亚洲免费乱码视频,日韩 欧美 国产 动漫 一区,97在线观看免费视频播国产,中文字幕亚洲图片

      1. <legend id="ppnor"></legend>

      2. 
        
        <sup id="ppnor"><input id="ppnor"></input></sup>
        <s id="ppnor"></s>

        考研英語歷年閱讀理解真題精析--1998年part2

        字號(hào):

        Part Two
            Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain? Everywhere you go in America, you hear tales of corporate revival. What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.
            The official statistics are mildly discouraging. They show that, if you lump manufacturing and services together, productivity has grown on average by 1.2% since 1987. That is somewhat faster than the average during the previous decade. And since 1991, productivity has increased by about 2% a year, which is more than twice the 1978 87 average. The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend. There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a “disjunction” between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.
            Some of this can be easily explained. New ways of organizing the workplace all that re engineering and downsizing - are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training. Moreover, most of the changes that companies make are intended to keep them profitable, and this need not always mean increasing productivity: switching to new markets or improving quality can matter just as much.
            Two other explanations are more speculative. First, some of the business restructuring of recent years may have been ineptly done. Second, even if it was well done, it may have spread much less widely than people suppose.
            Leonard Schlesinger, a Harvard academic and former chief executive of Au Bong Pain, a rapidly growing chain of bakery cafes, says that much “re engineering” has been crude. In many cases, he believes, the loss of revenue has been greater than the reductions in cost. His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long term profitability. BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re engineering consultants as mere rubbish - “the worst sort of ambulance cashing.”
            5. According to the author, the American economic situation is _____ .
            A)not as good as it seemsB)at its turning point
            C)much better than it seems D)near to complete recovery
            6. The official statistics on productivity growth _____ .
            A)exclude the usual rebound in a business cycleB)fall short of businessmen's anticipation
            C)meet the expectation of business people D)fail to reflect the true state of economy
            7. The author raises the question “what about pain without gain?” because _____ .
            A)he questions the truth of “no gain without pain”
            B)he does not think the productivity revolution works
            C)he wonders if the official statistics are misleading
            D)he has conclusive evidence for the revival of businesses
            8. Which of the following statements is NOT mentioned in the passage?
            A)Radical reforms are essential for the increase of productivity.
            B)New ways of organizing workplaces may help to increase productivity.
            C)The reduction of costs is not a sure way to gain long term profitability.
            D)The consultants are a bunch of good for nothings.
            Unit 5 (1998) Part2
            重點(diǎn)詞匯:
            1.assume (v.假定;承擔(dān);呈現(xiàn))。Optimism assumes, or attempts to prove, that the universe exists to please us, and pessimism that it exists to displease us.樂觀主義假定或企圖證明宇宙存在是為了使我們快樂;悲觀主義則假定或企圖證明那是為了使我們不快樂。
            2.lump (團(tuán)塊;使成團(tuán)塊)。An overdose of praise is like ten lumps of sugar in coffee; only a very few people can swallow it.過量的贊揚(yáng)有如在咖啡里放了十塊糖,只有極少數(shù)的人能咽得下去。
            3.acceleration(加速;加速度)即ac+celer+ation,ac-加強(qiáng)前綴,celer詞根“速度”,-ation名詞后綴;反義詞為deceleration(減速)←de向下+celer+ation。
            4.rebound(v.n.反彈)←re反+bound跳。
            5.evidence(證據(jù),跡象)即e+vid+ence,e-(=ex-),vid詞根“看”=vis(如visible→vis+ible→可見的),-ence名詞后綴,“能看出來的東西”→證據(jù)。Growth is the only evidence of life.成長(zhǎng)是生命的證明。Poverty of speech is the outward evidence of poverty of mind.言語的貧乏是心智貧乏的表現(xiàn)。
            6.treasury (寶庫(kù),國(guó)庫(kù))即treasur(e)+y,treasure(n.財(cái)寶v.珍愛),-y表“地方”,于是“放財(cái)寶的地方”→寶庫(kù)。Collection of famous quotes and collection of mottoes are the most important treasure of the society.名言集和格言集是社會(huì)可貴的財(cái)富。
            7.disjunction ?(n.分離,分裂)即dis+junction,dis-否定前綴,junction(n.連接,連接處)。
            8.anecdote(趣聞,軼事)
            9.profitability(收益率)即profit+ability,profit(v.n.收益),-ability名詞后綴; profitability — the sovereign criterion of the enterprise 有利可圖——企業(yè)的至高無上的準(zhǔn)則。
            10.ineptly(不相宜地;無能地)即in+ept+ly,in-否定前綴,ept(=apt)適宜的,-ly副詞后綴。
            11.revenue(財(cái)政收入;稅收)←re+venue,另可記avenue(林蔭道;途徑)←a+venue。Economy is of itself a great revenue.節(jié)約本身就是一大筆收入。
            12.blunt ?率直的;鈍的;使鈍。
            13.consultant (顧問)即consult+ant,consult(v.商量;查詢),-ant表“人”。
            難句解析:
            ① What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.
