研究生英语高级教程1-6单元课文翻译
研究生英语高级教程 第1单元 美国梦
Waking Up from the American DreamDead-end jobs and the high cost of college could be choking off upward mobility.[1]There has been much talk recently of the “Wal-Martization” of America, a reference to thegiant retailer’s fervent attempts to keep its costs—and therefore its prices—at rock-bottomlevels. But for years, even during the 1990s boom, much of Corporate America had already embraced Wal-Mart-like stratagems to control labor costs, such as hiring temps and part-timers, fighting unions, dismantling internal career ladders and outsourcing to lower-paying contractor at home and abroad.[2]While these tactics have the admirable outcome of holding down consumer prices, they’re costly in other ways. More than a quarter of the labor force, about 34 million workers, is trapped in low-wage, often dead-end jobs, according to a new book entitled Low-Wage America: How Employers Are Reshaping Opportunity in the Workplace. Many middle-income and high-skilled employees face fewer opportunities, too, as companies shift work to subcontractors and temp agencies and move white-collar jobs to China and India.[3]The result has been an erosion of one of A merica’s most cherished values: giving its people the ability to move up the economic ladder over their lifetimes. Historically, most Americans, even low-skilled ones, were able to find poorly paid janitorial or factory jobs, then gradually climb into the middle class as they gained experience and moved up the wage curve. But the number of workers progressing upward began to slip in the 1970s, when the post World War Ⅱ productivity boom ran out of steam. Upward mobility diminished even more in the 1980s as globalization and technology slammed blue-collar wages.[4]Many experts expected the trend to reverse as productivity rebounded during the heated economy of the 1990s. Certainly, there were plenty of gains. The long decline in pay rates turned around as supertight labor markets raised the wages of almost everyone. College enrollment boomed, too, and home ownership shot up, extending the American dream to more families. Low interest rates and higher wages allowed even those on the bottom to benefit. There was even a slight decline in the ranks of the very poorest families, as measured by asset wealth—those with a net worth of less than $5,000—according to a study by New York University economics professor Edward N. Wolff.[5]But new research suggests that, su rprisingly, the best economy in 30 years did little to get America’s vaunted upward mobility back on track. The new studies, which follow individuals and families over many years, paint a paradoxical picture: Even as the U.S. economy was bursting with wealth in the 1990s, minting dot-com millionaires by the thousands, conventional companies were cutting the middle out of career ladders, leaving fewer people able to better their economic position over the decade.[6]During the 1990s, relative mobility—that is, the share of Americans changing income quintiles in any direction, up or down—slipped by two percentage points, to 62%, according to an analysis of decade long income trends through 2001 by Jonathan D. Fisher and David S. Johnson, two economists at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. While two points may not sound like much, it’s bad news given how much progress might have been made amid explosive growth. Essentially, says University of Chicago economics professor and Nobel laureate James J. Heckman, “The big finding in recent years is that the notion of America being a highly mobile society isn’t as true as it used to be.”[7]In fact, according to a study by two Federal Reserve Bank of Boston economists that analyzed families’ incomes over three decades, the number of people who stayed stuck in the same income bracket—be it at the bottom or at the top—over the course of a decade actually increased in the 1990s. So, though the bottom lifted pay rates for janitors and clerks by as much as 5% to 10% in the late 1990s, more of them remained janitors or clerks; fewer worked their way into better-paying positions. Imelda Roman, for one, makes about $30,000 a year as a counselor at a Milwaukee nonprofit—barely more than the $27,000 or so, after inflation adjustments, that the 33-year-old single mom earned as a school-bus driver more than 10 years ago. Says Roman, who hopes to return tocollege to improve her prospects: “It’s hard to find a job with a career ladder these days, and a B. A. would be an edge.”