北京科技大学2012年考研专业课真题翻译硕士英语2012

those with husbands earning less than $23, 4000 a year. You might say that the movement of the richest women out of the workforce proves that women will, in the best of all possible worlds, go home. But these women often have husbands who, in order to earn those top salaries, work 70 or 80 hours a week and travel extensively; someone had to be home. Many left high-powered careers that made similar demands on their time.

The alternative narrative — of constricted horizons, not choice — that might have emerged from recent research has never really made it into the mainstream. It just can’t, it seems, find a foothold.

“The reason we keep getting this narrative is that there is this deep cultural ambivalence about mothers’ employment,” England told me this week. “On the one hand, people believe women should have equal opportunities, but on the other hand, we don’t envision men taking on more child care and housework and, unlike Europe, we don’t seem to be able to envision family-friendly work policies.”

Why this matters — and why opening this topic up for discussion is important — is very clear: because our public policy continues to rest upon a fictitious idea, eternally recycled in the media, of mothers’ free choices, and not upon the constraints that truly drive their behavior. “If journalism repeatedly frames the wrong problem, then the folks who make public policy may very well deliver the wrong solution,” is how E. J. Graff, the associate director and senior researcher at Brandeis University’s Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism once put it in the Columbia Journalism Review, “If women are happily choosing to stay home with their babies, that’s private decision. But it’s a public policy issue if schools, jobs and other American institutions are structured in ways that make it frustratingly difficult, and sometimes impossible, for parents to manage both their jobs and family responsibilities.”

1. What is the significance of the report run by the Census Bureau? A. It changes the images of what mothers are.

B. The society should notice the importance of mothers’ choices.

C. We need talk about what mothers should do rather than the choices they have. D. More attention should be paid to opportunities offered to change women’s current lives.

2. The phrase “in droves” in Paragraph 3 means ______. A. under stimulation B. in groups

C. driven by conditions D. none of the above

3. The fourth paragraph claims that ______.

A. the very richest prefer to opt out for the wealth they own B. demands on time are the only reason for the poorest at home C. financial affluence leads to the women’s “opting out” D. family responsibility forces women to stay at home

5

4. According to the passage, ______ is the root cause of women staying at home. A. the media B. their own choice C. the public policy D. school structure

5. What is the best title for the passage? A. The Choice of Non-Working Women B. The Opt-Out Revolution of Women C. The Objective Condition of Women D. Women in Employment Market

Passage Two

You don’t have to be Julian Assange, the man behind WikiLeaks, to think that governments have a nasty habit of abusing their powers of secrecy. Or that, whether governments are corrupt and malign or merely negligent and incompetent, then sunlight is often the best disinfectant. One of the jobs of journalism is to make a grubby nuisance of itself by ferreting out the establishment’s half-truths and embarrassments. And one of the jobs of the courts is to police the press by protecting whistle-blowers while also punishing libel and treachery.

But the most recent WikiLeaks dump of diplomatic cables has overturned that order in two ways. First by its sheer volume. When you have not just a handful of documents to release, but more than 250,000 emails seemingly touching on every file in the State Department, however dusty, you discredit not just one government official or one policy, but an entire way of going about diplomacy.

It is too soon to know what effect the leak’s revelations will have. The newspapers have so far published the e-mails piecemeal, and a lot more are to come. Foreign-policy experts are right when they say they have learned little that is radically new. Revelations about the tireless nightlife of Italy’s aging prime minister will surprise no one. Given that hundreds of thousands of people had access to the cables, the sensitive stuff will already be in the hands of many a spy service.

But the experts also miss a larger point: they themselves are part of the elite inner-circle that WikiLeaks wants to break open so that Everyman can judge for himself. Perhaps shattering all those taboos might do some good. The public airing of Arab leaders’ fears of an Iranian bomb might shake others’ complacency about the issue.

But any gains will come at a high cost. In a world of WikiLeaks, diplomacy would no longer be possible. The secrecy that WikiLeaks despises is vital to all organizations, including government --- and especially in the realm of international relations. Those who pass information to American diplomats, out of self-interest, conviction or goodwill, will be less open now. Some of them, like the Iranian businessman fingered as a friend of America, could face reprisals.

In the past, the rights and wrongs of all this could have been determined by public debate, the passage of some legislation and the courts. Not any longer. The second way in which WikiLeaks has overturned the old order is by being beyond jurisdiction.