            這個(gè)句子的主語和表語都是從句。主語是what引導(dǎo)的名詞性從句,表語是whether引導(dǎo)的狀語表語從句。在表語從句中,主語是the productivity revolution,核心句是Whether the productivity revolution is for real,其中productivity revolution后面跟了一個(gè)that引導(dǎo)的定語從句,這個(gè)從句中的主語是businessmen,謂語是assume,后面跟一個(gè)賓語從句,而that所替代的productivity resolution就是這個(gè)賓語從句中over這個(gè)介詞的賓語。
            理解這個(gè)句子的關(guān)鍵在于要弄清其中環(huán)環(huán)相套的從句關(guān)系,就是revolution后面that引導(dǎo)的定語從句,以及從句中assume后面的賓語從句,這樣就找出preside over的賓語其實(shí)就是productivity revolution。
            ② The trouble is that Part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend.
            這個(gè)句子有一個(gè)很長(zhǎng)的表語從句,由that引導(dǎo)。從句中有兩個(gè)分句,中間用and so連接。第一個(gè)分句中又有一個(gè)that引導(dǎo)的定語從句,修飾的是rebound,第二個(gè)分句的主語與第一個(gè)分句的主語一樣,都是Part of the recent acceleration。這樣我們可以得到這個(gè)句子的主干部分:The trouble is that Part of acceleration is due to rebound, and is not conclusive evidence.
            理解這個(gè)句子的關(guān)鍵在于要清楚表語從句中第一個(gè)分句所套的修飾rebound的定語從句,再者就是第二個(gè)分句的主語與第一個(gè)分句的主語一致,并注意conclusive的意思。
            ③ There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.
            理解這個(gè)句子先要找出它的核心句:There is a "disjunction" between the mass and the picture,中間的人名及其職位可以當(dāng)作插入語。between后面的名詞帶有一個(gè)that引導(dǎo)的定語從句,修飾的是business anecdote,that在這個(gè)從句中充當(dāng)?shù)氖侵髡Z;and后面的名詞the picture后面跟的是過去分詞reflected,表示的是一種被動(dòng)關(guān)系。
            找出between和and的賓語(分別是the mass of business anecdote和the picture reflected by the statistics),這個(gè)句子就容易理解了。
            ④ New ways of organizing the workplace — all that re-engineering and downsizing — are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training.
            這個(gè)句子看似龐大,分析之下就簡(jiǎn)單了。先找出核心句:New ways are one contribution,再來看其它部分:new ways后面of organizing the workplace限定了new ways的內(nèi)容;破折號(hào)之間的部分是進(jìn)一步說明new ways of organizing the workplace的一些具體內(nèi)容;contribution后面的to接的是名詞賓語,這之后有一個(gè)which引導(dǎo)的定語從句,修飾的是前面的名詞an economy。在這個(gè)定語從句中by后面的賓語是factors,后面的such as跟隨的三個(gè)名詞短語就是列舉的內(nèi)容。
            找出主干句之后就不會(huì)受到長(zhǎng)句所造成的混亂影響,關(guān)鍵是要弄清楚contribution to后面的內(nèi)容,尤其是which引導(dǎo)的定語從句,修飾的是economy。
            ⑤His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re-engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long-term profitability.
