考研英語范文閱讀(十七)

字號:

It's a rough world out there. Step outside and you could break a leg slipping on your doormat. Light up the stove and you could burn down the house. Luckily, if the doormat or stove failed to warn of coming disaster, a successful lawsuit might compensate you for your troubles. Or so the thinking has gone since the early 1980s, when juries began holding more companies liable for their customers' misfortunes.
    Feeling threatened, companies responded by writing ever-longer warning labels, trying to anticipate every possible accident. Today, stepladders carry labels several inches long that warn, among other things, that you might—surprised!—fall off. The label on a child's Batman cape cautions that the toy “does not enable user to fly.”
    While warnings are often appropriate and necessary—the dangers of drug interactions, for example—and many are required by state or federal regulations, it isn't clear that they actually protect the manufacturers and sellers from liability if a customer is injured. About 50 percent of the companies lose when injured customers take them to court.
    Now the tide appears to be turning. As personal injury claims continue as before, some courts are beginning to side with defendants, especially in cases where a warning label probably wouldn't have changed anything. In May, Julie Nimmons, president of Schutt Sports in Illinois, successfully fought a lawsuit involving a football player who was paralyzed in a game while wearing a Schutt helmet. “We're really sorry he has become paralyzed, but helmets aren't designed to prevent those kinds of injuries,” says Nimmons. The jury agreed that the nature of the game, not the helmet, was the reason for the athlete's injury. At the same time, the American Law Institute—a group of judges, lawyers, and academics whose recommendations carry substantial weight—issued new guidelines for tort law stating that companies need not warn customers of obvious dangers or bombard them with a lengthy list of possible ones. “Important information can get buried in a sea of trivialities,” says a law professor at Cornell Law School who helped draft the new guidelines. If the moderate end of the legal community has its way, the information on products might actually be provided for the benefit of customers and not as protection against legal liability.
    51. What were things like in 1980s when accidents happened?
    (A)Customers might be relieved of their disasters through lawsuits.
    (B)Injured customers could expect protection from the legal system.
    (C)Companies would avoid being sued by providing new warnings.
    (D)Juries tended to find fault with the compensations companies promised.
