本帖最后由 asia9 于 2014-1-10 23:53 編輯
本人英語水平很一般：高考成績110（150分制），四級433，六級488，考研55（2010年） 開始正題：附帶翻譯，有誤地方請指正。 In order to “change lives the better” and reduce “dependency”, Geroge Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, in troduced the “upfront work search”scheme. Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV,register for online job search, and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit—and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly.What could be more reasonable? 為了“把生活變得更美好”以及減少“依賴性”，財政大臣喬治·奧斯本介紹了一款“前期工作搜索”設計。失業了只要帶上簡歷到就業服務中心，在網上登記好求職信息，然后開始尋找工作，他們將會得到合適的福利——之后他們應該每周而不是兩周才報告（他們的求職情況）還有什么比這個（設計方案）更為合理的呢？ 21. Geroge Osborne’s scheme was intended to________ 喬治·奧斯本的方案的主要意圖是為了________ [A]provide the unemployed with easier access to benefits. 給失業者提供更便利的方式獲得福利。 [B]encourage jobseekers active engagement in job seeking. 鼓勵求職者更為積極地找工作。 [C]motivate the unemployed to report voluntarily. 激勵失業者自愿進行報道。 [D]gurarantee jobseekers legitimate right to benefits. 確保求職者獲得福利的合法權利。 選B。第一段第一句話讀懂即可選對！ 為啥不選A、C、D？這三項蜻蜓點水而已，沒談到本質的東西。摳住一個詞：reduce “dependency”（減少依賴性）。可以這樣理解，給失業者提供福利只是讓他們暫時度過難關，讓他們繼續尋找工作機會而不是干等著。
More apparent reasonableness followed.There will now be a seven-day wait for the jobseeker’s allowance. “Those first few days should be spent looking for work, not looking for to sign on.” he claimed.”We are doing these things because we kown they help people stay off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster.”Help? Really? On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor trying to change the lives for the better, complete with “reforms” to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidies laziness. What motivated him,we were to understand, was his zeal for “fundamental fairness”—protect the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most deserving claimants recieved their benefits.（第23題答案在此！）接下來還有更為明顯的合理性。現其間將會有7天時間等待求職者（失業）補助的發放。“前幾日應該花在繼續找尋工作，而不是指望（等待）著簽字（指申請ZF的失業補助）。”他（這位財政大臣）聲稱。 （翻譯待補） 22.the phrase “to sign on”(Line 3, Para 2) most probably means? 22.短語“to sign on“（第2段第3行）最可能是什么意思？ [A]to check on the availability of job at the jobcentre. 去驗證一下求職中心的工作的實用性（實效性）。 [B]to accept the government’s restrictions on the allowance. 去接受ZF在補貼上的限定。 [C]to register for an allowance from the government. 登記（申請）一份ZF補貼。 [D]to attend a government job training program. 去參加一個ZF工作培訓項目。 22題選C。 為啥不選A、B、D？A、D無中生有，B項無緣無故加了一個“限定（限制）”。 23.What prompted the chancellor for develop his scheme? 是什么促使這位（財政）大臣開發他的方案？ [A] A desire to secure a better life for all. 為了確保所有人生活的更好的一個愿望。 [B] An eagerness to protect the unemployed. 保護失業者的一個渴望。 [C] An urge to be generous to the claimants. 對訴求者表示慷慨的（態度）的一個強烈愿望 [D] A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayer. 確保對納稅人的那份公平的一份熱心。 23題選D。答案在第二段最后一句話當中可以找到。好簡單的一題！四個字概括：同義替換！先是題目當中的prompt替換文中的motivate，都有“促使”的意思；接著題干中的passion替換文中的zeal！都有“熱情，熱心”的意思，其中zeal(ous)我記得應該應該是考研核心詞匯吧。而且在音序Z，哈哈，很多童鞋肯定看得到這個單詞。 A、B、C為何不選？首先A項all（所有，注意：貌似含有絕對肯定絕對否定都是錯答案吧，嘿嘿嘿。），原文說了是為了改善所有人的生活？B、C項無中生有。 Paragraph 3:Losing a job is hurting: you don’t skip down to the jobcentre with a song in your heart, delighted at the prospect of the doubling your income from the generous state. It is finally terrifyng, psychologically embarrassing and your kown that support is minimal and extraodinarily hard to get. You are now not wanted, you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life. Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared. Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always: a job. 24.According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one feel_______ 根據第3段，處于失業狀態會使人感到_________ [A] uneasy 不安 [B] enraged 憤怒 [C] insulted 羞辱 [D] guilty 內疚 第24題選A。第3段第一句話就說失業讓人傷不起啊（很受傷啊有木有），看看選項，于是我們可以斃掉B、D，再對應第3段的 psychologically embarrassing，那就肯定選A了。 為啥不選B、C、D？C、羞辱有點夸張，B、D屬于無中生有。 Paragraph 4: But in Osborneland, your first instinct is to fall into dependency – permanent dependency if you can get it – supported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood. It is as though 20 years of every-tougher reforms of the job search and benefit adminstration system never happened. The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and recieve the unconditional payments if the disaster happens. Even the very phrase “jobseeker’s allowance” is about redefining the unemployed as a “jobseeker” who had no fundamental right to a benefit he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions. Instead, the claimant recieves a time-limited “allowance,” conditional on actively seeking a job; no entitlement and no insurance, at ￡71.70 a week, one of the least generous in the EU. 25. To which of the following would the author most probably agree? 作者最為可能贊同下列哪項？ [A] The British welfare system indulges jobseekers’ laziness. 英國的福利制度助長了求職者的惰性。 [B] Osborne’s reforms will reduce the risk of unemployment. 奧斯本的改革將會減少失業的風險。 [C] The jobseekers’ allowance has met their actual needs. 求職者的補助已滿足他們的實際需要。 [D] unemployment benefits should not be made conditional. 失業救濟金不應該無條件發放。 第25題選D。第4段開始就說要陷入“依賴性”只會讓你繼續錯下去。接著第二句說，20年的苦心經營的求職改革與福利管理制度將像從來沒發生一樣。這暗示著人們領取ZF的救濟金不應該白領的。 為啥不選A、B、C？The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and recieve the unconditional payments if the disaster happens.“英國福利制度的原則就是：當你的確不能抵御失業的風險之時，而且不幸確實降臨到你頭上時你才領取無條件的資助。”
先貼上我的答案：
21-25BCDAD
26-30DABBC
31-35DBBAA
36-40ACCDB
5個A，6個B，4個C，5個D。
。。。待續！
| 
發表于 2014-1-5 23:47
收藏
分享
支持
反對
樓主
