新视野大学英语第四册第三版课文及翻译.doc

新视野大学英语第四册第三版课文及翻译Unit 5Speaking Chinese in America在美国说中文Once， at a dinner on the Monterey Peninsula， California， my mother whispered to me confidentially: Sau-sau （brothers wife) pretends too hard to be a polite recipient! Why bother with such nominal courtesy？ In the end， she always takes everything.有一次，在加州蒙特雷半岛上用餐时，我母亲私下悄悄地对我说:“嫂嫂想做个彬彬有礼的客人，但是装得太厉害了！何必费劲讲究形式上的客套呢？到最后她还是什么都要。”My mother acted like a waixiao, an emigrant, no longer patient with old taboos and courtesies。 To prove her point, she reached across the table to offer my elderly aunt from Beijing the last scallop from the garlic seafood dish, along with the flank steak and the cucumber salad。我母亲行事像个“外侨”，即一个移民国外的侨民,因为她已经不耐烦老一套的禁忌和礼数了.为了证明她刚才的观点，她手伸过桌子,把蒜香海鲜拼盘里的最后一个扇贝，连同牛腩排及黄瓜沙拉一起,递给我从北京来的年长舅妈。Sausau frowned。 ”Byao， zhenbyao! she cried， patting her substantial stomach. I dont want it， really I dont.嫂嫂皱起了眉头,“不要，真不要!”她一边大声说一边拍着自己已经吃得很饱的肚子。我不要了，真的不要了。Take it！ Take it!” my mother scolded in Chinese， as predictably as the lunar cycles.“拿去吧！拿去吧！”我母亲用中文责备道。预料到她就会这样，就像月亮盈亏周期似的。Full， Im already full，” Sau-sau muttered weakly, eying the scallop.“饱了,我已经饱了，嫂嫂低声嘀咕着，眼睛却瞟着扇贝.Ai！ exclaimed my mother。 Nobody wants it。 It will only rot！”“哎!”我母亲感叹着说，“没人愿意吃，只能让它坏掉了！Sausau sighed， acting as if she were doing my mother a favor by taking the scrap off the tray and sparing us the trouble of wrapping the leftovers in foil。嫂嫂叹了口气，从碟子上拿去了那个扇贝，就好像是帮了我母亲一个大忙,并省去了我们用箔纸将剩菜打包的麻烦似的。My mother turned to her brother， an experienced Chinese magistrate, visiting us for the first time。 In America, a Chinese person could starve to death. If you dont breach the old rules of etiquette and say you want it， they wont ask you again.”我母亲转头看着她兄长-一位经验丰富的中国地方法官，这是他初次来看我们。她说:“在美国，一个中国人可能会饿死。要是你不打破老一套的礼数说你要吃，他们就不会再问你了。”My uncle nodded and said he understood fully： Americans take things quickly because they have no time to be polite。我舅舅点点头,说他完全理解:美国人待人接物快速迅捷,因为他们没有时间客气来客气去。I read an article in The New York Times Magazine on changes in New Yorks little cultural colony of Chinatown, where the author mentioned that the interwoven configuration of Chinese language and culture renders its speech indirect and polite。 Chinese people are so ”discreet and modest”， the article started, that there arent even words for yes” and no。我在纽约时报杂志上读到过一篇文章,描述的是纽约市内的中国城这一小块文化聚居地的变迁.作者在文章中提到，中国语言与文化错综交织，使中文十分委婉和客套。中国人是如此“谨慎和谦虚”，文章开头写道，以至于他们都没有词语来表达“是”和“不是”。Why do people keep fabricating these rumors? I thought。 They describe us as though we were a tribe of those little dolls sold in Chinatown tourist shops, heads moving up and down in contented agreement！我思索着，为什么人们会不断地编造这样的谣言呢？他们把我们描述得就像是唐人街旅游品商店里出售的一批小布娃娃。那些布娃娃的头不停地上下晃动，似乎对一切都心满意足，完全赞同。As any child of immigrant parents knows， there is a special kind of double bind attached to knowing two languages。 My parents, for example， spoke to me in both Chinese and English； I spoke back to them in English。生于移民家庭的孩子都清楚，有一种特殊的两难境地与说两种语言的生活联系在一起。