    52. Manufacturers as mentioned in the passage tend to ________.
    (A)satisfy customers by writing long warnings on products
    (B)become honest in describing the inadequacies of their products
    (C)make the best use of labels to avoid legal liability
    (D)feel obliged to view customers' safety as their first concern
    53. The case of Schutt helmet demonstrated that ________.
    (A)some injury claims were no longer supported by law
    (B)helmets were not designed to prevent injuries
    (C)product labels would eventually be discarded
    (D)some sports games might lose popularity with athletes
    54. The author's attitude towards the issue seems to be ________.
    (A)biased
    (B)indifferent
    (C)puzzling
    (D)objective
    答案及試題解析
    BCAD
    51.(B)意為:受傷的顧客可望得到法律制度的保護。
    第一段指出,外面是個危險的世界,如果你走出去,可能會滑倒在門墊上,摔傷一條腿;如果點燃爐灶,可能燒毀整棟房屋??尚业氖牵绻T墊或爐灶沒有警告你可能發(fā)生的危害,你可以就自己所受的傷害訴諸法律,成功地獲得賠償。或者,更確切地說,自80年代初以來人們一直這樣認為,從那時起,陪審團開始認為更多的公司應該對其顧客遭受的不幸負責。
    第二段提到,為了保護自己,公司開始撰寫冗長的標簽,但是,正如第三段第二句所指出的那樣,這種做法無濟于事,因為,如果顧客與公司對簿公堂,大約一半的情況是公司敗訴。然而,第四段第一句指出,這種潮流似乎正發(fā)生逆轉(zhuǎn)。
    A意為:顧客可以通過訴訟免除自己的災難。relieve sb. of sth.意為“免除某人某事;解除某人某事;使某人擺脫某事”。relieve的意思與原文表達的內(nèi)容不相符,根據(jù)對選擇項B的分析,顧客通過法律獲得的是對損失的賠償。
    C意為:公司將會通過提供新的警示標簽避免被起訴。該選擇項有兩處主要錯誤:一是avoid的使用,二是new的使用,這兩個詞的使用使C與原文表達的內(nèi)容很不一致。
    D意為:陪審團傾向于對公司所承諾的賠償嚴加挑剔。
    52.(C)意為:充分利用標簽避免法律責任。
    第二段指出,公司感到很大威脅,它們通過撰寫比以前更長的警示標簽保護自己,企圖預料各種可能發(fā)生的事故。結(jié)果,現(xiàn)在的梯子上的標簽有幾英寸長,除了警告你其他可能發(fā)生的意外之外,還警告說你可能摔下來——這種警告真是莫名其妙!孩子的蝙蝠俠玩具的斗篷上也警告說:本玩具“并不能使擁有者飛行”。在作者看來,這樣的警示語都是多余的、不必要的。
    A意為:通過在產(chǎn)品上寫長長的警示語滿足顧客。根據(jù)上文對選擇項C的分析,他們這樣做的目的主要是避免承擔責任,而不是滿足顧客的需要。
    B意為:在描述自己的產(chǎn)品的不足上表現(xiàn)得更誠實。
    D意為:不得不將顧客的安全看作頭等重要的事。53.(A)意為:某些因傷害提出的索賠再也受不到法律的保護了。
    第三段指出,潮流似乎正發(fā)生逆轉(zhuǎn),雖然因人身傷害引起的索賠案像以往一樣不斷出現(xiàn),某些法庭正逐漸開始站到被告一邊(side with),特別是在有警示標簽也可能無濟于事的案件中。在Schutt Sports的案件中,Schutt Sports公司被告生產(chǎn)了不安全的頭盔,造成一名橄攬球隊員(football player)的癱瘓,但是,陪審團認為,造成球員受傷的不是頭盔,而是橄欖球這種運動本身的危險性(the nature of the game)。公司因此勝訴。這一例子用于說明第四段第一、二句提到的現(xiàn)象。
    B意為:頭盔不是設計來防止損傷的。戴頭盔的目的當然是防止傷害,但是,頭盔不可能是萬能的。
    C意為:產(chǎn)品標簽最終將會被淘汰。discard意為:棄而不用。
    D意為:運動員可能不再會熱衷于某些體育運動項目。
    54.(D)意為:客觀的。
    這里所說的“問題”指索賠案中孰是孰非這一問題。文章探討了索賠案所涉及的顧客(原告)、公司(被告)和陪審團三方的反應,重點指出陪審團態(tài)度的轉(zhuǎn)變。文章敘述客觀,作者沒有表達個人觀點。
    A意為:有偏見的。
    B意為:冷漠的。
    C意為:迷惑不解的。
    翻譯句子
    1、Or so the thinking has gone since the early 1980s, when juries began holding more companies liable for their customers' misfortunes.
    [參考譯文]大約自80年代初以來人們就這樣認為了,當時陪審團已開始認為更多的公司應對其顧客所遭受的不幸負責。
    2、As personal injury claims continue as before, some courts are beginning to side with defendants, especially in cases where a warning label probably wouldn't have changed anything.
