為廣大考生整理了2014考研英語一翻譯模擬試題及答案，供廣大考生參考：
Whether or not animals are due equal consideration is an unresolved issue. 46) I have defended a moral presumption in favour of equal consideration, and it is clear that appeals to species will not overturn that presumption. Almost as certainly, contract theory will not do so either. But, while no published discussions of the appeals to moral agency and to social bonds have carried the burden of proof on the inegalitarian, it may be premature to preclude the possibility that the relevant argument could be developed more successfully. 47) Among the various challenges to equal consideration, the strategy of appealing to the common-sense moral differences regarding assistance and killing seems strongest. Combining this approach with either, or both, of the suitably developed appeals to moral agency and social bonds may offer the most formidable possible challenge to equal consideration. 48) But the very real possibility the our intuitions regarding assistance and killing are shaped by pro-human, anti-animal prejudice justifies a continued presumption in favour of equal consideration. Only a challenge that was explicit, coherent, and more compelling than any produce so far could overturn that presumption.
Suppose that the presumption favouring equal consideration for animals were successfully overturned, how should we understand animal moral status? As we have seen, the view that animals have moral status is not plausible, in view of the arguments we have canvassed. 49) But there is a position that falls in between that extreme one and the equal-consideration approach, a view that is intuitively fairly plausible and no doubt tacitly accepted by many people.
To get a handle on this view, one needs to imagine two particular scales and then merge them. The first is the phylogenetic scale, or at least one way of construing it. This scale is an evolutionary hierarchy with animal species that are more biologically and cognitively complex closer to the top. The second scale is a hierarchy of moral status. Being at the very top have the highest moral status and deserve full consideration. Beings somewhat lower deserve very serious consideration but less that what the beings on the top deserve. 50) As one moves down this scale of moral status or moral consideration, the amount of consideration one owes to beings at a particular level decreases. At some point one reaches beings who deserve just a little consideration.
答案及譯文
主要引用了外研社的斑斕閱讀系列的《動(dòng)物權(quán)利》中楊通進(jìn)的譯文。我主要修改了equal consideration，楊的譯文翻譯為“平等考慮”。我開始想用“平等對(duì)待”，后來還是用回了楊的譯文“平等考慮”，最后還是改為“平等關(guān)愛”。主要是這個(gè)詞在本書中一直出現(xiàn)，我還是覺得“關(guān)愛”好一點(diǎn)。然后修改大一點(diǎn)的是最后一句話。此文章只用來學(xué)生做翻譯參考練習(xí)，不做任何有關(guān)商業(yè)的用途。若有譯文上的錯(cuò)誤，請(qǐng)大方之家指出。
Whether or not animals are due equal consideration is an unresolved issue. 46) I have defended a moral presumption in favour of equal consideration, and it is clear that appeals to species will not overturn that presumption. 我已經(jīng)為一種贊成平等關(guān)愛的道德假定做了辯護(hù)。很明顯，訴諸于物種問題不能*這個(gè)假設(shè)。Almost as certainly, contract theory will not do so either. But, while no published discussions of the appeals to moral agency and to social bonds have carried the burden of proof on the inegalitarian, it may be premature to preclude the possibility that the relevant argument could be developed more successfully. 47) Among the various challenges to equal consideration, the strategy of appealing to the common-sense moral differences regarding assistance and killing seems strongest. 在對(duì)平等關(guān)愛的諸多質(zhì)疑聲中，有一種策略訴諸于關(guān)于援助與殺戮這樣常識(shí)性的道德差異，似乎是最為成功的。Combining this approach with either, or both, of the suitably developed appeals to moral agency and social bonds may offer the most formidable possible challenge to equal consideration. 48) But the very real possibility that our intuitions regarding assistance and killing are shaped by pro-human, anti-animal prejudice justifies a continued presumption in favour of equal consideration. 但是，關(guān)于援助于殺戮的直覺很可能是由偏愛人類、反對(duì)動(dòng)物的偏見決定的；這種可能性證明了繼續(xù)贊成平等關(guān)愛之假定的合理性。Only a challenge that was explicit, coherent, and more compelling than any produce so far could overturn that presumption.
Suppose that the presumption favouring equal consideration for animals were successfully overturned, how should we understand animal moral status? As we have seen, the view that animals have moral status is not plausible, in view of the arguments we have canvassed. 49) But there is a position that falls in between that extreme one and the equal-consideration approach, a view that is intuitively fairly plausible and no doubt tacitly accepted by many people.但是有一種觀點(diǎn)，介于極端的觀點(diǎn)與平等關(guān)愛之間，這種觀點(diǎn)在直覺上似乎是相當(dāng)可靠的，并且許多人會(huì)毫不懷疑的默默接受。
To get a handle on this view, one needs to imagine two particular scales and then merge them. The first is the phylogenetic scale, or at least one way of construing it. This scale is an evolutionary hierarchy with animal species that are more biologically and cognitively complex closer to the top. The second scale is a hierarchy of moral status. Being at the very top have the highest moral status and deserve full consideration. Beings somewhat lower deserve very serious consideration but less that what the beings on the top deserve. 50) As one moves down this scale of moral status or moral consideration, the amount of consideration one owes to beings at a particular level decreases. At some point one reaches beings who deserve just a little consideration.當(dāng)我們調(diào)低道德地位或者道德關(guān)愛的標(biāo)尺時(shí)，在特定水平上，我們應(yīng)該給與這些生物的關(guān)愛就會(huì)減少。
Whether or not animals are due equal consideration is an unresolved issue. 46) I have defended a moral presumption in favour of equal consideration, and it is clear that appeals to species will not overturn that presumption. Almost as certainly, contract theory will not do so either. But, while no published discussions of the appeals to moral agency and to social bonds have carried the burden of proof on the inegalitarian, it may be premature to preclude the possibility that the relevant argument could be developed more successfully. 47) Among the various challenges to equal consideration, the strategy of appealing to the common-sense moral differences regarding assistance and killing seems strongest. Combining this approach with either, or both, of the suitably developed appeals to moral agency and social bonds may offer the most formidable possible challenge to equal consideration. 48) But the very real possibility the our intuitions regarding assistance and killing are shaped by pro-human, anti-animal prejudice justifies a continued presumption in favour of equal consideration. Only a challenge that was explicit, coherent, and more compelling than any produce so far could overturn that presumption.