[8]What Roman faces is an economy that is slowly stratifying along class lines.Today, upward mobility is determined increasingly by a college degree that’s attainable mostly by those whose parents already have money or education. Problem is, that all-important sheepskin is out of reach for most students from low-income families. Although college enrollment has soared for higher-income students, more children from poor families can only afford to go to community college, which typically don’t offer bachelor’s degrees. The number of poor students who get a degree—fewer than 5% in 2001—has barely budged in 30 years, according to an analysis of Census Bureau data by Thomas G. Morcenson, who published an education newsletter from Oskaloosa, Iowa[9]In turn, the lack of mobi lity for those who don’t or can’t get a degree is putting a lid on the intergenerational progress that has long been a mainstay of the American experience. Last year, Wichita State University sociology professor David W. Wright and two colleagues updated a classic 1978 study that looked at how sons fared according to the social and economic class of their fathers. Defining class by a mix of education, income and occupation, they found that sons from the bottom three quarters of the socioeconomic scale were less likely to move up in the 1990s than in the 1960s. Just 10% of sons whose fathers were in the bottom quarter had made it to the top quarter by 1998, the authors found. By contrast, 23% of low-class sons had done so by 1973, according to the earlier study. Similarly, only 51% of sons whose fathers belonged to the second-highest quarter equaled or surpassed the economic standing of their parents in the 1990s. In the 1960s, 63% did.[10]That’s the pattern Michael A. McLimans and his family follows. Now 33, with two young children, the New Holland (Pa.) resident has spent the past decade working at pizza chains such as Domino’s and Pizza Hut. He made it to assistant manager but found that he could more, $9 to $12 an hour with tips, as a delivery driver. He and his wife, a hotel receptionist, pull down about $40,000 a year—far from the $60,000 Michael’s father, David I. McLimans, earns as a veteran steelworker. “I wave every dime I can so my kids can go to college, which neither of us can afford to do,” says M ichael.[11]Restoring American mobility is less a question of knowing what to do than of making it happen. Experts have decried schools’ inadequacy for years, but fixing them is a long, arduous struggle. Similarly, there have been plenty of warnings about declining college access, but finding funds was difficult even in eras of large surpluses. One radical approach: that college be treated the way high school is, as a public good paid for by taxpayers. Presidential candidate Senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) ha s proposed making the first year’s tuition free all community and public colleges for any student willing to work 10 hours a week. That may never happen, but clearly, if the U.S. couldn’t shake off a creeping rigidity in the best of times, it will take a c onscious change to reverse course。
研究生英语教材课文翻译1-6单元
' Ten pence for a view over the bay' . said the old man with the telescope. 'Lovely clear morning. Have a look at the old lighthouse and the remains of the great shipwreck of 1935.' 十便士看一次海湾风光，”那个带着一架望远镜的老头说道：“多么晴朗美丽的早晨。请来看看那古老 的灯塔和 1935 年失事的大轮船残骸吧。” Ten pence was sheer robbery, but the view was certainly magnifi要ce十nt.便 士简直是敲诈勒索，可是海 湾的景色确实壮丽。 Cliffs stretched into the distance, sparkling waves whipped by the wind were unrolling on to the beach, and a
多么严重。” 'Fi y years ago to-night, no light appeared in the tower, and only at two o'clock in the morning did the beam
