ÀúÄêÓ¢ÓïרҵËļ¶ÕæÌâ ÁªÏµ¿Í·þ

·¢²¼Ê±¼ä : ÐÇÆÚÎå ÎÄÕÂÀúÄêÓ¢ÓïרҵËļ¶ÕæÌâ¸üÐÂÍê±Ï¿ªÊ¼ÔĶÁb1221603bb68a98271fefaed

meaning\ \ But this is a rather misled way of expressing the distinction.

Although a word like the is not the name of something as man is, it is very far away from being meaningless; there is a sharp difference in meaning between \ vile\le of this difference in meaning. Moreover, grammatical words differ considerably among themselves as the amount of meaning they have, even in the lexical sense. Another name for the grammatical words has been \ distinguishing the grammatical words of English, when we consider that we have lexical words as go, man, say, car. Apart from this, however, there is a good deal of truth in what some people say: we certainly do create a great number of obscurity when we omit them. This is illustrated not only in the poetry of Robert Browning but in the prose of telegrams and newspaper headlines.

´ó2¼Ò ´ó3¼Ò ´ó4¼Ò ´ó5¼Ò ´ó6¼Ò ´ó7¼Ò ´ó8¼Ò ´ó9¼Ò ´ó10¼Ò

PART IV Translation (60 min)

Öйú¿Æ¼¼¹ÝµÄµ®ÉúÀ´Ö®²»Òס£Óë¹ú¼ÊÖøÃû¿Æ¼¼¹ÝºÍÆäËû²©Îï¹ÝÏà±È, ËüÏÈÌìÓÐЩ²»×ã, ºóÌìÒ²³£È±·¦ÓªÑø, µ«ÊÇËü³É³¤µÄ²½·¥È´ÊǼáʵ¶øÓÐÁ¦µÄ¡£ËüÔÚ¹ú¼ÊÉÏÒѱ»¹«ÈÏΪºóÆðÖ®Ðã¡£

ÊÀ½çÉϵÚÒ»´ú²©Îï¹ÝÊôÓÚ×ÔÈ»²©Îï¹Ý, ËüÊÇͨ¹ý»¯Ê¯¡¢±ê±¾µÈÏòÈËÃǽéÉܵØÇòºÍ¸÷ÖÖÉúÎïµÄÑÝ»¯ÀúÊ·¡£µÚ¶þ´úÊôÓÚ¹¤Òµ¼¼Êõ²©Îï¹Ý, ËüËùչʾµÄÊǹ¤ÒµÎÄÃ÷´øÀ´µÄ¸÷Öֽ׶ÎÐÔ½á¹û¡£ÕâÁ½´ú²©Îï¹ÝËäÈ»Æðµ½ÁË´«²¥¿Æѧ֪ʶµÄ×÷ÓÃ, µ«ÊÇ, ËüÃǰѲιÛÕßµ±³ÉÁ˱»¶¯µÄÅÔ¹ÛÕß¡£

ÊÀ½çÉϵÚÈý´ú²©Îï¹ÝÊdzäÂúÈ«ÐÂÀíÄîµÄ²©Îï¹Ý¡£ÔÚÕâÀï, ¹ÛÖÚ¿ÉÒÔ×Ô¼ºÈ¥¶¯ÊÖ²Ù×÷, ×Ô¼ºÏ¸ÐÄÌå²ì¡£ÕâÑù, ËûÃÇ¿ÉÒÔ¸üÌù½üÏȽøµÄ¿Æѧ¼¼Êõ, ȥ̽Ë÷¿Æѧ¼¼ÊõµÄ°ÂÃî¡£

Öйú¿Æ¼¼¹ÝÕýÊÇÕâÑùµÄ²©Îï¹Ý!Ëü¼³È¡Á˹ú¼ÊÉÏһЩÖøÃû²©Îï¹ÝµÄ³¤´¦, Éè¼ÆÖÆ×÷ÁËÁ¦Ñ§¡¢¹âѧ¡¢µçѧ¡¢ÈÈѧ¡¢Éùѧ¡¢ÉúÎïѧµÈչƷ, չʾÁË¿ÆѧµÄÔ­ÀíºÍÏȽøµÄ¿Æ¼¼³É¹û¡£

If people mean anything at all by the expression \death\they must believe that some deaths nm on a better schedule than others. Death in old age is rarely called untimely ¨C a long life is thought to be a full one. But with the passing of a young person, one assumes that the best years lay ahead and the measure of that life was still to be taken.

History denies this, of course. Among prominent summer deaths, one recalls those of MariLarry Monroe and James Deans, whose lives seemed equally brief and complete. Writers cannot bear the fact that poet John Keats died at 26, and only half playfully judge their own lives as failures when they pass that year. The id ea that the life cut short is unfulfilled is illogical because lives are measured by the impressions they leave on the world and by their intensity and virtue.

