passage2

注解：標題為紅色，翻譯為藍色，分析為綠色。

? ? ? ?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.

【第3題】

? ? ? ?The official statistics are mildly discouraging. 【第1題】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.【第2題】

? ? ? ??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【第4題.B】, 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【第4題.C】. BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re-engineering consultants as mere rubbish【第4題.D】——"the worst sort of ambulance chasing."

一、文章結(jié)構(gòu)分析

? ? ? ? 這是一篇介紹美國生產(chǎn)力革命的文章。作者用改寫諺語的方式提出文章主旨。論證部分先用數(shù)據(jù)說明美國經(jīng)濟形勢沒有商界人士認為的那樣好，接著分析其原因是企業(yè)的生產(chǎn)力革命沒有促進生產(chǎn)力的發(fā)展。主要使用了數(shù)據(jù)、引文、及說理的論證方法。

? ? ? 第一段：開始部分使用諺語作為引子，引出全文主題：美國生產(chǎn)力革命并沒有改善經(jīng)濟狀況。

? ? ? ?第二段：指出官方統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)無法證明經(jīng)濟的復(fù)蘇，它和生產(chǎn)力飛躍增長的商業(yè)傳奇不相符合。本段結(jié)構(gòu)為總-分-總。第一句為主題句，中間部分使用數(shù)據(jù)說明，最后一句進行總結(jié)。

? ? ? ?第三段至第五段：具體解釋企業(yè)重組沒有促進生產(chǎn)力發(fā)展的原因。

1. According to the author, the American economic situation is.

[A] not as good as it seems

[B] at its turning point

[C] much better than it seems

[D] near to complete recovery

1.按照作者觀點，美國經(jīng)濟形勢。

[A]不如表面看上去那么好

[B]處于轉(zhuǎn)折點

[C]比表面看起來好得多

[D]幾乎完全復(fù)蘇

【

對于A選項。The official statistics are mildly discouraging.官方統(tǒng)計數(shù)字有點令人沮喪。故美國經(jīng)濟形勢不如表面看上去那么好。故選A。

B選項，文章并沒有提到轉(zhuǎn)折點。

C選項，文章官方統(tǒng)計數(shù)字有點令人沮喪。故美國經(jīng)濟形勢不如表面看上去那么好，故C選項與原文表述相反。

D選項，文章也沒有提到幾乎完全復(fù)蘇。

】

2.The official statistics on productivity growth.

[A]exclude the usual rebound in a business cycle

[B]fall short of businessment's anticipation

[C]meet the expectation of business people

[D]fail to reflect the true state of economy

2.關(guān)于生產(chǎn)力增長的官方統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)。

[A]排除了商業(yè)周期中的正常反彈現(xiàn)象

[B]沒有達到商業(yè)人士的預(yù)想

[C]達到了商業(yè)人士的預(yù)想

[D]沒有反映出經(jīng)濟的真實狀況

【

對于A選項。?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.問題是，最近的加速部分是由于商業(yè)周期中此時出現(xiàn)的通常反彈，因此并不是潛在趨勢復(fù)蘇的確鑿證據(jù)。原文是生產(chǎn)力增長是歸結(jié)于通常反彈，但不是潛在趨勢復(fù)蘇的確鑿證據(jù)。所以生產(chǎn)力增長是歸結(jié)于通常反彈，而不是生產(chǎn)力增長要排除反彈現(xiàn)象這個因素。

A選項錯誤。

對于B選項。"disjunction"between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.指出生產(chǎn)力飛躍的大量商業(yè)軼事與統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)所反映的情況之間的“脫節(jié)”。Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain 不勞不獲，但是勞動了卻沒有收獲又如何呢？這些句子反映生產(chǎn)力增長沒有達到商業(yè)人士的預(yù)想。B選項正確。

對于C選項，跟B選項相反，故C選項錯誤。

對于D選項。and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend.它不是經(jīng)濟復(fù)蘇已經(jīng)是潛在趨勢的確鑿證據(jù)。這一句也不能推斷出沒有反映出經(jīng)濟的真實狀況。

