3.1992年英譯漢試題及參考譯文
Intellingenceat best is an assumptive construct—the meaning of the word has never been clear.（71）There is more agreement on the kinds of behavior referred to by the term than there is on how to interpret or classify them.But it is generally agreed that a person of high intelligence is one who can grasp ideas readily，make distinctions，reason logically，and make ue of verbal and mathematical symbols in solving problems.An intelligence test is a rough measure of a child’s capacity for learning the kinds of things required in school.It does not measure character，social adjustment，physical endurance，manual skills，or artistic abilities.It is not supposed to—it was not designed for such purposes.（72）To criticise it for such failure is roughly comparable to criticising a thermometer for not measuring wind velocity.
The other thing we have to notice is that the assessment of the intelligence of any subject is essentially a comparative affair.
（73）Now since the assessment of intelligence is a comparative matter we must be sure that the scale with which we are comparing our subjects provides avalidorfaircomparison.It is here that some of the difficulties which interest us begin.Any test performed involves at least three factors:the intention to do one’s best，the knowledge required for understanding what you have to do，and the intellectual ability to do it.（74）The first two must be equal for all who are being compared，if any comparison in terms of intelligence is to be made.In school populations in our culture these assumptions can be made fair and reasonable，and the value of intelligence testing has been proved thoroughly.Its value lies，of course，in its providing a satisfactory basis for prediction.No one is in the least interested in the marks a little child gets on his test;what we are interested in is whether we can conclude from his mark on the test that the child will do better or worse than other children of his age at tasks which we think requiregeneral intelligence.（75）On the whole such a conclusion can be drawn with a certain degree of confidence，but only if the child can be assumed to have had the same attitude towards the test as the others with whom he is being compared，and only if he was not punished by lack of relevant information which they possessed.
1992年英譯漢試題參考譯文
智力充其量只是一個假設(shè)性的概念，因為智力的含義從來就是模糊的。（71）人們對智力所指的不同表現(xiàn)，比對這些表現(xiàn)如何進行解釋或分類，看法更為一致。但是一般認為，智力好的人是能夠迅速領(lǐng)會思想、區(qū)分事物、進行邏輯推理并運用文字和數(shù)字符號來解決問題的人。智力測驗只是粗略衡量一個兒童學(xué)習(xí)學(xué)校所要求的不同知識的能力。智力測驗并不測定人的品格、社會適應(yīng)能力、身體耐力、手工技能或藝術(shù)才能。智力測試沒有這樣的任務(wù)，因為它并不是為這樣的用途而設(shè)計的。（72）批評智力測試不反映上述情況，就猶如批評溫度計不測風(fēng)速一樣。
我們要注意的另一件事是，對任何測試對象的智力評估基本上是比較而言的事。
（73）既然對智力的評估是比較而言的事，那么我們必須確保，在對我們的對象進行比較時，我們所使用的尺度能提供有效的或公平的比較。由此而產(chǎn)生一些引起我們關(guān)注的問題。進行任何測試至少要包含三個因素:盡力考好測試的意向，了解要參加考試所需要的知識，以及做這件事情的智能。（74）如果要從智力方面進行任何比較的話，那么對所有比較對象來說，前兩個因素必須是一樣的。在我們培養(yǎng)的學(xué)生中，上述設(shè)想可以公平合理。這就完全證明了智力測試的價值。它的價值當(dāng)然就在它對預(yù)測提供了滿意的依據(jù)。沒有人絲毫?xí)σ粋€兒童在測試中所取得的分數(shù)感興趣。我們感興趣的是，我們能否從他測試的成績中得出結(jié)論:這個兒童和與他年齡相同的其他兒童相比，在完成我們認為需要一般智力的任務(wù)時，他會做得更好還是更差。（75）總的來說，得出這種結(jié)論是有一定程度把握的，但是必須具備兩個條件:能夠假定這個孩子對測試的態(tài)度和與他比較的另一些孩子的態(tài)度相同;他也沒有因為缺乏別的孩子已掌握的有關(guān)知識而被扣分。
4.1993年英譯漢試題及參考譯文
（71）The method of scientific investigation is nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind;it is simply the mode by which all phenomena are reasoned about and given precise and exact explanation.There is no more difference，but there is just the same kind of difference，between the mental operations of a man of science and those of an ordinary person，as there is between the operations and methods of a baker or of a butcher weighing out his goods in common scales，and the operations of a chemist in performing a difficult and complex analysis by means of his balance and finely graded weights.（72）It is not that the scales in the one case，and the balance in the other，differ in the principles of their construction or manner of working;but that the latter is much finer apparatus and of course much more accurate in its measurement than the former.