            這個(gè)句子的主要部分在于謂語says后面的賓語從句,從句中的重要成分是在狀語短語部分,即in a mechanistic fashion,因?yàn)楹竺娓囊粋€(gè)現(xiàn)在分詞短語chopping out costs是進(jìn)一步說明fashion的內(nèi)容,without后面的動(dòng)名詞短語是補(bǔ)充成分,表示的是一種伴隨狀態(tài)
            關(guān)鍵在于chopping out costs這個(gè)現(xiàn)在分詞短語的理解,要明白這是in a mechanistic fashion的進(jìn)一步說明。
            試題解析:
            5 【正確答案】[A]
            意為:并不像表面看上去那樣好。第一段第三、四句指出,美國(guó)到處都在談?wù)撍^公司的振興(tales of corporate revival),但是,商界自認(rèn)為正在進(jìn)行的所謂生產(chǎn)率革命究竟是否名符其實(shí)(for real),這一點(diǎn)卻很難確定。該句實(shí)際上是全文的主旨,從反面提出了下文旨在回答的問題,所謂生產(chǎn)率革命根本不存在,官方的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字也并不怎么樂觀;該段第四句指出,問題是;近顯示出的增長(zhǎng)部分是由商業(yè)領(lǐng)域里此時(shí)出現(xiàn)的正常的反彈(rebound)造成的,因此,不能將它看作是更深層的(當(dāng)指生產(chǎn)率)振興的證據(jù)。
            后一段引用了幾個(gè)專家的評(píng)價(jià),對(duì)目前進(jìn)行的促進(jìn)生產(chǎn)率發(fā)展的措施進(jìn)行了否定,特別是羅森伯格的評(píng)價(jià),在他看來,目前負(fù)責(zé)調(diào)整經(jīng)濟(jì)的顧問們所做的工作,多數(shù)都是垃圾(沒有成效),是典型的“于事無補(bǔ)”(ambulance-chasing)。
            B意為:處于轉(zhuǎn)折階段。C意為:比現(xiàn)狀要好得多。D意為;幾乎要實(shí)現(xiàn)全面復(fù)蘇了。
            6. 【正確答案】 [B]
            意為:與商人的預(yù)想不符?;颍翰幌裆倘祟A(yù)想的那樣好。第二段指出,官方的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字也并不怎么樂觀,如果將制造業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)算在一起(lump... together),1989年以來生產(chǎn)率平均增長(zhǎng)了1.2%,比前十年的平均指數(shù)略有增長(zhǎng);1991年后,生產(chǎn)率每年增長(zhǎng)約2%,是1978年至1987年這十年平均指數(shù)的一倍多。然而問題是:近顯示出的增長(zhǎng)部分是由商業(yè)領(lǐng)域里此時(shí)出現(xiàn)的正常的反彈造成的,因此,不能將它看作是更深層的(當(dāng)指生產(chǎn)率)振興的證據(jù)。正如財(cái)政部長(zhǎng)魯賓所說的那樣,一方面,大量的商業(yè)神話似乎表明生產(chǎn)率的激增(leap),另一方面,(官方的)統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字又是另一番景象,二者之間存在著一個(gè)“差距”(disjunction)。
            A意為:排除了商業(yè)領(lǐng)域里出現(xiàn)的正常的反彈。C意為:與商人預(yù)想的一致。D意為:沒有準(zhǔn)確地反映經(jīng)濟(jì)的狀況。
            7. 【正確答案】 [B]
            意為:他認(rèn)為所謂的生產(chǎn)率革命并未奏效。第一段指出,人們常說:不勞則無所獲,但是,要是勞而無獲呢?美國(guó)到處都在談?wù)撍^公司的振興,但是,商界自認(rèn)為正在進(jìn)行的所謂生產(chǎn)率革命究竟是否名符其實(shí),這一點(diǎn)卻很難確定。作者的觀點(diǎn)在此其實(shí)已表達(dá)得很清楚。另外,從第三段來看,所謂的生產(chǎn)率革命包括了改組企業(yè)(business restructuring, reengineering)等一系列措施,正如第四段所指出的,近年所進(jìn)行的一些重組措施也許并未奏效,而且,即使有所成效,效果也沒有人們想像的那樣廣泛。在后一段,作者引用了幾個(gè)專家的評(píng)價(jià),這幾位專家對(duì)目前進(jìn)行的促進(jìn)生產(chǎn)率發(fā)展的措施更是持否定態(tài)度。作者的引用當(dāng)然帶有很大的傾向性,用以支持自己的觀點(diǎn)。
            另請(qǐng)參考第5、6題題解。
