大学翻译硕士MTI历年考研真题上外MTI真题2.docx

1、大学翻译硕士MTI历年考研真题上外MTI真题2翻译硕士英语 总分 100分2012年1月7号下午 14:00-17:00I. 十五个无选项完形填空，每个2分。总分30分。The future of the EUTwo-speed Europe, or two Europes?Nov 10th 2011, 2:23 by Charlemagne | BRUSSELS TweetNICOLAS Sarkozy is causing a big stir after calling on November 8th for a two-speed Europe: a “federal” core of

2、 the 17 members of the euro zone, with a looser “confederal” outer band of the ten 1.non-euro members. He made the comments during a debate with students at the University of Strasbourg. The key passage is below (video here, starting near the 63-minute mark)You cannot make a single 2.currency withou

3、t economic convergence and economic integration. Its impossible. But on the contrary, one cannot plead for federalism and at the same time for the enlargement of Europe. Its impossible. Theres a contradiction. We are 27. We will obviously have to open up to the Balkans. We will be 32, 33 or 34. I im

4、agine that nobody thinks that 3.federalismtotal integrationis possible at 33, 34, 35 countries.So what one we do? To begin with, frankly, the single currency is a wonderful idea, but it was strange to create it without asking oneself the question of its governance, and without asking oneself about e

5、conomic convergence. Honestly, its nice to have a vision, but there are details that are 4.missing: we made a currency, but we kept fiscal systems and economic systems that not only were not 5.converging, but were diverging. And not only did we make a single currency without convergence, but we trie

6、d to undo the rules of the pact. It cannot work.There will not be a single currency without greater economic integration and convergence. That is certain. And that is where we are going. Must one have the same rules for the 27? No. Absolutely not . In the end, clearly, there will be two European gea

7、rs: one gear towards more integration in the euro zone and a gear that is more confederal in the European Union.At first blush this is statement of the blindingly obvious. The euro zone must integrate to save itself; even the British say so. And among the ten non-euro states of the EU there are coun

8、tries such as Britain and Denmark that have no 6.intention of joining the single currency.The European Union is, in a sense, made up not of two but of 7.multiple speeds. Think only of the 25 members of the Schengen passport-free travel zone (excluding Britain but including some non-EU members), or o

9、f the 25 states seeking to create a common patent(including Britain, but excluding Italy and Spain).But Mr Sarkozys comments are more worrying because, one suspects, he wants to create an exclusivist, protectionist euro zone that seeks to 8.detach itself from the rest of the European Union. Elsewher

10、e in the debate in Strasbourg, for instance, Mr Sarkozy seems to suggest that Europes 9.troublesdebt and high unemploymentare all the 10.fault of social, environmental and monetary “dumping” by developing countries that pursue “aggressive” trade policies.For another11. insight into Mr Sarkozys think

11、ing about Europe, one should listen to an interview he gave a few days earlier, at the end of the marathon-summitry in Brussels at the end of October (video here, starting at about 54:30):I dont think there is enough economic integration in the euro zone, the 17, and too much integration in the Euro

12、pean Union at 27.In other words, France, or Mr Sarkozy at any rate, does not appear to have got over its 12.resentment of the EUs enlargement. At 27 nations-strong, the European Union is too big for France to lord it over the rest and is too liberal in economic terms for Frances protectionist leanin

13、gs. Hence Mr Sarkozys yearning for a smaller, cosier, “federalist” euro zone.Such ideas appeared to have been killed off by the large eastward 13.enlargement of the EU in 2004, and by the French voters rejection of the EUs new constitution in 2005. But the euro zones debt 14.crisis is reviving these

14、 old dreams.But what sort of federalism? Mr Sarkozy probably wants to create a euro zone in Frances 15.image, with power (and much discretion) concentrated in the hands of leaders, where the “Merkozy” duo (Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy) will dominate. Germany will no doubt want a replica of its

15、own federal system, with strong rules and powerful independent institutions to constrain politicians. Le Monde carries a series of articles (in French) on what a two-speed Europe may mean. If the euro zone survives the crisisand the meltdown of Italys bonds in the markets suggests that is becoming e

16、ver more difficultit will plainly require deep reform of the EUs treaties. Done properly, by keeping the euro open to countries that want to join (like Poland) and deepening the single market for those that do not (like Britain), the creation of a more flexible EU of variable geometry could ease man