】

3.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

3.作者提出"有勞無獲"的問題是因為。

[A]他懷疑"不勞無獲"的真實性

[B]他認為所謂的生產(chǎn)力革命并沒有奏效

[C]他懷疑官方數(shù)字有誤導(dǎo)性

[D]他掌握了商業(yè)復(fù)蘇的確鑿證據(jù)

【

對于A選項。Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain?不勞不獲，但是勞動了卻沒有收獲又如何呢？這個句子只是提出疑問，為后文推敲“勞動了卻沒有收獲”的原因做鋪墊。并不是對"不勞無獲"的這個詞產(chǎn)生質(zhì)疑，而是對于商人主導(dǎo)的生產(chǎn)力革命對經(jīng)濟發(fā)展沒有奏效表示質(zhì)疑。故A選項錯誤。

對于B選項。What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real?更難確定的是，商人們認為他們正在領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的生產(chǎn)力革命是否是真的。對于商人主導(dǎo)的生產(chǎn)力革命對經(jīng)濟發(fā)展沒有奏效表示質(zhì)疑。故B選項正確。

對于C選項。作者并未懷疑官方數(shù)據(jù)造假。The official statistics are mildly discouraging.只是說“官方的統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)卻有些讓人沮喪”，言外之意是“官方數(shù)據(jù)表明經(jīng)濟發(fā)展的成果沒有很理想的結(jié)果”。故C選項錯誤。

對于D選項。and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend.它不是經(jīng)濟復(fù)蘇已經(jīng)是潛在趨勢的確鑿證據(jù)。原文不是潛在趨勢的確鑿證據(jù)。故全文沒有得出掌握了商業(yè)復(fù)蘇的確鑿證據(jù)的結(jié)論。故D選項錯誤。

】

4.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.【good for nothings無用之輩】

4.下面哪個說法在文中沒有被提及？

[A]激進的改革對于生產(chǎn)力的增長必不可少。

[B]新的企業(yè)組織方法可能有助于提高生產(chǎn)力。

[C]降低成本并不一定能帶來長期利潤。

[D]顧問是一群無用之輩。

chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long-term profitability【第4題.C】.?BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re-engineering consultants as mere rubbish【第4題.D】

第一句：CBBDO的Al Rosenshine更為直率，在沒有充分考慮長期盈利能力的情況下削減成本?？梢酝茢喑鯟選項被提及。降低成本并不一定能帶來長期利潤。

第二句：他認為許多重新設(shè)計顧問的工作純屬是垃圾。可以推斷出D選項被提及。顧問是一群無用之輩。

New ways of organizing the workplace--all that re-engineering and downsizing——are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy【第4題.B】

第三句：組織工作場所的新方法——所有的重新設(shè)計和裁員——是經(jīng)濟整體生產(chǎn)力的一個貢獻。故新的企業(yè)組織方法可能有助于提高生產(chǎn)力。可以推斷出B選項被提及。

對于A選項。原文只有開頭提到生產(chǎn)力革命。What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.更難確定的是，商人們認為他們正在主持的生產(chǎn)力革命是否是真的。沒有提到改革措施會提高生產(chǎn)力革命。故A選項沒有被提及。

二、核心詞匯與超綱詞匯

（1）acceleration（n.）加速（度）；accelerate（v.）加速，促進

（2）blunt（a.）直率的，鈍的；（v.）（使）鈍，（使）遲鈍

（3）disjunction（n.）分離，分裂

（4）revenue（n.）財政收入，稅收

（5）preside（v.）（over，at）主持

（6）rebound（v.）跳回；回生；（n.）跳回，彈回；回生，回復(fù)

（7）restructuring（n.）重建，改組，調(diào)整；restructure（v.）重建，改組，調(diào)整；re前綴，表示"再"，"又"，"重新"，"反復(fù)"；如：reappear（v.）再次眼出現(xiàn)；reconstruction（n.）重建；retell（v.）復(fù)述；reunite（v.）使重聚