suddenly start to flash out its warning again. 'The next morning the light was s ll visible. The storm had almost bl own itself out, so a relief boat set out to inves gate. A grim discovery awaited the crew . The men's living-room w as in a horrifying state. The table was over-turned: a pack of playing cards was sca ered everywhere: bloodstains splashed the floor. The relief men climbed the winding stair to the lantern room and there discovered Mar n's bo dy, crouched beside the burning lamp. He had been stabbed and was dead. Two days later, Blake's body was wash ed up. scratched, bruised, and terribly injured.
(完整word版)研究生英语高级教程-1单元-Move-Over--Big-Brother
Move Over, Big Brother1.Living without privacy, even in his bedroom, was no problem for Louis XIV. In fact, it wasa way for the French king to demonstrate his absolute authority over even the most powerful members of the aristocracy. Each morning, they gathered to see the Sun King get up, pray, perform his bodily functions, choose his wig and so on.2.Will this past—life without privacy—be our future? Many futurists, science fiction writers and privacy advocates believe so. Big Brother, they have long warned, is watching. Closed-circuit television cameras often track your moves; your mobile phone reveals your location; your transit pass and credit cards leave digital trails. Now there is the possibility that citizens are being watched.3.But in the past few years, something strange has happened. Thanks to the spread of mobile phones, digital cameras and the internet, surveillance technology has become far more widely available. Bruce Schneier, a security guru, argues that a combination of forces—the miniaturisation of surveillance technologies, the falling price of digital storage and ever more sophisticated systems able to sort through large amounts of information—means that “surveillanc e abilities that used to be limited to governments are now, or soon will be, in the hands of everyone.”4.Digital technologies, such as camera phones and the internet, are very different from their analogue counterparts. A digital image, unlike a conventional photograph, can be quickly and easily copied and distributed around the world. Another important difference is that digital devices are far more widespread. Most people take their camera phones with them everywhere.5.The speed and ubiquity of digital cameras lets them do things that film-based cameras could not. In October, for example, the victim of a robbery in Nashville, Tennessee, used his camera-phone to take pictures of the thief and his getaway vehicle. The images were shown to the police, who broadcast descriptions of the man and his truck, leading to his arrest ten minutes later.6.The democratisation of surveillance is a mixed blessing, however. Camera phones have led to voyeurisms and new legislation to strengthen people’s rights to their own image. In September, America’s Congress passed the “Video Voyeurism Prevention Act”, which prohibits the photography of various parts of people’s unclothed bodies or undergarments without their consent. The legislation was prompted both by the spread of camera-phones and the growing incidence of hidden cameras in bedrooms, public showers, toilets and locker rooms. Similarly, Germany’s parliament has passed a bill that outlaws unauthorized photos within buildings. In Saudi Arabia, the import and sale of camera-phones has been banned, and religious authorities have denounced them for “spreading obscenity”. South Korea’s government has ordered manufacturers to design new phones so that they beep when taking a picture.7.There are also concerns about the use of digital cameras and camera-phones for industrial espionage. Sprint, an American mobile operator, is now offering one of its best-selling phones without a camera in response to demands from its corporate customers, many of which have banned cameras in their workplaces. Some firms make visitors and staff leave camera-phones at the entrance of research and manufacturing facilities—including