2. 外语
  3. It is not my contention that chemical insecticides must never be used. I do contend that we have put poisonous and biologically

It is not my contention that chemical insecticides must never be used. I do contend that we have put poisonous and biologically

admin2011-01-11  54
问题     It is not my contention that chemical insecticides must never be used. I do contend that we have put poisonous and biologically potent chemicals indiscriminately into the hands of persons largely or wholly ignorant of their potentials for harm. We have subjected enormous numbers of people to contact with these poisons, without their consent and often without their knowledge. If the Bill of Rights contains no guarantee that a citizen shall be secure against lethal poisons distributed either by private individuals or by public officials, it is surely only because our forefathers, despite their considerable wisdom and foresight, could conceive of no such problem.
    I contend, furthermore, that we have allowed these chemicals to be used with little or no advance investigation of their effect on soil, water, wildlife and man himself. Future generations are unlikely to condone our lack of prudent concern for the integrity of the natural world that supports all life.
    There is still very limited awareness of the nature of the threat. This is an era of specialists, each of whom sees his own problem and is unaware of or intolerant of the larger frame into which it fits. It is also an era dominated by industry, in which the right to make a dollar at whatever cost is seldom challenged. When the public protests, confronted with some obvious evidence of damaging results of pesticide applications, it is fed little tranquilizing pills of half truth. We urgently need an end to these false assurances, to the sugar coating of unpalatable facts. It is the public that is being asked to assume the risks that the insect controllers calculate. The public must decide whether it wishes to continue on the present road, and it can do so only when in full possession of the facts. In the words of Jean Rostand, "The obligation to endure gives us the right to know."
选项
答案我并不主张化学杀虫剂绝对不能使用。但我认为我们已把化学毒药不加区别地置于某些人的乎中，他们不甚了解或者全然不了解这些化学毒药具有潜在的造成危害的能力。我们迫使众多的人接触这些毒药，并未征得他们的同意，而且他们往往并不知道。如果说《人权宣言》没有规定要保证公民不受致命毒药的危害，无论这种毒药是来自私人还是来自官员，那肯定只是因为我们的祖先虽然具有远见卓识，却不可能想到这类问题。 我还认为，我们容许使用这些化学毒药，却并未调查或很少调查它们对土壤、水、野生动物和人类本身有什么影响。我们不认真关心一切生命赖以生存的自然界的完整性，我们的后代是不会宽恕我们的。 于这究竟是怎样一种危害，人们的认识仍然极为有限。当今是专家时代，每一位专家只看到自己的问题，认识不到或者并不顾及更大的范畴，而他面临的问题只是其中的一部分。当今也是工业主宰一切的时代，人们有权为赚取一块钱而不惜任何代价，却很少有人过问。公众因看到一些明显的证据证明使用杀虫剂造成了破坏性的后果而表示不满，就给他们吃一些用半真半假的话制作的小药丸，使他们镇静下来。我们急需结束这些虚假的宽心话，结束这种给难以接受的事实裹糖衣的作法。治虫者设置的这些风险是要由公众来承担的。因此公众必须作出决定，是否愿意在现在这条路上走下去，而要这样做，就必须充分掌握真实的情况。用让?罗斯丹的话来说：“一定要让我们忍受，我们就有知情权。”
解析 1．I do contend that we have pot poisonous and biologically potent chemicals indiscriminately into the hands of persons largely or wholly ignorant of their potentials for harm. 但我认为我们已把化学毒药不加区别地置于某些人的手中，他们不甚了解或者全然不了解这些化学毒药具有潜在的造成危害的能力。
    [分析] 理解结构采分点。