比如我父母，他们和我说话时中文和英文都用,但我和他们说话时只用英文。Amyah！” theyd scold me。“艾米啊！他们会这样责备我。what？” Id answer back。“怎么啦?”我会回问道。”Do not question us when we call,” theyd scold in Chinese。 Its not respectful.”“我们叫你时，不要对我们反问，”他们会用中文训斥道.“这是不礼貌的！”what do you mean？“你们什么意思？”Ai! Didnt we just tell you not to question? is If I consider my upbringing carefully， I find there was nothing discreet about the Chinese language I grew up with， no censorship for the sake of politeness. My parents made everything abundantly clear in their consecutive demands： ”Of course you will become a famous aerospace engineer, they prodded。 And yes, a concert pianist on the side.”仔细想想自己的成长过程,我发现，我从小到大所接触到的中文并不是什么特别谨慎的语言，也不存在出于客气而对所说的话进行仔细检查的现象。我父母向我提一连串的要求时，总是把一切都表述得清清楚楚：“你当然会成为著名的航空工程师，”他们会鼓励我说，“对了，你业余时间还要做音乐会的钢琴师.”It seems that the more forceful proceedings always spilled over into Chinese: ”Not that way！ You must wash rice so not a single grain is lost。”似乎更加强硬的事情总是通过中文倾泻出来：“不能那样!你淘米的时候,必须一粒都不漏。”Having listened to both Chinese and English， Im suspicious of comparisons between the two languages, as I notice the reciprocal challenges they each present。 English speakers say Chinese is extremely difficult because different words can be denoted by very subtle variations in tone. English is often bracketed with the label of inconsistency， a language of too many broken rules。由于一直同时听着中英文两种语言，故而我对它们之间的任何对比总是心存怀疑，因为我注意到它们各自都有对方所没有的难点。说英文的人会认为中文极其难，因为中文用非常微妙的声调变化就可以表示不同的词语。而英文则常常被认为缺乏一致性，因为英文具有太多不合规则的用法。Even more dangerous， in my view， is the temptation to view the gulf between different languages and behavior in translation。 To listen to my mother speak English， an outside spectator might make the deduction that she has no concept of the temporal differences of past and future or that she is gender blind because she refers to my husband as she. If one were not careful， one might also generalize that all Chinese people take an indirect route to get to the point。 It is, rather, my mothers individual tendency to ornament her language and wander around a bit。在我看来，更危险的做法是，人们往往倾向于通过翻译来理解不同语言和行为之间的差异。如果一个旁观的外人听我母亲说英语，可能会得出结论，说她对过去和将来这样的时间区别没有概念,或者认为她对人的性别不加区分，因为她提到我丈夫时总是说“她。如果一个人对此类现象不假思虑,他也许还会概括说，所有中国人都是通过委婉迂回的方式才能说到话题重点的。而实际上喜欢修饰和绕弯子只是我母亲个人的说话风格。I worry that the dominant society may see Chinese people from a limited perspective， hedging us in with the stereotype. I worry that the seemingly innocent stereotype may lead to actual intolerance and be part of the reason why there are few Chinese in top management positions， or in the main judiciary or political sectors。 I worry about the power of language： If one says anything enough times, it might become true, with or without malicious intent。我担心主流社会可能会从一个狭隘的角度、以一种成见看待中国人。我担心这种看似无害的成见实际会导致人们对中国人难以容忍,并成为中国人在高层管理职位或主要的司法及政府部门寥寥无几的部分原因。我担心语言的力量，即如果一个人将一件事说了很多遍，无论其是否有恶意，这件事都会变成事实.Could this be why the Chinese friends of my parents generation are willing to accept the generalization？