Samsung, the South Korean company that pioneered the camera phone.8.Cheap surveillance technology facilitates other sorts of crime. Two employees at a petrol station in British Columbia, for example, installed a hidden camera in the ceiling above a card reader, and recorded the personal identification numbers of thousands of people. They alsoinstalled a device to “skim” a ccount details from users as they swiped their plastic cards. The two men gathered the account details of over 6,000 people and forged 1,000 bank cards before being caught.9.But the spread of surveillance technology also has its benefits. In particular, it can enhance transparency and accountability. More and more video cameras can be found in schools, for example. Web-based services such as and link to cameras in hundreds of American child-care centers, so that parents can see what their offspring (and those looking after them) are up to. Schools are also putting webcams in their classrooms. And tech firms such as Google have put webcams in their staff restaurants, so employees can delay going to lunch if they see a long queue.10.Steve Mann, a professor at the University of Toronto, calls the spread of citizen surveillance “sousveillance”—because most cameras no longer watch from above, but from eye level. Instead of being on top of buildings and attached to room ceilings, cameras are now carried by ordinary people. The video images of Rodney King being assaulted by police officers and the horrific pictures of prisoner abuse from the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq are the best known examples.11.Camera-phones could have a profound effect on the news media. Camera phones make everyone a potential news photographer. Unsurprisingly, old media is starting to embrace the trend. The San Diego Union-Tribune recently launched a website to gather camera-phone images of news events taken by their readers, and the BBC also encourages users of its website to send in pictures of news events.panies and governments will have to assume that there could be a camera or a microphone everywhere, all the time, argues Paul Saffo of the Institute for the Future. Unsafe conditions in a factory or pollution at a chemical plant are harder to deny if they are not just described, but shown in photos and videos. Animal-rights activists, for instance, operate online multimedia archives where people can store and view graphic images from chicken farms, slaughterhouses and fur factories. Such material can cause outrage among consumers, as was the case with videos of dolphins caught in tuna nets.st year, a German member of parliament was caught photographing a confidential document of which only a few copies were handed out (and later collected) at a background meeting on health-care reform. Some Berlin politicians are said to let reporters eavesdrop on fellow parliamentarians by calling them right before an important meeting—and then failing to hang up, in effect turning their phones into bugs.14.In November 1996, Senegal’s interior minister was caught out when he admitted that there had been fraud in a local election, but failed to notice that a bystander was holding a mobile phone with an open line. The election was annulled. In the same country’s presidential election in 2000, radio stations sent reporters to polling stations and equipped them with mobile phones. The reporters called in the results as they were announced in each district, and they were immediately broadcast on air. This reduced the scope for electoral fraud and led to a smooth transfer of power, as the outgoing president quickly conceded defeat.15.The social consequences of the spread of surveillance technology remain unclear. David Brin, author of The Transparent Society, suggests that it could turn out to be self-regulating: after all, Peeping Toms are not very popular. In a restaurant it is generally more embarrassing to be caught stari ng than to be observed with crumbs in your beard. “A photographically ‘armed’ society could turn out to be more polite,” he suggests, referring to an American aphorism thatholds “an armed society is a polite society”. Alternatively, the omnipresence of ca meras and other surveillance technologies might end up making individuals more conformist, says Mr Brin, as they suppress their individuality to avoid drawing too much attention to themselves.16.The surveillance society is on its way, just as privacy advocates have long warned. But it has not taken quite the form they imagined. Increasingly, it is not just Big Brother who is watching— but lots of little brothers, too.。