TEST FOR ENGLISH MAJORS (1999)

-GRADE EIGHT- PART II

Proofreading and Error Correction (15 min)

´ó1¼Ò ´ó2¼Ò ´ó3¼Ò ´ó4¼Ò ´ó5¼Ò ´ó6¼Ò

The hunter-gatherer tribes that today live as our prehistoric human ancestors consume primarily a vegetable diet supplementing with animal foods. An analysis of 58 societies of modem hunter- gatherers, including the Kung of southern Africa, revealed that one half emphasize gathering plant foods, one-third concentrate on fishing and only one-sixth are primarily hunters. Overall, two-thirds

and more of the hunter-gatherer's calories come from plants. Detailed studies of the Kung by the food scientists at the University of

London, showed that gathering is a more productive source of food than is hunting. An hour of hunting yields in average about 100 edible calories, as an hour of gathering produces 240.

Plant foods provide for 60 percent to 80 percent of the Kung diet, and no one goes hungry when the hunt fails. Interestingly, if they escape fatal infections or accidents, these contemporary aborigines live to old ages despite of the absence of medical care. They experience no obesity, no middle-aged spread, little dental

decay, no high blood pressure, on heart disease, and their blood cholesterol levels are very low (about half of the average American adult), if no one is suggesting what we return to an aboriginal life style, we certainly could use their eating habits as a model for healthier diet.

´ó7¼Ò ´ó8¼Ò ´ó9¼Ò ´ó10¼Ò

PART IV Translation (60 min)

¼ÓÄôóµÄθ绪1986Äê¸Õ¸Õ¶È¹ý°ÙËêÉúÈÕ, µ«³ÇÊеķ¢Õ¹ÁîÊÀ½çÖõÄ¿¡£ÒÔ¸ÛÁ¢ÊÐ, ÒÔ¸ÛÐËÊÐ, ÊÇÐí¶à¸Û¿Ú³ÇÊÐÉú´æ·¢Õ¹µÄµÀ·¡£¾­¹ý°ÙÄ꿪·¢½¨Éè, ÓÐ×ÅÌìÈ»²»¶³Á¼¸ÛµÄθ绪, ³ÉΪ¾ÙÊÀÎÅÃûµÄ¸Û¿Ú³ÇÊÐ, ͬÑÇÖÞ¡¢´óÑóÖÞ¡¢Å·ÖÞ¡¢À­¶¡ÃÀÖÞ¾ùÓж¨ÆÚ°àÂÖ, Äê»õÎïÍÌÍÂÁ¿´ïµ½8, 000Íò¶Ö, È«ÊоÍÒµÈË¿ÚÖÐÓÐÈý·ÖÖ®Ò»´ÓÊÂóÒ×ÓëÔËÊäÐÐÒµ¡£ θ绪(Vancouver)µÄ»Ô»ÍÊÇθ绪ÈËÖǻۺÍÇڷܵĽᾧ, ÆäÖаüÀ¨¶àÃñ×åµÄ¹±Ïס£¼ÓÄôóµØ¹ãÈËÏ¡, ¹úÍÁÃæ»ý±ÈÖйú»¹´ó, ÈË¿ÚÈ´²»×ã3000Íò¡£ÎüÊÕÍâÀ´ÒÆÃñ, ÊǼÓÄôó³¤ÆÚ·îÐеĹú²ß¡£¿ÉÒÔ˵, ¼ÓÄôó³ýÁËÓ¡µÚ°²ÈËÍâ, ÎÞÒ»²»ÊÇÍâÀ´ÒÆÃñ, ²»Í¬µÄÖ»ÊÇʱ¼ä³¤¶Ì¶øÒÑ¡£Î¸绪Ôò¸üÊÇÊÀ½çÉÏÇüÖ¸¿ÉÊýµÄ¶àÃñ×å³ÇÊС£ÏÖ½ñ180Íòθ绪¾ÓÃñÖÐ, ÓÐÒ»°ë²»ÊÇÔÚ±¾µØ³öÉúµÄ, ÿ4¸ö¾ÓÃñÖоÍÓÐÒ»¸öÊÇÑÇÖÞÈË¡£¶ø25Íò»ªÈ˶Ôθ绪µÄ¾­¼ÃתÐÍÆðמö¶¨ÐÔµÄ×÷Óá£ËûÃÇÆäÖÐÓÐÒ»°ëÊǽü5Äê²ÅÀ´µ½Î¸绪µØÇøµÄ, ʹθ绪³ÉΪÑÇÖÞÒÔÍâ×î´óµÄÖйúÈ˾۾ӵء£

In some societies people want children for what might be called familial reasons: to extend the family line or the family name, to propitiate the ancestors; to enable the proper functioning of religious rituals involving the family. Such reasons may seem thin in the modern, secularized society but they have been and are powerful indeed in other places.

In addition, one class of family reasons shares a border with the following category, namely, having children in order to maintain or improve a marriage: to hold the husband or occupy the wife; to repair or rejuvenate the marriage; to increase the number of children on the assumption that family happiness lies that way. The point is underlined by its converse: in some societies the failure to bear children (or males) is a threat to the marriage and a ready cause for divorce. Beyond all that is the profound significance of children to the very institution of the family itself. To many people, husband and wife alone do not seem a proper family ¨C they need children to enrich the circle, to validate its family character, to gather the redemptive influence of offspring. Children need the family, but the family seems also to need children, as the social institution uniquely available, at least in principle, for security, comfort, assurance, and direction in a changing, often hostile, world. To most people, such a home base, in the literal sense, needs more than one person for sustenance and in generational extension.