You will understand this better，perhaps，if I give you some familiar examples.（73）You have all heard it repeated that men of science work by means of induction（歸納法）and deduction，that by the help of these operations，they，in a sort of sense，manage to extract from Nature certain natural laws，and that out of these，by some special skill of their own，they build up their theories.（74）And it is imagined by many that the operations of the common mind can be by no means compared with these processes，and that they have to be acquired by a sort of special training.To hear all these large words，you would think that the mind of a man of science must be constituted differently from that of his fellow men;but if you will not be frightened by terms，you will discover that you are quite wrong，and that all these terrible apparatus are being used by yourselves every day and every hour of your lives.
There is a wellknown incident in one of Moliere’s plays，where the author makes the hero express unbounded delight on being told that he had been talking prose（散文）during the whole of his life.In the same way，I trust that you will take comfort，and be delighted with yourselves，on the discovery that you have been acting on the principles of inductive and deductive philosophy during the same period.（75）Probably there is not one here who has not in the course of the day had occasion to set in motion a complex train of reasoning，of the very same kind，though differing in degree，as that which a scientific man goes through in tracing the causes of natural phenomena.
1993年英譯漢試題參考譯文
（71）科學(xué)研究的方法不過是人類思維活動的必要表達方式，也就是對一切現(xiàn)象進行思索并給以精確而嚴謹解釋的表達方式。科學(xué)家的思維活動與普通人的思維活動之間的區(qū)別和面包商或賣肉者用普通磅秤稱貨的操作方法與化學(xué)家在進行艱難而復(fù)雜的分析時用天平和精密刻度的砝碼的操作方法之間的區(qū)別是完全相同的，此外就沒有別的區(qū)別了。（72）這并不是說面包師或賣肉者所用的磅秤和化學(xué)家所用的天平在構(gòu)造原理和工作方式上存在差別，而是說與前者相比，后者是一種更精密得多的裝置，因而在計量上必然更準確得多。
要是我給你舉幾個熟悉的例子，或許你會更清楚地理解這一點。（73）你們多次聽說過，科學(xué)家是用歸納法和演繹法工作的，他們用這些方法，在某種意義上說，力求從自然界找出某些自然規(guī)律，然后他們根據(jù)這些規(guī)律，用自己的某種非同一般的本領(lǐng)，建立起他們的理論。（74）許多人以為，普通人的思維活動根本無法與科學(xué)家的思維過程相比，認為這些思維過程必須經(jīng)過某種專門訓(xùn)練才能掌握。聽了上面的夸張言詞后，你會以為，科學(xué)家的思維結(jié)構(gòu)與普通人的思維結(jié)構(gòu)大不相同;但是假如你沒有被這些言詞所嚇倒，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)，你是完全錯了;你還會發(fā)現(xiàn)，所有這些令人望而生畏的說法你自己每時每刻也在使用。
在莫里哀的一個劇本中有這樣一個的插曲:作者讓主人公得知他在整個一生中一直在說散文后，表現(xiàn)出無限的喜悅。同樣，我認為，當(dāng)你一旦發(fā)現(xiàn)你在一生中一直在按歸納法和演繹法的哲理辦事時，你也會感到欣慰和陶醉。（75）大概這里不會有人一整天都沒有機會進行一連串復(fù)雜的思考活動，這些思考活動與科學(xué)家在探索自然現(xiàn)象原因時所經(jīng)歷的思考活動，盡管復(fù)雜程度不同，但在類型上是完全一樣的。
5.1994年英譯漢試題及參考譯文
According to the new school of scientists，technology is an overlooked force in expanding the horizons of scientific knowledge.（71）Science moves forward，they say，not so much through the insights of great men of genius as because of more ordinary things like improved techniques and tools.（72）In short，a leader of the new school contends，the scientific revolution，as we call it，was largely the improvement and invention and use of a series of instruments that expanded the reach of science in innumerable directions.
（73）Over the years，tools and technology themselves as a source of fundamental innovation have largely been ignored by historians and philosophers of science.The modern school that hails technology argues that such masters as Galileo，Newton，Maxwell，Einstein，and inventors such as Edison attached great importance to，and derived great benefit from，craft information and technological devices of different kinds that were usable in scientific experiments.
The centerpiece of the argument of a technologyyes，geniusno advocate was an analysis of Galileo’s role at the start of the scientific revolution.The wisdom of the day was derived from Ptolemy，an astronomer of the second century，whose elaborate system of the sky put Earth at the center of all heavenly motions.（74）Galileo’s greatest glory was that in 1609 he was the first person to turn the newly invented telescope on the heavens to prove that the planets revolve around the sun rather than around the Earth.But the real hero of the story，according to the new school of scientists，was the long evolution in the improvement of machinery for making eyeglasses.
Federal policy is necessarily involved in the technology vs.genius dispute.（75）Whether the Government should increase the financing of pure science at the expense of technology or vice versa（反之）often depends on the issue of which is seen as the driving force.