这会不会就是我父母辈的中国朋友愿意接受那些对中国人的简单概括的原因呢?why are you complaining? one of them said to me。” If people think we are modest and polite, let them think that。 Wouldnt Americans appreciate such an honorary description?“你为什么要抱怨呢？”他们中有人问我。“如果人们认为我们谦虚礼让，就让他们那样想好了。难道美国人不喜欢这种赞誉性的话吗?And I do believe that anyone would take the description as a compliment at first。 But after a while， it annoys， as if the only things that people heard one say were what had been filtered through the sieve of social niceties: Im so pleased to meet you. Ive heard many wonderful things about you.我当然相信每个人在一开始都会把这种描述的话当成称赞。但过了一段时间，这种话就会让人恼怒，就好像所听到的只是些经过细微的社交区别过滤后的言辞，诸如“很高兴认识你，我听到许多人都夸奖你”之类的话。These remarks are not representative of new ideas， honest emotions, or considered thought。 Like a piece of bread, they are only the crust of the interaction, or what is said from the polite distance of social contexts： greetings, farewells， convenient excuses， and the like. This generalization， therefore， is not a true composite of Chinese culture but only a stereotype of our exterior behavior.这些话不能表达什么新观点，也不能传达什么真实的情感或深思熟虑的想法.它们就像一片面包，只是人们交往中最表层的东西，或社交场合下出于礼貌而说的一些话：问候、道别、顺口的托词,诸如此类。由此看来，那些对中国人的概括性评价并非是对中国文化成分的真实描述，而仅仅是对我们外在行为的一种成见而已.”So how does one say yes and no in Chinese?” my friends may ask carefully.“那么中文究竟怎么表达是和不是呢?”我的朋友也许会小心翼翼地问。At this junction, I do agree in part with The New York Times Magazine article。 There is no one word for ”yes or no， but not out of necessity to be discreet。 If anything， I would say the Chinese equivalent of answering ”yes or no” is specific to what is asked。在这一点上,我的确在某种程度上同意纽约时报杂志的那篇文章.在中文里，没有哪一个字专门用于表达“是或“不是”，但这并非是因为需要保持谨慎.若的确有什么不同的话,那我会说中文里对应的“是或“不是”的表达通常是针对所问的具体内容而定的。Ask a Chinese person if he or she has eaten， and he or she might say chrle （eaten already) or meiyou (have not).如果你问一个中国人是否吃饭了，他（或她)会说“吃了”（已经吃过）或“没有”（没有吃过)。Ask, Have you stopped beating your wife？ and the answer refers directly to the proposition being asserted or denied： stopped already, still have not， never beat， have no wife。你若问:“你停止打老婆了吗?”他会直接就所断定或所否认的假设进行回答：已经停止了，还没有，从来不打，没有老婆。What could be clearer?还有什么能比这更明了的呢?Unit 4Achieving sustainable environmentalism实现可持续性发展的环保主义Environmental sensitivity is now as required an attitude in polite society as is, say， belief in democracy or disapproval of plastic surgery. But now that everyone from Ted Turner to George H。 W. Bush has claimed love for Mother Earth， how are we to choose among the dozens of conflicting proposals， regulations and laws advanced by congressmen and constituents alike in the name of the environment？ Clearly, not everything with an environmental claim is worth doing。 How do we segregate the best options and consolidate our varying interests into a single, sound policy？在上流社会，对环境的敏感就如同信仰民主、反对整容一样，是一种不可或缺的态度。然而，既然从泰德特纳到乔治W。H。布什，每个人都声称自己热爱地球母亲，那么，在由议员、选民之类的人以环境名义而提出的众多的相互矛盾的提案、规章和法规中，我们又该如何做出选择呢？显而易见,并不是每一项冠以环境保护名义的事情都值得去做。我们怎样才能分离出最佳选择,并且把我们各自不同的兴趣统一在同一个合理的政策当中呢？There is a simple way。 