English, playful. Of course.

In this case, Ms Chalaris, a scholar, at least proposed a specific and plausible line of causation from grammar to personality: in Greek, the verb comes first, and it carries a lot of information, hence easy interrupting. The problem is that many unrelated languages all around the world put the verb at the beginning of sentences. Many languages all around the world are heavily inflected, encoding lots of information in verbs. It would be a striking finding if all of these unrelated languages had speakers more likely to interrupt each other. Welsh, for example, is also both verb-first and about as heavily inflected as Greek, but the Welsh are not known as pushy conversationalists.

Neo-Whorfians continue to offer evidence and analysis that aims to prove that different languages push speakers to think differently. One such effort is forthcoming: “The Bilingual Mind” to be published in April. Meanwhile John McWhorter takes the opposite stance in “The Language Hoax”, forthcoming in February. But strong Whorfian arguments do not need to be valid for people to feel differently in their different languages.

16. Which statement or notion is under discussion in this passage?

17. Do bilinguals feel more comfortable with their first language? Why or why not?

18. According to the passage, why do people feel different when they speak different languages?

19. Why are Greeks likely to interrupt in conversation according to some scholar?

20. Does the author agree on the causation from language to personality? How does he argue for or against it?

11

III. Writing ( 30 points, 60 minutes)

Some universities in China have changed Chinese from a compulsory course to an optional one. Only Students who major in Chinese literature or relevant majors are taking Chinese courses.

Write a composition of about 400 words about the phenomenon described above and your opinion about it.

12