（8）revival（n.）蘇醒，復(fù)蘇，復(fù)活；復(fù)興，再流行；revive（v.）恢復(fù)；使復(fù)蘇

（9）speculative（a.）思索的，推測的；不確定的，冒險的；純理論的；speculate（v.）（about，on）推測，推斷；投機

（10）statistics（n.）統(tǒng)計（學(xué)）；statistical（a.）統(tǒng)計的，統(tǒng)計學(xué)的

三、閱讀答案：A B B A

四、全文翻譯：

? ? ? ?人們說，不勞不獲。但是，如果付出了卻沒有收獲會怎樣呢？在美國，無論你走到哪里都會聽到企業(yè)復(fù)蘇的故事。但難以確定的是商業(yè)人士自認為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的這場生產(chǎn)力革命是否確有其事。

? ? ? ?官方的統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)卻有些讓人沮喪。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1.2%，這比上一個十年的平均增長速度略快。自1991年來，生產(chǎn)力每年約增長2%。這比1978至1987年的平均增長速度高兩倍多。問題在于，近年發(fā)生的生產(chǎn)力快速增長現(xiàn)象部分是由于商業(yè)周期到了這時候通常會出現(xiàn)的反彈造成的，因而它不是經(jīng)濟復(fù)蘇已經(jīng)是潛在趨勢的確鑿證據(jù)。正如財政部長羅伯特·魯賓所說的，大量有關(guān)生產(chǎn)力飛躍增長的商業(yè)傳奇與統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)所反映的情況之間存在著"出入"。

? ? ? ? 這其中的一些原因很容易解釋。企業(yè)重組的新方法--所有那些重新規(guī)劃和縮小規(guī)模的做法--只能對一個經(jīng)濟的整體生產(chǎn)力做出一方面的貢獻，而生產(chǎn)力的發(fā)展還受到許多其它因素的驅(qū)動，如設(shè)備機械上的聯(lián)合投資、新技術(shù)、以及教育和培訓(xùn)上的投資。另外，公司大部分的改革是為了贏利，而達到贏利的目的不一定非要提高生產(chǎn)力：轉(zhuǎn)入新的市場或改善產(chǎn)品質(zhì)量也會有同樣的功效。

? ? ? ? 其他兩種解釋帶有很大的猜測性。一種解釋認為，近年來的一些企業(yè)重組也許進行得并不恰當(dāng)。另一種解釋則認為，即使有成效，效果也沒能象人們所設(shè)想的那樣廣泛。

? ? ? ? 哈佛學(xué)者，快速發(fā)展的面包咖啡連鎖店AuBonPain的前任總裁萊昂納多·施萊辛格說，"重新規(guī)劃"大多是粗糙的。他認為在很多情況下，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，太多的公司采用了機械的方式進行重組，沒有充分考慮長期贏利能力就削減成本。BBDD的艾爾·羅森夏恩更是直言不諱。他把重組顧問所做的許多工作視為垃圾--"典型的勞而無獲"。

五、地毯式總結(jié).

no gain without pain 不勞動就沒有收獲

tales of corporate revival 企業(yè)復(fù)興的故事

preside over 主持

mildly discouraging 稍微令人沮喪

if you lump manufacturing and services together 如果你把制造業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)混為一談

somewhat faster than 比...有一點兒快

the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle 在商業(yè)周期的這一點上發(fā)生的通常的反彈

and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend 因此，這并不是潛在趨勢復(fù)蘇的確鑿證據(jù)

the treasury secretary 財政部長

a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics. 指出生產(chǎn)力飛躍的大量商業(yè)軼事與統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)所反映的情況之間的“脫節(jié)”。

all that re-engineering and downsizing 所有的重新設(shè)計和裁員

such as joint investment in equipment and machinery 如設(shè)備和機械的聯(lián)合投資

may have been ineptly done 可能做得不好

a rapidly growing chain of bakery cafes 快速發(fā)展的面包連鎖咖啡館

that much "re-engineering"has been crude 那么多“重新設(shè)計”都是粗制濫造

chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long-term profitability 在沒有充分考慮長期盈利能力的情況下削減成本

BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter BBDO的Al Rosenshine更直率

He dismisses a lot of the work of re-engineering consultants as mere rubbish 他認為許多重新設(shè)計顧問的工作純屬垃圾

the worst sort of ambulance chasing 最糟糕的救護車追逐