研究生英语高级教程第6单元AtWhatCostBeauty
研究生英语高级教程第6单元AtWhatCostBeautyAt What Cost BeautyPlastic surgery may have lost some of its stigma, but that doesn’t mean the risks have vanished too.[1] It was not that long ago that the term makeover suggested little more than a new eye shadow or a dye job. Now it is just as likely to result in a straighter nose, larger breasts and a brow that won’t furrow when confronted by even the most noxious odor. That attaining such features often involves anesthesia, injections, incisions, blood and a professional with at least seven years of medical training is a distinction increasingly lost on the general population.[2] But plastic surgery does mean going under the knife, and lately there have been plenty of reminders of the risks involved. From May 2003 to January 2004, five people in Florida died following cosmetic plastic surgery, prompting the state’s board of medicine to open an investigation. All five, ranging in age from38 to 63, had their operations done in doctors’ offices. One hada breast augmentation; another, surgery on his eyes, chin and neck; another had liposuction and a fat transfer; and two, liposuction and tummy tuck. Citing an “immediate danger to public health”, the board issued a 90-day moratorium on the two procedures being performed together in a non-hospital setting. A 54-year-old woman, the wife of a cardiologist, died of complications from plastic surgery last week while undergoing a procedure at one of New York City’s most prestigious hospitals, the Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital, run by Sherrell Aston, husband of socialite Muffie Potter Aston. This is the same location where last month, in a case that made national headlines,The First Wives Club author Olivia Goldsmith, whose work often celebrated and satirized plastic surgery, died after seeking a cosmetic procedure. Both women died of complications from anesthesia.[3] The vast majority of cosmetic procedures—both surgical, such as face-lifts and liposuction, and nonsurgical, like Botox and collagen injections—conclude without incident. But with the number of these operations growing—8.3 million in 2003, a 293% increase from 1997—things can end badly more often. Part of the problem may be that it is not necessary, from a legal standpoint, to be trained as a plastic surgeon to practice plastic surgery. All a person needs is a medical degree. Doctors can choose to become certified by the American Medical Association-recognized American Board of Plastic Surgery. For that, they must complete seven years of training, including a three year residency in general surgery and at least two additional years of a residency in plastic surgery. But many doctors don’t bother with the special training and practice the surgery anyway to supplement their incomes. Only two of the five doctors in the fatal Florida cases were board-certified. The woman who died after a breast augmentation was operated on by a doctor who specialized in dentistry.[4] Since doctors have the right to perform such operations, it is up to the patient to monitor their backgrounds and decide whether he or she feels comfortable with their training. A patient should also investigate the facility where a procedure would be performed. Technological advances have made it possible to perform intricate surgeries in nonhospital settings on an outpatient basis. Some are done in private, freestanding surgical centers, others in doctors’ offices.