    [參考譯文]隨著有關(guān)個人傷害的指控一如既往地繼續(xù)著,有些法庭開始偏向被告一方,尤其是在審理那些警告標簽可能起不到什么作用的案件的時候。
    補充難句翻譯
    ①While warnings are often appropriate and necessary—the dangers of drug interactions, for example—and many are required by state or federal regulations, it isn't clear that they actually protect the manufacturers and sellers from liability if a customer is injured.[參考譯文]盡管警告常常是適當而且必須的——比如對于藥物相互作用的危險提出警告——許多警告還是按州或聯(lián)邦政府規(guī)定要求給出的,然而 (我們)并不清楚,如果顧客受到傷害時,這些警告是不是確實可以使得生產(chǎn)者和銷售者豁免責任。
    [結(jié)構(gòu)剖析]在這個主從復合句中,前一個分句是由while引導的讓步從句,這個從句由兩個并列句組成,中間用and連接。破折號之間的部分是舉例說明warnings的內(nèi)容,and后面的 many省略了warnings,state與federal共用regulations.主句部分本身也是一個主從復合句,主句用了一個形式主語it,真正的主語是that引導的從句,注意這個從句中有個動詞短語protect…… from……,后面是一個if引導的條件從句。
    [閱讀重點]首先要把握這個句子的主旨,那就是主句中所闡明的warnings對manufacturers and sellers的保護作用還很不明朗。注意破折號之間的部分對warnings的解釋作用以及it作為形式主語的替代作用。
    ②As personal injury claims continue as before, some courts are beginning to side with defendants, especially in cases where a warning label probably wouldn't have changed anything.[參考譯文]隨著有關(guān)個人傷害的指控一如既往地繼續(xù)著,有些法庭開始偏向被告一方,尤其是在審理那些警告標簽可能起不到什么作用的案件的時候。
    [結(jié)構(gòu)剖析]在這個主從復合句中,前一個分句是由as引導的伴隨狀語從句,注意這里的claims是個名詞;主句的時態(tài)用的是現(xiàn)在進行時,表示的這種狀況正在開始。這個主句有一個較長的狀語短語,原因是cases后面跟了一個where引導的定語從句修飾cases,這個定語從句的主干是warning label not change anything,解釋的是什么樣的cases.
    [閱讀重點]主句依然是抓住句子大意的關(guān)鍵,該句所要表達的就是some courts beginning to side with defendants,再者要注意cases后面定語從句指出了哪類cases尤為如此。
    ③In May, Julie Nimmons, president of Schutt Sports in Illinois, successfully fought a lawsuit involving a football player who was paralyzed in a game while wearing a Schutt helmet.[參考譯文]五月份的時候,伊利諾斯州Schutt體育用品公司總裁朱力?尼蒙斯就打贏了一場官司。這場官司涉及到一位美式橄欖球運動員,他戴著Schutt公司生產(chǎn)的頭盔參加比賽,結(jié)果受傷癱瘓了。
    [結(jié)構(gòu)剖析]這個句子的主干是…… president…… successfully fought a lawsuit……。句子的主語是Julie Nimmons,后面逗號之間的部分是她的職位,賓語部分a lawsuit有一個較長的動詞現(xiàn)在分詞involving所引導的短語,involving的賓語是a football player,后面跟了一個who引導的定語從句,這個定語從句中有一個while引導的時間狀語,還原成句子就是while he was wearing a Schutt helmet.找出其中的關(guān)鍵部分:…… president of Schutt…… successfully fought a lawsuit involving a football player…… paralyzed…… while wearing a Schutt helmet.
    ④At the same time, the American Law Institute—a group of judges, lawyers, and academics whose recommendations carry substantial weight—issued new guidelines for tort law stating that companies need not warn customers of obvious dangers or bombard them with a lengthy list of possible ones.[參考譯文]與此同時,美國法律研究所——由一群法官、律師和理論專家組成,他們的建議分量極重——發(fā)布了新的民事傷害法令指導方針,宣稱公司不必提醒顧客注意顯而易見的危險,也不必連篇累犢地一再提請他們注意一些可能會出現(xiàn)的危險。
    [結(jié)構(gòu)剖析]這個看起來很長的句子其實是一個簡單句,主干是…… the…… Institute…… issued new guidelines for tort law……。其中破折號之間的內(nèi)容說明的是這個Institute的人員構(gòu)成,并且用一個whose引導的定語從句說明了這些成員的權(quán)威。law后面跟的現(xiàn)在分詞stating有一個相當長的賓語從句,這個從句的主語是companies,而謂語有兩個動詞結(jié)構(gòu),一個是warn…… of……,另一個是bombard…… with……,敘述了guidelines的內(nèi)容。
    [閱讀重點]這個句子的要點是在stating后面的that從句,對其中兩個動詞結(jié)構(gòu)warn…… of……和bombard…… with……的正確理解決定了對整個句子的理解。
    ⑤If the moderate end of the legal community has its way, the information on products might actually be provided for the benefit of customers and not as protection against legal liability.[參考譯文]如果這個法律團體適中的目的能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)的話,產(chǎn)品信息的提供就可能的確是為了顧客的利益,而不是為了避免公司承擔法律責任了。
    [結(jié)構(gòu)剖析]在這個復合句中,if引導的是一個條件從句,主句部分的謂語用了被動形式,謂語動詞provide for有兩個賓語,一個是the benefits of customers,另一個是protection against legal liability,not決定了兩者的取舍關(guān)系:取前者,舍后者。
    [閱讀重點]從句給出了前提條件,注意has its way的意思是can be achieved;理解主句部分的關(guān)鍵在于provide for的兩個賓語的取舍關(guān)系。
    語言點詳解
    1.slip滑倒[大綱詞匯]slip v.滑,滑倒;滑落,滑掉;溜走;n.疏忽,小錯,口誤,筆誤[經(jīng)典例句]The old lady slipped on a banana skin and broke her leg.