Suppose that the presumption favouring equal consideration for animals were successfully overturned, how should we understand animal moral status? As we have seen, the view that animals have moral status is not plausible, in view of the arguments we have canvassed. 49) But there is a position that falls in between that extreme one and the equal-consideration approach, a view that is intuitively fairly plausible and no doubt tacitly accepted by many people.
To get a handle on this view, one needs to imagine two particular scales and then merge them. The first is the phylogenetic scale, or at least one way of construing it. This scale is an evolutionary hierarchy with animal species that are more biologically and cognitively complex closer to the top. The second scale is a hierarchy of moral status. Being at the very top have the highest moral status and deserve full consideration. Beings somewhat lower deserve very serious consideration but less that what the beings on the top deserve. 50) As one moves down this scale of moral status or moral consideration, the amount of consideration one owes to beings at a particular level decreases. At some point one reaches beings who deserve just a little consideration.
答案及譯文
主要引用了外研社的斑斕閱讀系列的《動(dòng)物權(quán)利》中楊通進(jìn)的譯文。我主要修改了equal consideration，楊的譯文翻譯為“平等考慮”。我開始想用“平等對(duì)待”，后來還是用回了楊的譯文“平等考慮”，最后還是改為“平等關(guān)愛”。主要是這個(gè)詞在本書中一直出現(xiàn)，我還是覺得“關(guān)愛”好一點(diǎn)。然后修改大一點(diǎn)的是最后一句話。此文章只用來學(xué)生做翻譯參考練習(xí)，不做任何有關(guān)商業(yè)的用途。若有譯文上的錯(cuò)誤，請(qǐng)大方之家指出。
Whether or not animals are due equal consideration is an unresolved issue. 46) I have defended a moral presumption in favour of equal consideration, and it is clear that appeals to species will not overturn that presumption. 我已經(jīng)為一種贊成平等關(guān)愛的道德假定做了辯護(hù)。很明顯，訴諸于物種問題不能*這個(gè)假設(shè)。Almost as certainly, contract theory will not do so either. But, while no published discussions of the appeals to moral agency and to social bonds have carried the burden of proof on the inegalitarian, it may be premature to preclude the possibility that the relevant argument could be developed more successfully. 47) Among the various challenges to equal consideration, the strategy of appealing to the common-sense moral differences regarding assistance and killing seems strongest. 在對(duì)平等關(guān)愛的諸多質(zhì)疑聲中，有一種策略訴諸于關(guān)于援助與殺戮這樣常識(shí)性的道德差異，似乎是最為成功的。Combining this approach with either, or both, of the suitably developed appeals to moral agency and social bonds may offer the most formidable possible challenge to equal consideration. 48) But the very real possibility that our intuitions regarding assistance and killing are shaped by pro-human, anti-animal prejudice justifies a continued presumption in favour of equal consideration. 但是，關(guān)于援助于殺戮的直覺很可能是由偏愛人類、反對(duì)動(dòng)物的偏見決定的；這種可能性證明了繼續(xù)贊成平等關(guān)愛之假定的合理性。Only a challenge that was explicit, coherent, and more compelling than any produce so far could overturn that presumption.
Suppose that the presumption favouring equal consideration for animals were successfully overturned, how should we understand animal moral status? As we have seen, the view that animals have moral status is not plausible, in view of the arguments we have canvassed. 49) But there is a position that falls in between that extreme one and the equal-consideration approach, a view that is intuitively fairly plausible and no doubt tacitly accepted by many people.但是有一種觀點(diǎn)，介于極端的觀點(diǎn)與平等關(guān)愛之間，這種觀點(diǎn)在直覺上似乎是相當(dāng)可靠的，并且許多人會(huì)毫不懷疑的默默接受。
To get a handle on this view, one needs to imagine two particular scales and then merge them. The first is the phylogenetic scale, or at least one way of construing it. This scale is an evolutionary hierarchy with animal species that are more biologically and cognitively complex closer to the top. The second scale is a hierarchy of moral status. Being at the very top have the highest moral status and deserve full consideration. Beings somewhat lower deserve very serious consideration but less that what the beings on the top deserve. 50) As one moves down this scale of moral status or moral consideration, the amount of consideration one owes to beings at a particular level decreases. At some point one reaches beings who deserve just a little consideration.當(dāng)我們調(diào)低道德地位或者道德關(guān)愛的標(biāo)尺時(shí)，在特定水平上，我們應(yīng)該給與這些生物的關(guān)愛就會(huì)減少。