17、y of the existing tensions. Further enlargement need no longer be so neuralgic; further integration need no longer be imposed on those who do not want it.But done wrongly, as one fears Mr Sarkozy would have it, this will be a recipe for breaking up Europe. Not two-speed Europe but two separate Europ

18、es.II. 一篇阅读理解，5个问题，总分30分来自经济学人World populationNow we are seven billionPersuading women to have fewer babies would help in some places. But it is no answer to scarce resourcesOct 22nd 2011 | from the print edition . .IN 1980 Julian Simon, an economist, and Paul Ehrlich, a biologist, made a bet. Mr Eh

19、rlich, author of a bestselling book, called “The Population Bomb”, picked five metalscopper, chromium, nickel, tin and tungstenand said their prices would rise in real terms over the following ten years. Mr Simon bet that prices would fall. The wager symbolised the dispute between Malthusians who th

20、ought a rising population would create an age of scarcity (and high prices) and those “Cornucopians”, such as Mr Simon, who thought markets would ensure plenty.Mr Simon won easily. Prices of all five metals fell in real terms. As the world economy boomed and population growth began to ebb in the 199

21、0s, Malthusian pessimism retreated.It is returning. On October 31st the UN will dub a newborn the worlds 7 billionth living person. The 6 billionth, Adnan Nevic, born in October 1999, will be only two weeks past his 12th birthday. If Messrs Simon and Ehrlich had ended their bet today, instead of in

22、1990, Mr Ehrlich would have won. What with high food prices, environmental degradation and faltering green policies, people are again worrying that the world is overcrowded. Some want restrictions to cut population growth and forestall ecological catastrophe. Are they right?Lower fertility can be go

23、od for economic growth and society (see article). When the number of children a woman can expect to bear in her lifetime falls from high levels of three or more to a stable rate of two, a demographic change surges through the country for at least a generation. Children are scarcer, the elderly are n

24、ot yet numerous, and the country has a bulge of working-age adults: the “demographic dividend”. If a country grabs this one-off chance for productivity gains and investment, economic growth can jump by as much as a third.Less is more However, the fall in fertility is already advanced in most of the

25、world. Over 80% of humanity lives in countries where the fertility rate is either below three and falling, or already two or less. This is thanks not to government limits but to modernisation and individuals desire for small families. Whenever the state has pushed fertility down, the result has been

26、 a blight. Chinas one-child policy is a violation of rights and a demographic disaster, upsetting the balance between the sexes and between generations. China has a bulge of working adults now, but will bear a heavy burden of retired people after 2050. It is a lurid example of the dangers of coercio

27、n.Enthusiasts for population control say they do not want coercion. They think milder policies would help to save the environment and feed the world. As the World Bank points out, global food production will have to rise by about 70% between now and 2050 to feed 9 billion. But if the population stay

28、s flat, food production would have to rise by only a quarter.When Mr Simon won his bet he was able to say that rising population was not a problem: increased demand attracts investment, producing more. But this process only applies to things with a price; not if they are free, as are some of the mos

29、t important global goodsa healthy atmosphere, fresh water, non-acidic oceans, furry wild animals. Perhaps, then, slower population growth would reduce the pressure on fragile environments and conserve unpriced resources?That idea is especially attractive when other forms of rationinga carbon tax, wa

30、ter pricingare struggling. Yet the populations that are rising fastest contribute very little to climate change. The poorest half of the world produces 7% of carbon emissions. The richest 7% produces half the carbon. So the problem lies in countries like China, America and Europe, which all have sta

31、ble populations. Moderating fertility in Africa might boost the economy or help stressed local environments. But it would not solve global problems.There remains one last reason for supporting family planning: on some estimates, 200m women round the worldincluding a quarter of African womenwant cont

32、raceptives and cannot get them. A quarter of pregnancies are unplanned. In our view, parents ought to decide how many children to bring into the world and whennot the state, or a church, or pushy grandparents. Note, though, that this is not an argument about the global environment but individual well-being. Moreover, family planning appears to do little directly to control the size of families: some studies have shown no impact at all; others only a modest extra one. Encouraging smaller families in the highest-fertility places would still be worth doing. It might boost the e