First， differentiate between environmental luxuries and environmental necessities. Luxuries are those things that would be nice to have if costless。 Necessities are those things we must have regardless. Call this distinction the definitive rule of sane environmentalism， which stipulates that combating ecological change that directly threatens the health and safety of people is an environmental necessity. All else is luxury。有一种简便的方法。首先要区分什么是环境奢侈品,什么是环境必需品。奢侈品是指那些无需人类付出代价就能拥有的给人美好感受的东西.必需品则是指那些无论付出什么代价，都一定要去拥有的东西.这一区分原则可以被称为理性环保主义的至高原则.它规定，对那些直接威胁人类健康与安全的生态变化采取应对措施是环境保护的必需品，而其他则都属于奢侈品。For example， preserving the atmosphere stopping ozone depletion and the greenhouse effect is an environmental necessity。 Recently， scientists reported that ozone damage is far worse than previously thought。 Ozone depletion has a correlation not only with skin cancer and eye problems， it also destroys the oceans ecology, the beginning of the food chain atop which we humans sit。例如，保护大气层阻止臭氧损耗及控制温室效应-是环境保护的必需品。近来,科学家报告说臭氧层遭受破坏的程度远比我们先前认为的要严重得多 .臭氧损耗不仅与皮肤癌及眼疾有关,而且它还会破坏海洋生态。而海洋生态是食物链的起点，人类则位于该食物链的顶端.The possible thermal consequences of the greenhouse effect are far deadlier： melting ice caps， flooded coastlines， disrupted climate， dry plains and， ultimately， empty breadbaskets。 The American Midwest feeds people at all corners of the atlas. With the planetary climate changes, are we prepared to see Iowa take on New Mexicos desert climate， or Siberia take on Iowas moderate climate？温室效应所可能引发的热效应是非常具有毁灭性的:冰川融化、海岸线被淹没、气候遭受破坏、平原干涸，最终食物消失殆尽。美国中西部地区的粮食供养着全世界。随着全球气候的变化，我们难道准备看到衣阿华州变成新墨西哥州的沙漠气候，而西伯利亚变成衣阿华州的温和气候吗？Ozone depletion and the greenhouse effect are human disasters, and they are urgent because they directly threaten humanity and are not easily reversible。 A sane environmentalism， the only kind of environmentalism that will strike a chord with the general public, begins by openly declaring that nature is here to serve human beings. A sane environmentalism is entirely a human focused regime: It calls upon humanity to preserve nature, but merely within the parameters of selfsurvival.臭氧损耗和温室效应是人类的灾难，而且是需要紧急处理的灾难，因为它们直接威胁到人类，且后果很难扭转.理性环保主义-唯一能够引起公众共鸣的环保主张首先公开声明，自然是服务于人类的。理性环保主义是一种完全以人类为中心的思想。它号召人类保护自然，但是是在人类自我生存得到保证的前提之下。Of course， this human focus runs against the grain of a contemporary environmentalism that indulges in overt earth worship。 Some people even allege that the earth is a living organism. This kind of environmentalism likes to consider itself spiritual。 It is nothing more than sentimental。 It takes, for example， a highly selective view of the kindness of nature， one that is incompatible with the reality of natural disasters. My nature worship stops with the twister that came through Kansas or the dreadful rains in Bangladesh that eradicated whole villages and left millions homeless.当然,这种以人类为中心的主张与当下盛行的环保主义是格格不入的，后者已经沉溺于对地球的公然崇拜。有的人甚至声称地球是一个活的生物体。这种环保主义喜欢把自己看作是神圣的，其实它只是感情用事而已。比如，在自然是否友善的问题上，当下的环保主义采取了高度选择性的片面的观点，而这种观点与自然造成的灾难这一现实是不相协调的。