    该句可译成两个句子。翻译形容词短语largely or wholly ignorant of their potentials for harm时，增加“他们”作主语，形容词ignorant转译成动词“不了解”，这部分泽成“他们不甚了解或者全然不了解这些化学毒药具有潜在的造成危害的能力”。indiscriminate指“不分青红皂白的，不加选择的，不受限制的”。
2．We have subjected enormous numbers of people to contact with these poisons. without their consent and often without their knowledge. 我们迫使众多的人接触这些毒药，并未征得他们的同意，而且他们往往并不知道。
    [分析] 理解表达采分点。
    在翻译介词短语without their consent时，要增加动词“征得”。介词短语often without their knowledge译成一个分句“他们往往并不知道”，without sb.’s knowledge指在某人不知情的情况下。knowledge要转译为动词。“知道”。 subject...to...指“使……遭受到……”。subject，这里应选择其“使”的含义。
3．If the Bill of Rights contains no guarantee that a citizen shall be secure against lethal poisons distributed either by private individuals or by public officials, it is surely only because our forefathers, despite their considerable wisdom and foresight, could conceive of no such problem. 如果说《人权宣言》没有规定要保证公民不受致命毒药的危害，无论这种毒药是来自私人还是来自官员，那肯定只是因为我们的祖先虽然具有远见卓识，却不可能想到这类问题。
    [分析] 理解表达采分点及基本素质采分点。
    Bill of Rights《权利法案》是美国宪法前十条修正案。lethal指“致命的，致死的”。介词短语despite their considerable wisdom and foresight作为插入语，用来进一步解释说明先人的特点。因此翻译时应将其放在转折之前。即“即使他们具有远见卓识，他们也想象不到……”。considerable意为“相当可观的，相当大的”，在句中修饰wisdom and foresight，可以翻译成“大智慧和远见卓识”。短语 conceive of sth. 意思是“想到某事”。
4．Future generations are unlikely to condone our lack of prudent concern for the integrity of the natural world that supports all life. 如果我们不认真关心一切生命赖以生存的自然界的完整性，我们的后代是不会宽恕我们的。
    [分析] 理解表达采分点。
    原句可以通过断句及增译的方法翻译成一个条件句。Future generations are unlikely to condone是句子的主要部分，译成主句“我们的后代是不会宽恕我们的”，宾语及定语从句our lack of prudent concern for the integrity of the natural world that supports all life翻译成条件分句，增加主语，名词concern转译成动词。condone指“宽恕，赦免”。
5．This is an era of specialists, each of whom sees his own problem and is unaware of or intolerant of the larger frame into which it fits. 当今是专家时代，每一位专家只看到自己的问题，认识不到或者并不顾及更大的范畴，而他面临的问题只是其中的一部分。
    [分析] 理解结构采分点。
    本句是一个非限定性定语从句，which指代的是前面所提及的larger frame，从句单独翻译成一句话。it 所指的就是前面句子中的“his own problem”。因此这句话应该这样理解，即这些专家们只看到自己领域内的问题，而这些问题实际上是属于一个更大的范畴之内的。
6．It is also an era dominated by industry, in which the right to make a dollar at whatever cost is seldom challenged. 当今也是工业主宰一切的时代，人们有权为赚取一块钱而不惜任何代价，却很少有人过问。
    [分析] 理解表达采分点。
    at cost指“以……的价格或成本”。at whatever cost指“不惜任何代价”。此句是一个非限制性定语从句，which后面所跟成分解释说明这一工业时代的特点，即人们有权利去不惜任何代价赚取金钱，并且这一权利is seldom challenged，很少被人质疑和挑战。challenge可以翻译成“质疑，过问”。
7．When the public protests, confronted with some obvious evidence of damaging results of pesticide applications, it is fed little tranquilizing pills of half truth. 公众因看到一些明显的证据证明使用杀虫剂造成了破坏性的后果而表示不满，就给他们吃一些用半真半假的话制作的小药丸，使他们镇静下来。
    [分析] 理解表达采分点。
    protest指“抗议，不满”；tranquilize指“宁静，安静”，tranquilizing pills译成“镇静剂”。在这里比喻政府的安抚政策，即(政府)会给公众一些半真半假的解释，就如同那些镇静药片一样，从而起到镇静和安抚作用。
8．In the words of Jean Rostand, "The obligation to endure gives us the right to know."用让?罗斯丹的话来说：“一定要让我们忍受，我们就有知情权。”
    [分析] 理解表达采分点。
    right to know译成“知情权”。obligation to endure指“忍受或忍耐的义务”，即如果要公众履行其沉默或忍受的义务，那么必须给他们知情权。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/5uVYFFFM
本试题收录于： CATTI二级笔译实务题库翻译专业资格（CATTI）分类
0

CATTI二级笔译实务

翻译专业资格（CATTI）

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)