    2. doormat門前擦鞋墊
    3.light up點燃[大綱詞匯]light n.光,光亮,光線;燈,燈光,光源;v.點(火),點燃;(使)變亮,照亮[經(jīng)典例句] It is getting dark-time to light the lamp.
    4.burn down燒毀[大綱詞匯burn v.燃燒,燒傷,燒毀; n.燒傷,灼傷[擴充詞匯]burn down燒毀,(使)燒成平地[經(jīng)典例句]He burned down his enemy's house.
    5.warn of警告[大綱詞匯]warn v.(of,a,inst)警告,告誡[經(jīng)典例句]The notice warned of danger of walking an the frozen river.
    6.lawsuit訴訟[擴充詞匯]lawsuit n.訴訟[經(jīng)典例句]The injured clients brought a lawsuit against the airline.
    7.jury陪審團[大綱詞匯]jury n.陪審團;全體陪審員[經(jīng)典例句]The jury found the prisoner not guilty.
    8.hold liable for認為…應負有…的責任[大綱詞匯] liable a.(for)有責任的,有義務的[經(jīng)典例句]The judge held the defendant liable for his friend's death.
    9.anticipate預料[大綱詞匯]anticipate v.預期,預料,預感,期望[經(jīng)典例句]The directors anticipated a fall in demand.
    10 .interaction相互作用[大綱詞匯]interact v.互相作用,互相影響[衍生詞匯]interaction n.相互作用,相互影響[經(jīng)典例句]Researchers observed the interaction between the heart and lungs.
    11.federal聯(lián)邦的[大綱詞匯]federal a.聯(lián)邦的[經(jīng)典例句]Congress is the federal lawmaking body of the United States.
    12.liability責任[大綱詞匯]liability n.責任,義務;[pl.]債務[經(jīng)典例句]He accepted the liability for the damage done to the car.
    13.claim索賠[大綱詞匯] claim v.要求;聲稱,主張;索賠n.要求;主張,斷言;索賠;權(quán)利,要求權(quán),所有權(quán)[經(jīng)典例句]The patient put forward a malpractice claim to the hospital.
    14.side with站在…的一邊[大綱詞匯]side v.(with)同意,站在…的一邊;n.側(cè)面,旁邊;坡,岸,一邊,一方[經(jīng)典例句]My mother sided with me in my dispute with my father.
    15.defendant被告[擴充詞匯]defendant n.被告[經(jīng)典例句]The defendant is charged of murder.
    1 6.paralyze使癱瘓[大綱詞匯]paralyze/paralyse v.使癱瘓(麻痹);使喪失作用[經(jīng)典例句]The driver was paralyzed in an car accident.
    17.carry weight有分量[大綱詞匯]weight n.重量,重力;負荷,重擔;重要性,分量;祛碼,秤碗[擴充詞匯]carry weight有重要性,有影響,有價值,有分量[經(jīng)典例句]The mayor's opinion carries great weight in this town.
    18.substantial重大的[大綱詞匯]substantial a.實質(zhì)的,真實的;堅固的;結(jié)實的;富裕的[經(jīng)典例句]She has made substantial progress in her study.
    19.tort law侵權(quán)行為法[擴充詞匯] tort n.侵權(quán)行為
    20.bombard with連續(xù)提出…
    [擴充詞匯] bombard v.轟炸;痛斥,不斷攻擊,向…連續(xù)提出問題[經(jīng)典例句]The persecutor bombarded the defendant with questions.