当龙卷风肆虐堪萨斯州,当瓢泼大雨袭击孟加拉国，毁灭了整座整座的村庄，使几百万人失去家园的时候，我对自然的崇拜便停止了.A non-sentimental environmentalism is one founded on Protagorass idea that ”Man is the measure of all things.” In establishing the sovereignty of man， such a principle helps us through the dense forest of environmental arguments. Take the current debate raging over oil drilling in a corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge （ANWR）. Environmentalist coalitions， mobilizing against a legislative action working its way through the US Congress for the legalization of such exploration, propagate that Americans should be preserving and economizing energy instead of drilling for it。 This is a false eitheror proposition. The US does need a sizable energy tax to reduce consumption. But it needs more production too。 Government estimates indicate a nearly fifty-fifty chance that under the ANWR rests one of the five largest oil fields ever discovered in America。 It seems illogical that we are not finding safe ways to drill for oil in the ANWR。非感情用事的环保主义是建立在普罗泰哥拉的格言“人是万物的尺度的基础上的。在建立人类权威的过程中,这条原则会帮助我们梳理各种错综复杂的关于环境保护的争议。就以当前关于是否在北极国家野生动物保护区的某一角落开采石油的激烈争论为例吧。环保主义者联盟动员人们反对目前正在试图通过美国国会审议、使这一开采行为变得合法化的一项立法行动。他们散布说美国应该保护并且节约能源而不是开采能源。这其实是一个错误的非此即彼的主张。美国确实需要征收高额的能源税以减少能源消耗,但同时也需要生产更多的能源.政府的估测表明，在北极国家野生动物保护区的地下蕴藏着美国五大油田之一的可能性几乎到达 50%。我们没有寻找安全的方法开采北极国家野生动物保护区地下的石油,这看上去是不符合情理的。The US has just come through a war fought in part over oil。 Energy dependence costs Americans not just dollars but lives. It is a bizarre sentimentalism that would deny oil that is peacefully attainable because it risks disrupting the birthing grounds of Arctic caribou。美国刚刚经历了一场战争，其部分原因就是为了获取石油。对能源的依赖使美国不但付出了金钱的代价，而且也付出了生命的代价.就因为可能破坏北美驯鹿的繁衍地而放弃能够以和平手段获得的石油，这是一种十分怪异的感情用事。I like the caribou as much as the next person。 And I would be rather sorry if their mating patterns were disturbed。 But you cant have your cake and eat it too。 And in the standoff of the welfare of caribou versus reducing an oil reliance that gets people killed in wars, I choose people over caribou every time.我像别人一样喜欢驯鹿。如果他们的交配模式受到干扰，我会感到非常遗憾。但是,鱼和熊掌不能兼得。是要保护驯鹿，还是要为了避免人们在战争中丧生而减少对石油的依赖，面对这一僵局,我每次都会选择人类而不是驯鹿。I feel similarly about the spotted owl in Oregon. I am no enemy of the owl. If it could be preserved at a negligible cost, I would agree that it should be biodiversity is after all necessary to the ecosystem. But we must remember that not every species is needed to keep that diversity. Sometimes aesthetic aspects of life have to be sacrificed to more fundamental ones。 If the cost of preserving the spotted owl is the loss of livelihood for 30,000 logging families, I choose the families （with their saws and chopped timber) over the owl。我对俄勒冈州的斑点猫头鹰的态度也是一样.我绝不是仇视猫头鹰。如果花很少的代价就可以保护猫头鹰,我会赞同它应受保护毕竟，生物多样性对生态系统是非常必要的。但是，我们必须记住，保持生物多样性并不意味着要留住每一种物种。有时候，为了更加根本的利益，我们不得不牺牲一部分生活中美的东西.如果为了保护斑点猫头鹰而让三万伐木工家庭失去生计，我会选择伐木工家庭(包括他们的锯子和砍伐的木材)，而不是猫头鹰。11 The important distinction is between those environmental goods that are fundamental and those that are not。 Na