            A意為:他對(duì)“不勞則無所獲”的真實(shí)性提出質(zhì)疑。該選擇項(xiàng)過于局限于字面意思。C意為:他認(rèn)為官方的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)寧可能有錯(cuò)。正好相反,他們認(rèn)為所謂的商業(yè)振興僅僅是假象。D意為:他獲得了商業(yè)振興的確鑿證據(jù)。
            8.【正確答案】[A]
            意為:激進(jìn)的改革對(duì)生產(chǎn)率的提高極其重要。這是本文所未提到的,作者只指出促進(jìn)生產(chǎn)率革命的措施并未奏效,未達(dá)到人們想象的效果,而并末提到應(yīng)該如何才對(duì)。
            B意為:用新方法改變工作場(chǎng)所可以提高生產(chǎn)率。第三段第二句指出,重新改變工作場(chǎng)所僅是加快一個(gè)國(guó)家的國(guó)民經(jīng)濟(jì)綜合生產(chǎn)率水平(overall productivity of an economy)的一種措施,促進(jìn)生產(chǎn)率發(fā)展的因素還有許多,如:設(shè)備和機(jī)器投資、新技術(shù)、教育和培訓(xùn)投資等都會(huì)帶來生產(chǎn)率的提高。C意為:降低成本并不能保證帶來長(zhǎng)期利潤(rùn)。根據(jù)第五段第三句,在比爾看來,許多公司機(jī)械地(in a mechanistic fashion)應(yīng)用改革措施,降低了成本,但對(duì)長(zhǎng)期盈利卻考慮不夠??梢?,降低成本和長(zhǎng)期盈利并非總是成正比。D意為:顧問們是一伙飯桶。文章后一段指出,在羅森伯格看來,目前負(fù)責(zé)經(jīng)濟(jì)調(diào)整的顧問們所做的工作,多數(shù)都是垃圾(沒有成效),是典型的“于事無補(bǔ)”。
            全文翻譯:
            人們說,不勞就無獲。但是,如果有勞卻無獲又會(huì)怎樣呢?在美國(guó),無論你走到哪里都會(huì)聽到企業(yè)復(fù)蘇的故事。商人們自認(rèn)為的他們所領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的生產(chǎn)力革命是否確有其事,這一點(diǎn)更加難以確定。
            官方的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字卻有點(diǎn)不讓人樂觀。這些數(shù)據(jù)表明,如果把制造業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)合起來算,1987年以來生產(chǎn)力平均增長(zhǎng)1.2%。這比前10年的平均增長(zhǎng)速度略快。自1991年來,生產(chǎn)力每年約增長(zhǎng)2%。這比1978年—1987年的平均增長(zhǎng)速度高兩倍以上。問題在于,近年發(fā)生的生產(chǎn)力快速增長(zhǎng)部分是由于商業(yè)周期通常到了這時(shí)候就會(huì)出現(xiàn)的反彈造成的,因而它不是經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇已經(jīng)是潛在趨勢(shì)的結(jié)論性證據(jù)。正如財(cái)政部長(zhǎng)羅伯特?魯賓所說的,生產(chǎn)力發(fā)生飛躍的商業(yè)傳奇與統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字所反映的情況之間存在著一種“脫節(jié)”。
            這其中的一些原因很容易解釋。企業(yè)重組的新方法——所有那些重新設(shè)計(jì)和縮小規(guī)模的做法——只是對(duì)一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)的整體生產(chǎn)力做出了一方面的貢獻(xiàn),而這種經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展還收到許多其他因素的驅(qū)動(dòng),如設(shè)備、機(jī)械上的聯(lián)合投資,新技術(shù),以及教育和培訓(xùn)上的投資。另外,公司的大部分改革是為了贏利,而達(dá)到贏利的目的不一定非要提高生產(chǎn)力:轉(zhuǎn)入新的市場(chǎng)或改善產(chǎn)品質(zhì)量也會(huì)有同樣的功效。
            其他兩種解釋帶有很大的猜測(cè)性。一種解釋是近年來所進(jìn)行的公司重組也許并未奏效。另一種則說,即使有所成效,效果也不像人們所設(shè)想的那樣廣泛。
            哈佛學(xué)者,快速增長(zhǎng)的面包連鎖店Au Bon Pain的前任總裁萊昂納多?施萊辛格說,許多“重組”是粗糙的。他認(rèn)為很多情況下,企業(yè)收益的損失超出了成本的降低。他的同事邁克?比爾說,太多的公司已用機(jī)械的方式進(jìn)行重組,在沒有充分考慮到長(zhǎng)期贏利能力的情況下降低了成本。BBDO的艾爾?羅森夏恩更加直率。他把許多重組咨詢專家所做的工作視為垃圾——“典型的勞而無獲”。