6

America can and will try to use its laws to protect its secrets. But even if it locks up Bradley Manning, the 23-year-old serviceman thought to be behind the leaks, and even if it captures Mr. Assange, the information is out, on a network of computers somewhere in cyberspace.

In any case, there will be the other Mannings and other Assanges. You cannot uninvent the technology for copying a State Department’s worth of cables and carting them pretty much anywhere. The only remedy is to manage secrets better. The damage that America’s diplomatic service has suffered is partly the result of sloppy practices. It has now tightened access to the e-mails and the scope to copy them. Sensitive information will have to receive a higher classification.

On reading diplomats’ dissembling, people may be tempted to sneer. In fact diplomacy’s never-ending private conversation ultimately helps see off war and strife. That conversation will continue. Too many people have too much to gain for it to stop. But it will be less rich, less clear and therefore probably less useful. WikiLeaks claims to want to make the world a better place. It will probably do the reverse.

6. Which of the following statements can NOT be learned from the first paragraph? A. Few people think governments tend to abuse their powers of secrecy. B. Ordinary people generally approve of the transparency in the media. C. The journalism has the responsibility to make known the hidden truth. D. The judicature has the duty to maintain the security of the press.

7. According to the passage, which is NOT the viewpoint of the author? A. WikiLeaks has released much more information than imagined. B. WikiLeaks has overstepped jurisdiction.

C. WikiLeaks has changed the practice of diplomacy in the world. D. WikiLeaks has ushered in a new era in the press.

8. Why did the author say in Paragraph 3 that “Italy’s aging prime minister will surprise no one”?

A. No one is interested in leaders’ affairs.

B. There have been too many such revelations. C. People have already known the stuff.

D. No one believes in the truth of this revelation.

9. What is the way to prevent the leak of top secrets? A. To ban WikiLeaks.

B. To raise the safety of secrets.

C. To change the working environment and practice. D. To remind governments of the threat from WikiLeaks.

10. What is the author’s attitude towards WikiLeaks? A. Positive B. Disapproval C. Objective D. Cynical

7

Passage Three

To many developers of technologies that affect public health or the environment, “risk communication” means persuading the public that the potential risks of such technologies are small and should be ignored. Those who communicate risks in this way seem to believe that lay people do not understand the actual nature of technological risk, and they can cite studies asserting that although people apparently ignore mundane hazards that pose significant danger, they get upset about exotic hazards that pose little chance of death or injury. Because some risk communicators take this persuasive stance, many lay people see “risk communication” as a euphemism for brainwashing done by experts.

Since, however, the goal of risk communication should be to enable people to make informed decisions about technological risks, a clear understanding about how the public perceives risk is needed. Lay people’s definitions of “risk” are more likely to reflect subjective ethical concerns than are experts’ definitions. Lay people, for example, tend to perceive a small risk to children as more significant than a large risk to consenting adults who benefit from the risk-cheating technology. However, if asked to rank hazards by the number of annual fatalities, without reference to ethical judgments, lay people provide quite reasonable estimates, demonstrating that they have substantial knowledge about many risks. Although some studies claim to demonstrate that lay people have inappropriate concerns about exotic hazards, these studies often use questionable methods, such as asking lay people to rank risks that are hard to compare. In contrast, a recent study showed that when lay people were given the necessary facts and time, they understood the specific risks of electromagnetic fields produced by high-voltage power transmission well enough to make informed decisions.

Risk communication should therefore be based on the principle that people process new information in the context of their existing beliefs. If people know nothing about a topic, they will find messages about that topic incomprehensible. If they have erroneous beliefs, they are likely to misconstrue the messages. Thus, communicators need to know the nature and extent of recipients’ knowledge and beliefs in order to design messages that will not be dismissed or misinterpreted. This need was demonstrated in a research project concerning the public’s level of knowledge about risks posed by the presence of radon in the home. Researchers used open-ended interviews and questionnaires to determine what information should be included in their brochure on radon. Subjects who read the researchers’ brochure performed significantly better in understanding radon risks than did a control group who read a brochure that was written using a different approach by a government agency. Thus, careful preparation can help risk communicators to produce balanced material that tells people what they need to know to make decisions about technological risks.

11. Which of the following best expresses the main point of the passage?

A. Risk communicators are addressing the proliferation of complex technologies that have increasing impact on public health and safety.

8