[5] Patients often enjoy a doctor’s office because it feels more personal; many doctors prefer it because they exercise complete control over their surroundings and costs. That can be perfectly safe as long as the offices maintain safety precautions, but some states and local governments do not monitor whether they do. The task can be left to accrediting agencies. States may require offices to be accredited, but the agencies perform inspections and give the seal of approval. Theone considered the gold standard is from the American Association for the Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgery Facilities (AAAASF). T o receive its blessing, doctors must be board-certified in their field, and their facilities must prove they have the means to handle emergency situations. The problem is that getting inspected for accreditation is done on a voluntary basis. Says Michael Mc Guire, a Los Angeles cosmetic surgeon and the AAAASF’s president: “Facilities open, and nobody knows on a state level that they are there.”[6] Why—or whether—the liposuction-tummy-tuck combination is particularly hazardous ina doctor’s office is a questi on the Florida board is investigating. It is not uncommon for people to have multiple procedures performed at once, and when the patient is in good health, it is not especially perilous. But generally, undergoing more than one procedure not only prolongs r ecovery but also increases the time a patient is anesthetized, which can be risky. “I personally don’t believe in procedures that go beyond five or six hours,” says Dr. Robert Bernard, who operates in his Westchester, N. Y., office and is the president of the American Society for Anesthetic Plastic Surgery, whose members are all board-certified. “If somebody comes in and wants their face,eyes and nose done, that’s O.K. But if they want that as well as breast reduction a nd a large amount of liposuction, I’d prefer to divide it into two procedures.”[7] In one of the Florida cases under investigation, a combination of surgeriesmay have proved fatal. James McCormick had decided to go to the Florida Center for Cosmetic Surgery in Fort Lauderdale to nip and tu ck his crow’s feet. His doctor recommended a brow job as well and offered to throw in a chin implant at a discount. McCormick agreed to all the procedures and was at the facility less than four hours. By the next day, he was dead. Citing patient confidentiality, Dr. Jeffrey Hamm, medical director of the facility, declined to discuss the case.[8] Bernard reports that he has received more requests for combination surgeries since the premiere of Extreme Makeover, a phenomenally popular reality show on ABCin which subjects undergo as many as six surgeries at a time to remove any perceived flaws on their bodies. He says the show has generated good p.r. for the field, but he is worried that it raises unrealistic expectations. “People don’t realize that subjects on the show are preselected,” he says. “They’re in excellent health, screened by psychologists and analyzed by the best plastic surgeons in the country to ensure thattheir transformation has the potential to look like a home run.” Bernard points out tha t the subjects also work with dermatologists, cosmetic dentists and hair stylists.[9] Sometimes a patient can appear to do everything right but still end up paying the ultimate price. For her chin tuck, a procedure generally characterized as routine, Goldsmith chose the best board-certified plastic surgeon royalties could buy andhad the operation at a respected hospital but still had a bad reaction to anesthesia. Her death was not necessarily related to plastic surgery; it might very well have happened during an emergency appendectomy. It did, however, cause a momentary flutter in the plastic surgery community. Doctors across Florida, California and New York said they received a few concerned calls from patients that week. But virtually no surgeons reported any cancellations. And the phones kept ringing for new appointments.。
研究生英语综合教程上unit1-6课文翻译
Unit One核心员工的特征大卫·G．詹森1核心员工究竟是什么样子的?几乎每次进行调查时，我都会从雇主们那里听到“核心员工”这个名词。
我请一位客户——一位正参与研究的人事部经理，给我解释一下。
“每家公司都有少数几个这样的员工，在某个专业领域，你可以指望他们把活儿干好。
在我的小组中，有七名化工流程工程师和生物学家，其中有那么两三个人是我赖以生存的，”他说，“他们对我的公司而言不可或缺。