Intellingenceat best is an assumptive construct—the meaning of the word has never been clear.（71）There is more agreement on the kinds of behavior referred to by the term than there is on how to interpret or classify them.But it is generally agreed that a person of high intelligence is one who can grasp ideas readily，make distinctions，reason logically，and make ue of verbal and mathematical symbols in solving problems.An intelligence test is a rough measure of a child’s capacity for learning the kinds of things required in school.It does not measure character，social adjustment，physical endurance，manual skills，or artistic abilities.It is not supposed to—it was not designed for such purposes.（72）To criticise it for such failure is roughly comparable to criticising a thermometer for not measuring wind velocity.
The other thing we have to notice is that the assessment of the intelligence of any subject is essentially a comparative affair.
（73）Now since the assessment of intelligence is a comparative matter we must be sure that the scale with which we are comparing our subjects provides avalidorfaircomparison.It is here that some of the difficulties which interest us begin.Any test performed involves at least three factors:the intention to do one’s best，the knowledge required for understanding what you have to do，and the intellectual ability to do it.（74）The first two must be equal for all who are being compared，if any comparison in terms of intelligence is to be made.In school populations in our culture these assumptions can be made fair and reasonable，and the value of intelligence testing has been proved thoroughly.Its value lies，of course，in its providing a satisfactory basis for prediction.No one is in the least interested in the marks a little child gets on his test;what we are interested in is whether we can conclude from his mark on the test that the child will do better or worse than other children of his age at tasks which we think requiregeneral intelligence.（75）On the whole such a conclusion can be drawn with a certain degree of confidence，but only if the child can be assumed to have had the same attitude towards the test as the others with whom he is being compared，and only if he was not punished by lack of relevant information which they possessed.
1992年英譯漢試題參考譯文
智力充其量只是一個假設(shè)性的概念，因為智力的含義從來就是模糊的。（71）人們對智力所指的不同表現(xiàn)，比對這些表現(xiàn)如何進行解釋或分類，看法更為一致。但是一般認為，智力好的人是能夠迅速領(lǐng)會思想、區(qū)分事物、進行邏輯推理并運用文字和數(shù)字符號來解決問題的人。智力測驗只是粗略衡量一個兒童學(xué)習(xí)學(xué)校所要求的不同知識的能力。智力測驗并不測定人的品格、社會適應(yīng)能力、身體耐力、手工技能或藝術(shù)才能。智力測試沒有這樣的任務(wù)，因為它并不是為這樣的用途而設(shè)計的。（72）批評智力測試不反映上述情況，就猶如批評溫度計不測風(fēng)速一樣。
我們要注意的另一件事是，對任何測試對象的智力評估基本上是比較而言的事。
（73）既然對智力的評估是比較而言的事，那么我們必須確保，在對我們的對象進行比較時，我們所使用的尺度能提供有效的或公平的比較。由此而產(chǎn)生一些引起我們關(guān)注的問題。進行任何測試至少要包含三個因素:盡力考好測試的意向，了解要參加考試所需要的知識，以及做這件事情的智能。（74）如果要從智力方面進行任何比較的話，那么對所有比較對象來說，前兩個因素必須是一樣的。在我們培養(yǎng)的學(xué)生中，上述設(shè)想可以公平合理。這就完全證明了智力測試的價值。它的價值當(dāng)然就在它對預(yù)測提供了滿意的依據(jù)。沒有人絲毫?xí)σ粋€兒童在測試中所取得的分數(shù)感興趣。我們感興趣的是，我們能否從他測試的成績中得出結(jié)論:這個兒童和與他年齡相同的其他兒童相比，在完成我們認為需要一般智力的任務(wù)時，他會做得更好還是更差。（75）總的來說，得出這種結(jié)論是有一定程度把握的，但是必須具備兩個條件:能夠假定這個孩子對測試的態(tài)度和與他比較的另一些孩子的態(tài)度相同;他也沒有因為缺乏別的孩子已掌握的有關(guān)知識而被扣分。
4.1993年英譯漢試題及參考譯文
（71）The method of scientific investigation is nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind;it is simply the mode by which all phenomena are reasoned about and given precise and exact explanation.There is no more difference，but there is just the same kind of difference，between the mental operations of a man of science and those of an ordinary person，as there is between the operations and methods of a baker or of a butcher weighing out his goods in common scales，and the operations of a chemist in performing a difficult and complex analysis by means of his balance and finely graded weights.（72）It is not that the scales in the one case，and the balance in the other，differ in the principles of their construction or manner of working;but that the latter is much finer apparatus and of course much more accurate in its measurement than the former.