    21.triviality無足輕重的細節(jié)[大綱詞匯] trivial a.瑣碎的;無足輕重的[衍生詞匯]triviality n.瑣事,無足輕重的事[經(jīng)典例句]He was criticized for including too many trivialities in his report.
    22.draft new guidelines起草新的方針[大綱詞匯]draft v.起草,草擬;n.草稿,草案,草圖[擴充詞匯]guideline n.方針,原則
    23.moderate end穩(wěn)健的一派[大綱詞匯]moderate a.中等的,適度的,溫和的,穩(wěn)健的[經(jīng)典例句] People believe he is a moderate leader.
    24.has its way自主行事[擴充詞匯]have one's way想怎樣就怎樣,自主行事[經(jīng)典例句] It would be disastrous if you let your son to have his way.
    25.for the benefit of為了…受益[大綱詞匯]benefit n.利益,好處,恩惠;v.(from,by)收益;有益于[經(jīng)典例句]He moved to a big city for the benefit of his children.
    26.inadequacy不適當[大綱詞匯] inadequate a.(for,to)不充足的,不適當?shù)腫衍生詞匯]inadequacy n.不充足,不適當[經(jīng)典例句] This is a reflection of the inadequacy of the public hospital system.
    27.make the best use of使…得到的利用[大綱詞匯]make use of利用[經(jīng)典例句]We must make the best use of the limited natural resources.
    28.be obliged to被迫做…
    [大綱詞匯] oblige v.迫使;責成;(使)感激,施恩于[經(jīng)典例句] I felt obliged to invite him to the party.
    全文翻譯
    外面是一個危險的世界。如果你走出去,可能會滑倒在門墊上,摔傷一條腿。如果你點燃爐灶,可能會把房子燒掉。但是假如門墊或爐灶上沒有警示語告訴你可能發(fā)生的危害,那么你或許可以就自己所受的傷害通過法律訴訟,成功地獲得賠償。大約自80年代初以來人們就不再(guangxian注:此處“不再”二字應刪除?。┻@樣認為了,當時陪審團已開始認為更多的公司應對其顧客所遭受的不幸負責。
    公司因此感到了威脅,便做出了反應,寫出越來越長的警示標識語,力圖預先標明種種可能發(fā)生的事故。現(xiàn)在,梯子上警告標簽有幾英寸長,除了警告你其他可能發(fā)生的意外情況外,還警告你可能會摔下來,簡直是莫名其妙!印在兒童編幅俠披風上的標識語竟然也告誡說,本玩具“無法讓用戶飛行”。
    雖然警示語常常是合理而必要的,如對藥物副作用而產(chǎn)生的危險的警示語,并且很多是州或聯(lián)邦法規(guī)所要求的,但是當消費者受傷,這些警示語能否真正保護制造商和銷售商使之免于責任,這還很難說。被受傷的消費者告上法庭的公司中,大約一半的情況是公司敗訴。
    現(xiàn)在看來這種趨勢正在轉(zhuǎn)變。盡管個人傷害的指控一如既往地繼續(xù)著,但有些法庭已開始站到被告一方,特別是在處理那些有警示語也無法避免傷害的案件時。五月份,伊利諾斯州的Shutt體育公司總裁朱利?尼蒙斯就成功地打贏了這樣一場官司。一名橄欖球隊員戴著該公司的頭盔在一場比賽中受傷癱瘓,遂將該公司告上法庭。公司總裁朱利?尼蒙斯說:“他成了癱瘓,我們非常難過,但頭盔的設計不是為了預防這類傷害的?!迸銓張F也認為造成該運動員受傷的是這項運動本身的危險性,而不是頭盔。與此同時,美國法學會——該學會由一群舉足輕重的法官、律師、學者所組成——簽署了新的民事侵害法綱要,宣布公司不必警示顧客那些顯而易見的危險,或者給顧客列出一份冗長的可能造成的危險的清單??的螤柎髮W法學院一位參與起草新綱要的教授說,“重要的信息會淹沒在細枝末節(jié)的汪洋之中”。如果該法律團體的這一適中的目的能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn),產(chǎn)品上提供的警示信息實際上是用來保護消費者利益的,而不是為了避免公司承擔法律責任的。