当请你们公司替我们招募新人的时候，我们期待你们会去其他公司找这样的人：其他公司经理不想失去的员工。
我们只招募核心员工。
”2这是一段充满了鼓动性的谈话，目的是把猎头们派往竞争对手的公司去游说经验丰富的员工们做一次职业变更。
他们想从另一家公司招募核心员工。
然而，每家公司也从新人中招人。
他们要寻找的是完全一样的东西。
“我们把他们和公司顶级员工表现出的特质进行对照。
假如他们看起来有同样特征的话，我们就在他们身上赌一把。
”只是这样有点儿冒险。
3“这是一种有根据的猜测，”我的人事经理客户说。
作为未来的一名员工，你的工作是帮助人事部经理降低这种风险，你需要帮助他们认定你有潜力成为一名核心员工。
4特征1：无私的合作者职业顾问和化学家约翰·费策尔最早提出了这个特征。
关于这个特征，人们已经写了大量的文章。
它之所以值得被反复谈及，是因为这一特征是学术界和企业间最明显的差别。
“这里需要合作，”费策尔说，“企业的环境并不需要单打独斗，争强好胜，所以表现出合作和无私精神的员工就脱颖而出了。
在企业环境中，没有这样的思维方式就不可能成功。
”5许多博士后和研究生在进行这种过渡的过程中表现得相当费力。
因为生命中有那么长一段时间他们都在扮演一个独立研究者的角色，并且要表现得比其他年轻的优秀人才更出色。
你可以藉此提高在公司的吸引力：为追求一个共同的目标和来自其他实验室和学科的科学家们合作——并且为你的个人履历上的内容提供事迹证明。
这个方法，加上你在描述业绩时开明地使用代词“我们”，而不是“我”，能使公司对你的看法从“单干户”转变成“合作者”。
研究生系列英语教程课文翻译
Unit3 美国人的酷爱我父亲的车是别克。
在经济大萧条以前，他的车本是史达兹。
然而，就像成千上万经济状况处于上升阶段的有车族一样，那场可悲的经济逆转使他们非得调整对汽车的胃口不可。
到他死的时候，他开过的那些别克轿车就不只是普通意义上的交通工具了，而且将父亲定位于这样的社会阶层——比庞蒂亚克人富有，但比不上克迪拉克人。
拥有别克轿车让人一看便知父亲的社会地位。
与别克人相当的还有福特人和克莱斯勒人。
我们美国人与汽车的特殊缘分，其坚实的基础就在于对一种轿车品牌的忠诚，这种忠诚因其来之不易而倍受珍惜。
·这就是爱吗?也许用词过分，可美国人对这些机器的尊重甚过所有其他机器——不仅将它们视为20世纪雕塑大观中的标志，而且还将它们视为社会的护身符。
我记忆中的第一辆别克车是一辆闪闪发亮的黑色轿车，椅子的衬垫是厚厚的马海毛，离合器拉杆是新式的。
我父亲爱吹嘘说这辆车一小时能跑120英里。
一想到这样的速度就会令男人们兴奋不已。
我照着家里的菲尔可牌收音机盒里播出的格林，霍利特驾驶的那个神秘机器的名字，给这头漂亮的牲口取了个名副其实的绰号——黑美驹。
20世纪中，电话、电视或者个人电脑，这一切都使人类环境发生了巨大变化。
然而，与电话、电视、电脑不同的是，汽车却享有人格化的地位。
有些汽车可以成为家庭成员，机械宠物。
我们给汽车起名字，在自己·家的车道上精心打扮汽车，在汽车不能满足我们的需要时诅咒它们。
在折旧换新之时为旧车的离去而悲哀。
人们对汽车的热爱让环境保护者、安全为重的倡导者以及社会工程师们感到不安。
他们认为通往人间天堂的道路应该到处都铺设公交运输所必备的发亮轨道。
他们想象着我们加入未来拥挤不堪的自行车行列，而不是像一位激动不已的评论家所预见的那样，坐在“傲慢的双轮马车”方向盘后。
这种态度不是现在才有的。
首先是铁路，接着是汽车造成的人口流动早已使得守旧的特权阶层感到不安。
在战场上有过辉煌，但却以鄙视下层民众而出名的威林顿公爵在150年前就曾反对英国发展铁路，这是因为火车只会怂恿普通人毫无意义地到处走动。
研究生综合英语(下)unit1-2-6课文中英对照翻译
The Hidden Side of HappinessPleasure only gets you so far. A rich, rewarding life often requires a messy battle with adversity.幸福隐藏的另一面愉悦舒适不能指引你领略人生的全部，与逆境的艰苦搏斗常常会使人生变得丰富而有意义Hurricanes, house fires, cancer, whitewater rafting accidents, plane crashes, vicious attacks in dark alleyways. Nobody asks for any of it. But to their surprise, many people find that enduring such a harrowing ordeal ultimately changes them for the better. Their refrain might go something like this: "I wish it hadn't happened, but I'm a better person for it."1、飓风、房屋失火、癌症、激流飘筏失事、坠机、黄昏小巷遭歹徒袭击，没人想找到这些但出人意料的是，很多人发现遭受这样一次痛苦的磨难最终会使他们向好的方面转变。
他们可能都会这样说：“希望这事没发生，但因为它我变得更完美了。
”We love to hear the stories of people who have been transformed by their tribulations, perhaps because they testify to a bona fide psychological truth, one that sometimes gets lost amid endless reports of disaster: There is a built-in human capacity to flourish under the most difficult circumstances. Positive reactions to profoundly disturbing experiences are not limited to the toughest or the bravest. In fact, roughly half the people who struggle with adversity say that their lives have in some ways improved.2、我们都爱听人们经历苦难后发生转变的故事，可能是因为这些故事证实了一条真正心理学上的真理，这条真理有时会湮没在无数关于灾难的报道中：在最困难的境况中，人所具有的一种内在的奋发向上的能力会迸发出来。
高等学校研究生英语综合教程上下册Unit原文加翻译
上unit1——TRAITS OF THE KEY PLAYERS关键员工的特征1.What exactly is a key player?A“Key Player"is aphrase that I've heard about from employers during just about every search I've conducted.I asked a client——a hiring manager involved in a recent search—to define it for me."Every company has a handful of staff in a given area of expertise that you can count on to get the job done.On my team of seven process engineers and biologists,I've got two or three whom I just couldn't live without,”he said."Key players are essential to my organization.And when we hire your company to recruit for us,we expect that you'll be going into other companies and finding just that:the staff that another manager will not want to see leave.We recruit only key players.”关键员工到底是什么?在我进行的每一次搜索中，我都会从雇主那里听到“关键员工”这个词。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
老大哥，移过去一点[1] 对路易十四而言，即使在卧室里生活没有隐私都不是问题。
事实上，这是这位法国君主向那些甚至是最为显赫的贵族展示自己绝对君权的一种方式。
每天早晨，这些权贵们聚集在一起观摩太阳王起床、祈祷、上厕所、挑假发等活动。
[2] 过去这种生活——没有隐私的生活——会成为我们的未来吗? 许多未来学家、科幻小说作家和隐私权倡导者都确信会这样。
他们一直提醒人们“老大哥〞在监视着我们。
闭路电视摄像头常常跟踪你的行动；你的会泄露你所在的位置；你的过境证和信用卡会留下数码痕迹。
现在公民有可能正受到监视。
[3] 但是，在过去的几年中，某种奇怪的事情发生了。
由于、数码相机和互联网的普及，监视技术被更为广泛地利用。