You will understand this better，perhaps，if I give you some familiar examples.（73）You have all heard it repeated that men of science work by means of induction（歸納法）and deduction，that by the help of these operations，they，in a sort of sense，manage to extract from Nature certain natural laws，and that out of these，by some special skill of their own，they build up their theories.（74）And it is imagined by many that the operations of the common mind can be by no means compared with these processes，and that they have to be acquired by a sort of special training.To hear all these large words，you would think that the mind of a man of science must be constituted differently from that of his fellow men;but if you will not be frightened by terms，you will discover that you are quite wrong，and that all these terrible apparatus are being used by yourselves every day and every hour of your lives.
There is a wellknown incident in one of Moliere’s plays，where the author makes the hero express unbounded delight on being told that he had been talking prose（散文）during the whole of his life.In the same way，I trust that you will take comfort，and be delighted with yourselves，on the discovery that you have been acting on the principles of inductive and deductive philosophy during the same period.（75）Probably there is not one here who has not in the course of the day had occasion to set in motion a complex train of reasoning，of the very same kind，though differing in degree，as that which a scientific man goes through in tracing the causes of natural phenomena.
1993年英譯漢試題參考譯文
（71）科學(xué)研究的方法不過是人類思維活動的必要表達方式，也就是對一切現(xiàn)象進行思索并給以精確而嚴謹解釋的表達方式。科學(xué)家的思維活動與普通人的思維活動之間的區(qū)別和面包商或賣肉者用普通磅秤稱貨的操作方法與化學(xué)家在進行艱難而復(fù)雜的分析時用天平和精密刻度的砝碼的操作方法之間的區(qū)別是完全相同的，此外就沒有別的區(qū)別了。（72）這并不是說面包師或賣肉者所用的磅秤和化學(xué)家所用的天平在構(gòu)造原理和工作方式上存在差別，而是說與前者相比，后者是一種更精密得多的裝置，因而在計量上必然更準確得多。
要是我給你舉幾個熟悉的例子，或許你會更清楚地理解這一點。（73）你們多次聽說過，科學(xué)家是用歸納法和演繹法工作的，他們用這些方法，在某種意義上說，力求從自然界找出某些自然規(guī)律，然后他們根據(jù)這些規(guī)律，用自己的某種非同一般的本領(lǐng)，建立起他們的理論。（74）許多人以為，普通人的思維活動根本無法與科學(xué)家的思維過程相比，認為這些思維過程必須經(jīng)過某種專門訓(xùn)練才能掌握。聽了上面的夸張言詞后，你會以為，科學(xué)家的思維結(jié)構(gòu)與普通人的思維結(jié)構(gòu)大不相同;但是假如你沒有被這些言詞所嚇倒，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)，你是完全錯了;你還會發(fā)現(xiàn)，所有這些令人望而生畏的說法你自己每時每刻也在使用。
在莫里哀的一個劇本中有這樣一個的插曲:作者讓主人公得知他在整個一生中一直在說散文后，表現(xiàn)出無限的喜悅。同樣，我認為，當(dāng)你一旦發(fā)現(xiàn)你在一生中一直在按歸納法和演繹法的哲理辦事時，你也會感到欣慰和陶醉。（75）大概這里不會有人一整天都沒有機會進行一連串復(fù)雜的思考活動，這些思考活動與科學(xué)家在探索自然現(xiàn)象原因時所經(jīng)歷的思考活動，盡管復(fù)雜程度不同，但在類型上是完全一樣的。
5.1994年英譯漢試題及參考譯文
According to the new school of scientists，technology is an overlooked force in expanding the horizons of scientific knowledge.（71）Science moves forward，they say，not so much through the insights of great men of genius as because of more ordinary things like improved techniques and tools.（72）In short，a leader of the new school contends，the scientific revolution，as we call it，was largely the improvement and invention and use of a series of instruments that expanded the reach of science in innumerable directions.
（73）Over the years，tools and technology themselves as a source of fundamental innovation have largely been ignored by historians and philosophers of science.The modern school that hails technology argues that such masters as Galileo，Newton，Maxwell，Einstein，and inventors such as Edison attached great importance to，and derived great benefit from，craft information and technological devices of different kinds that were usable in scientific experiments.
The centerpiece of the argument of a technologyyes，geniusno advocate was an analysis of Galileo’s role at the start of the scientific revolution.The wisdom of the day was derived from Ptolemy，an astronomer of the second century，whose elaborate system of the sky put Earth at the center of all heavenly motions.（74）Galileo’s greatest glory was that in 1609 he was the first person to turn the newly invented telescope on the heavens to prove that the planets revolve around the sun rather than around the Earth.But the real hero of the story，according to the new school of scientists，was the long evolution in the improvement of machinery for making eyeglasses.
Federal policy is necessarily involved in the technology vs.genius dispute.（75）Whether the Government should increase the financing of pure science at the expense of technology or vice versa（反之）often depends on the issue of which is seen as the driving force.