SECTION A: CHINESE TO ENGLISH (30 MIN)

97Äê2ÔÂ24ÈÕÎÒÃÇ´ú±íÍÅÏÂé½ÈÕÔÂ̶ÖÐÐÅ´ó·¹µê, ËÍ×ßÁË×îºóÒ»Åú¿ÍÈË, ÒÑÊÇ´ÎÈÕÁ賿3µãÁË¡£ÎÒÌÉÔÚ´²ÉϾþò»ÄÜÈë˯, ÅúÒÂ×ßµ½´°Ç°, ÍùÍâ¿´È¥, Ö»¼ûËÄÖÜȺÂ͵þ´ä, ºþÃ沨¹âôÔÁס£Íûץ̊ÍåÕâ½öÓеľ°É«Èç»­µÄÌìÈ»ºþ²´, ÎÒÏëÁËÐí¶à, Ðí¶à¡­¡­

Õâ´Îµ½Ì¨Íå·ÃÎʽ»Á÷, ËäÈ»Ðг̴ҴÒ, µ«ÊÇ, ¿´Á˲»Éٵط½, ·ÃÁ˾ÉÓÑ, ½»ÁËÐÂÖª, ´ó¼Ò×ßµ½Ò»Æð, ̸ÂÛµÄÒ»¸öÖØÒª»°Ìâ¾ÍÊÇÖлªÃñ×åÔÚ21ÊÀ¼ÍµÄÇ¿Ê¢¡£ËäÈ»×æ¹ú´ó½¡¢Ì¨ÍåµÄÇàÄêÉú»îÔÚ²»Í¬µÄÉç»á»·¾³ÖÐ, ÓÐן÷×Ô²»Í¬µÄÉú»î¾­Àú, µ«´ó¼ÒµÄÄÚÐĶ¼ÉîÉîÃú¿Ì×ÅÖлªÎÄ»¯ÓÅÐ㴫ͳµÄÓ¡¼Ç, ¶¼ÓµÓÐ×ÅÕñÐËÖлªÃñ×åµÄ¹²Í¬ÀíÏë¡£ÔÚÊÀ¼ÍÖ®½»µÄΰ´óʱ´ú, ÎÒÃǵÄ×æ¹úÕýÔÚ×ßÏò·±ÈÙ¸»Ç¿, º£Ï¿Á½°¶ÈËÃñÒ²½«¼ÓÇ¿½»Á÷, ¹²Í¬Íƽø×æ¹úͳһ´óÒµµÄÔçÈÕÍê³É¡£ÊÀ¼ÍÖ®½»µÄ±¦¹ó»úÓöºÍ¾Þ´óÌôÕ½½«ÇàÄêÍƵ½ÁËÀúʷǰ̨¡£¿çÊÀ¼ÍÇàÄêÒ»´úÓ¦¸ÃÓÃʲôÑùµÄ×Ë̬ӭ½Ó³äÂúÏ£ÍûµÄÐÂÊÀ¼Í, ÕâÊÇÎÒÃDZØÐë»Ø´ðµÄÎÊÌâ¡£

ÈÕÔÂ̶ˮ²¨²»ÐË, ·Â·ðÓëÎÒһͬÔÚ˼Ë÷¡­¡­

I agree to some extent with my imaginary English reader. American literary historians are perhaps prone to view their own national scene too narrowly, mistaking prominence for uniqueness. They do over-phrase their own literature, or certainly its minor figures. And Americans do swing from aggressive overphrase of their literature to an equally unfortunate, imitative deference. But then, the English themselves are somewhat insular in their literary appraisals. Moreover, in fields where they are not pre-eminent -- e. g. in painting and music -- they too alternate between boasting of native products and copying those of the Continent. How many English paintings try to look as though they were done in Paris; how many times have we read in articles that they really represent an 'English tradition' after all.

To speak of American literature, then, is not to assert that it is completely unlike that of Europe. Broadly speaking, America and Europe have kept step. At any given moment the traveller could find examples in both of the same architecture, the same styles in dress, the same books on the shelves. Ideas have crossed the Atlantic as freely as men and merchandise, though sometimes more slowly. When I refer to American habit, thoughts, etc., I intend some sort of qualification to precede the word, for frequently the difference between America and Europe (especially England) will be one of degree, sometimes only of a small degree. The amount of divergence is a subtle affair, liable to perplex the Englishman when he looks at America. He is looking at a country which in important senses grew out of his own, which in several ways still resembles his own -- and which is yet a foreign country. There are odd overlappings and abrupt unfamiliarities; kinship yields to a sudden alienation, as when we hail a person across the street, only to discover from his blank response that we have mistaken a stranger for a friend.