保安专家布鲁斯·施奈尔认为，监视技术的微型化、数字存储设备价格的下降以及能够处理大量信息的更为尖端的系统的出现等因素的结合，意味着“监视能力曾经只由政府掌握，现在或在不久的将来，会掌握在每个人手中。
〞[4] 数字技术产品，如可拍照及互联网，与模拟技术同类产品大不相同。
数字图像与传统照片不同，能被迅速、便捷地复制并传遍全球。
另外一个重大不同是数码设备的使用更为广泛。
大多数人都随身携带着可拍照。
[5] 数码照相机的快速和普及使它们能做到使用胶卷的照相机做不到的事情。
比方，10月份，田纳西州纳什维尔一宗抢劫案的受害者用可拍照拍下了劫匪的照片和他逃走时使用的交通工具。
警方看了这些照片后，在播送里描述了这名劫匪和他的卡车，10分钟后，此人便被抓获。
[6] 然而，监视行为的群众化有利有弊。
可拍照导致了窥淫癖现象，从而导致了维护个人形象权的新法规的出台。
9月份，美国国会通过了“防止录像窥淫法〞，该法案禁止在未经本人同意的情况下对其裸露身体的各个部位或内衣拍照。
该法案的出台是由于可拍照的普及以及在卧室、公共浴室、卫生间和更衣室出现隐蔽摄像头事件的增加。
同样，德国议会也通过了一项议案，禁止未经授权在建筑物内拍照。
沙特阿拉伯完全禁止进口和销售可拍照，因为宗教权威认为可拍照“传播淫秽思想〞而对其加以谴责。
韩国政府也命令制造商设计新型，拍照时能够发出“哔哔〞声。
[7] 人们还担忧数码相机和可拍照用于工业间谍活动。
应公司客户需求，美国移动经营商斯伯林特公司推出一款没有拍照功能的热销。
许多客户公司都已禁止把照相机带到工作场所。
一些公司——包括最先推出可拍照的韩国三星公司——要求来访者和员工把可拍照留在研究和生产制造设施外。
[8] 廉价的监视技术方便了其他犯罪活动。
比方，加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省的一家加油站的两名雇员在读卡机上方的天花板内安装了一个隐蔽的摄像头，记录了数千人的个人身份证号码。
这两人还安装了一个仪器，当用户刷信用卡时，该仪器可以“扫描〞他们账户的详细信息。
时至被捕时，两人已收集了6000多人的账户信息，伪造了1000张银行卡。
[9] 但是，监视技术的广泛使用也有其益处。
特别是它能提高透明度、加强责任感。
比方，越来越多的摄像机被安装在学校里。
像ParentWatch. com和KinderCam. com这样的网络效劳商与美国上百家托儿所的摄像机联网，这样家长就可以看到他们的孩子〔以及那些照看他们孩子的人〕在做什么。
学校也把网络摄像头设在教室里。
像google这样的科技公司把网络摄像头设在员工餐厅内, 如果员工们看见打饭的队伍排得很长，就可以晚点去用餐。
[10] 多伦多大学教授史蒂夫·曼把公民监视的普及称为“平视〞，因为多数摄像机不再是俯瞰，而是来自眼睛的视角高度。
现在，摄像机不再被高置于楼顶并附在屋内天花板上，而是被普通人随身携带。
最广为人知的例子就是罗德尼·金遭警察殴打的录像以及令人震惊的伊拉克阿布格莱布监狱虐囚照片。
[11] 可拍照可能对新闻媒体产生深刻的影响。
可拍照使每个人都有可能成为新闻摄影师。
旧媒体正开始欢送这种趋势，这并不奇怪。
最近，?圣地亚哥联合论坛报?创办了一个网站，专门征集读者用可拍照拍摄的新闻照片。
英国播送公司也鼓励访问其网站的用户上传自拍的新闻事件图片。
[12] 未来学会的保罗·塞福认为，公司和政府将不得假设照相机或麦克风有可能无时无刻无所不在。
如果工厂的危险环境或化工厂的污染情况不仅仅是被描述一下，而且还能通过图片和录像展示出来，那么厂方就很难抵赖了。
比方，动物权利保护者创办了网上多媒体档案库，人们可以在此存储并查看拍摄自养鸡场、屠宰场和皮毛加工厂的生动图像。
用金枪鱼网捕捉海豚的录像等材料会使消费者义愤填庸。
[13] 去年，一位德国议员在拍摄一份机密文件时被逮个正着。
这份文件只在一次医疗保健改革的背景会议上分发了几份〔而后又被收回〕。
据说，一些柏林政客让记者在一次重要会议前给他们打，然后不挂断，实际上把他们的变成了窃听器，让记者偷听其他议员的讲话。
[14] 1996年11月，塞内加尔内政部长没有注意到一个站在旁边的人拿着接通的，当成认地方选举有舞弊行为时被曝光。
选举宣告无效。
2000年，在该国总统选举中，电台派记者到每个计票站，并给他们配备了。
每个选区的结果宣布后，记者就向电台打报告结果，然后电台马上播报。
这就减少了选举作弊的时机，使得权力交接顺利进行，落选的总统很快成认失败。
[15] 监视技术广泛使用的社会效应仍不明朗。
?透明社会?一书的作者戴维·布雷恩提出，这将导致自我约束：毕竟，偷窥者不是很受欢送。
在饭店里，一般来说，被发现正盯着别人看比让人看到自己胡子上沾着面包屑更为难。
他指出，美国有句格言说，“一个武装的社会是有礼貌的社会〞，依此类推，“一个用照相机‘武装’的社会可能会变得更有礼貌〞。
布雷恩先生说，换句话说，摄像机及其他监视技术的无处不在可能最终使人更加循规蹈矩，因为他们会压抑个性以免他人过多地注意自己。
[16] 正如隐私权倡导者一直警告的那样，受人监视的社会即将到来，但并不是以他们想像的那种形态出现。
注视着每个人的不仅仅只有“老大哥〞——还有越来越多的小兄弟。
古代文物与当代政治迈克尔·基莫尔曼［1］柏林新博物馆最近重新开放了，这里成千上万的人排着长队，想看一眼奈费尔提蒂王后的半身雕像，文化战争的又一场冲突随即爆发了。
［2］埃及首席考古学家扎西·哈瓦斯曾经宣布，埃及要求德国立即归还奈费尔提蒂雕像，除非德国能够证明，有着3500年历史的、阿克那顿国王的王后的这尊雕像，不是一个世纪以前从埃及非法偷运出境的。
［3］哈瓦斯先生对Spiegel在线说，“我们并非追珍索宝之徒，如果有确定的证据，证明这尊雕像不是偷运出境的，那就不存在任何问题。
〞［4］之后他又说，他确信这件艺术品是被偷运出境的。
［5］事实上，全球化不但没有缩小国家之间的文化差异，反而加剧了这种差异。
民族主义势力热中于让文化为己所用，因为文化具有象征意义，有着巨大的潜在经济利益，而且文化使动辄引起纷争的身份政治有了合法的说法。
［6］哈瓦斯先生最近还在法国放了一炮，他要求卢浮宫将五幅湿壁画残片归还给埃及。
2000年和2003年，卢浮宫从一家美术馆和一次拍卖会上买到了这些残片。
这些残片是从卢克索附近的一个有着3200年历史的古墓中开掘出来的，之后一直藏于卢克索博物馆。
埃及此前提出过这种要求，但是这一次，埃及中止了卢浮宫在开罗附近的撒卡拉的长期开掘，并且声称将中止与卢浮宫在其会展中的合作。
［7］法国很明白其中的意思，承诺立即将这些残片归还给埃及。
［8］巴黎、柏林和开罗不会没有注意到，哈瓦斯先生提出的归还奈费尔提蒂雕像以及中止卢浮宫的开掘活动的要求，正是在埃及文化部长法鲁克·赫斯尼竞选联合国的文化机构——联合国教科文组织——总干事一职遭到惨痛失败之后提出的。
这一职位在上个月下旬给了保加利亚的一位外交官。
赫斯尼先生本可以成为获得这一职位的首个阿拉伯人，埃及总统赫斯尼·穆巴拉克以自己极大的威信打了保票，说部长将得到这一职位。
［9］但是一些犹太组织以及知名的法国和德国知识界人士〔尽管不是以色列政府〕发起了反对赫斯尼先生竞选的活动。
去年，在埃及议会开会期间，有人就亚历山大里亚图书馆藏有犹太书籍一事问及赫斯尼先生，他说，“让我们一起烧掉这些书吧。
假设真有犹太书籍的话，我会当着你的面亲自把它们烧掉。
〞这件事使得艾里·韦塞尔、克劳德·兰兹曼和伯纳尔-亨利·列维在?世界报?上发表文章，呼吁阻止赫斯尼先生竞选，文章还引用赫斯尼先生2001年说过的话，他说以色列文化是建立在偷窃根底上的“野蛮文化。
〞［10］此后，赫斯尼先生向这家法国报纸表示，他对自己的那些话表示遗憾，还说“种族主义，否认别人，以及伤害犹太文化或者任何其他文化的念头，是我最不能容忍的。
〞［11］后来赫斯尼先生竞选失败，就将自己的失败归咎于犹太人的阴谋。
［12］他对埃及一家周刊说，“这个阴谋之大，超出了你的想象。
〞［13］事实上，最终导致赫斯尼先生竞选失败的原因，除了他与埃及陈旧的、腐化的专制政权之间的密切关系之外，可能还有一个原因。
1985年，在阿基尔·洛罗号邮轮上发生了一场恐怖袭击，当时他是埃及的外交官，有人疑心他为袭击者提供了保护。
在这次恐怖袭击中，一位犹太裔美国游客在轮椅中遭到枪杀后被推到海里。
［14］不管怎样，就在联合国教科文组织宣布竞选结果之后的几天，哈瓦斯先生就对法国和德国采取了行动。
有人问及他的时机选择问题，他强调这两件事情之间根本没有联系，声称他两个月以前就已经向法国人提出了归还要求。
但是那是在赫斯尼先生的竞选即将失败的时候。
哈瓦斯先生还说，去年八月他突然宣布修复埃及境内的一个犹太教堂的决定与赫斯尼先生的竞选一事没有关联。
这就缺乏为奇了。
回想当时，很显然此举是为了平息日益高涨的犹太人对埃及部长的反对情绪。
［15］多少年来，每当政治时机成熟的时候，埃及就不时地提出归还奈费尔提蒂雕像的要求。
德国人指出，路德维希·博夏特于1912年在泰尔·埃尔·阿马尔那发现了这尊雕像，在埃及的官方许可下才把它带到柏林。
就在几天前，伊拉克重申了要求德国归还巴比伦古城伊什塔尔城门的请求，这座城门是在一战之前开掘出来运到柏林的。
［16］就伊拉克而言，政府似乎是在下赌注，认为德国对目前战争的矛盾立场也许有助于影响国内公众对于归还伊什塔尔城门的态度。
这和2002年萨达姆·侯赛因政权的做法是一样的。
当时的政权大打遣返牌，将其视为一种策略，与联合国就允许武器检查人员入境检查问题进行谈判。
［17］对于埃及公众来说，赫斯尼先生的失败是对政府领导不力的又一责难。
一位隶属穆斯林兄弟会的议员马辛·拉迪在?阿尔-达斯托日报?上发表文章说，“政府成员的策略是永远保住自己的位置，这样的政权将不断遭到挫折、失败和倒退。