GMAT-Official Guide for GMAT Review 12 阅读翻译 20篇

pansy

1.A recent study has provided clues to predator-prey dynamics in the late Pleistocene era. Researchers compared the number of tooth fractures in carnivores that lived 36,000 to 10,000 years ago and that were preserved in the Rancho La Brea tar pits in Los Angeles. The breakage frequencies in the extinct species were strikingly higher than those in the present-day species.

In considering possible explanations for this finding, the researchers dismissed demographic bias because older individuals were not overrepresented in the fossil samples. They rejected preservational bias because a total absence of breakage in two extinct species demonstrated that the fractures were not the result of abrasion within the pits. They ruled out local bias because breakage data obtained from other Pleistocene sites were similar to the La Brea data. The explanation they consider most plausible is behavioral differences between extinct and present-day carnivores—in particular, more contact between the teeth of predators and the bones of prey due to more thorough consumption of carcasses by the extinct species. Such thorough carcass consumption implies to the researchers either that prey availability was low, at least seasonally, or that there was intense competition over kills and a high rate of carcass theft due to relatively high predator densities.

近期的一项研究为更新世后期食肉动物的捕食动态提供了线索。就食肉动物牙齿的磨损情况，研究者在现今食肉动物和生活在3600到10000年前的食肉动物（遗存于洛杉矶的拉布雷亚牧场沥青坑中）之间做了对比。这些已灭绝物种的牙齿破损发生率要明显高于现存物种。

在考虑对这一发现各种可能的解释时，研究者排除了统计偏差，因为年老个体没有过多占据化石样本总体。排除了可能因保存不当造成的偏差，因为两个完全没有破损的灭绝物种化石表明磨损不是由坑中的摩擦造成的。排除了地域性偏差，因为从其它更新世发掘地获得的数据与拉布雷亚的数据相近。而后研究者得出了他们认为最合理的解释——是因为灭绝物种和现存物种行为上的差异，尤其是由于已灭绝捕食者对猎物更彻底的啃食，使其牙齿与猎物骨头有更多的接触。研究者由这种彻底的啃食行为推断，不是猎物太少（至少是季节性的），就是捕食者太多，以致猎杀时有激烈的竞争和频繁的猎物盗取。

pansy

2.Ecoefficiency (measures to minimize environmental impact through the reduction or elimination of waste from production processes) has become a goal for companies worldwide, with many realizing signgficant cost savings from such innovation. Peter Senge and Ganor Carstedt see this development as laudable but suggest thatsimply adopting ecoefficiency innovation could actually worsen environmental stresses in the future. Such innovations reduce production waste but do not alter the number of products manufactured nor the waste generated from their use and discord; indeed, most companies invest in ecoefficiency improvements in order to increase profits and growth. Moreover, there is mo guarantee that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarlu ecoefficient ways, since in today’s global matkets, gteater profits may be turned in old-style eco-inefficient industries. Even a vastly more ecoefficient industrial system could, were it to grow much larger, generate more total waste and destroy more habitat and apecies than would a smaller, less ecoefficient economy. Senge and Carstedt argue that to preserve the global environment and sustain economic growth businesses must develop a new systemic approach that reduces total material use and total accumulated waste. Focusing exclusively on ecoefficiency, which offers a compelling business case according to established thinking, may distract companies from pursuing radically different products and business models.
                 
提高生态效率（通过减少或消除生产过程中产生的废物以最大限度地减小其对环境影响的措施）已成为全世界公司的目标。许多公司通过这一革新实现了明显的开销缩减。Peter Senge 和 Ganor Carstedt 认为这一发展是值得称赞的，但是仅仅采取这种技术革新实际上会加重未来的环境压力。这种革新虽然减少了生产废料，但是并没有改变产品的生产数量以及使用和丢弃产品的数量。再者，也不能保证因提高生态效率获得的经济增长会以同样的方式推行，因为在现今国际市场，更多的收益可能会转变成投资资本，很容易再次投入老式的无生态效率的产业。甚至生态效率更高的生产体系在扩大后也会产生出更多的废弃物，破坏更多的栖息地，危害更多的物种。Senge 和Carstedt 认为要想保护世界环境同时又保持经济增长，企业必须运用一种能减少材料使用总量和废料积累总量的系统性方法。现有的生态效率的理念提出了一种吸引人的商业方案，但仅关注与这一点会妨碍公司追求不同的产品和商业模式。

pansy

3.Tradionally, the first firm to commercialize a new technology has benefited from the unique opportunity to shape product definitions, forcing followers to adapt to a standard or invest in an unproven alternative. Today, however, the largest payoffs may go to companies that lead in developing integrated approaches for successful mass production and distribution.
  Producers of the Beta format for videocassette recorders(VCRs),for example, were first to develop the VCR commercially in 1975, but producers of the rival VHS (Video Home System) format proved to be more successful at forming strategic alliances with other producers were reluctant to form such alliances and eventually lost ground to VHS in the competition for the global VCR market.
  Despite Beta’s substantial technological head start and the fact that VHS was neither technically better nor cheaper than Beta, developers of VHS quickly turned a slight early lead in sales into a dominant position. Strategic alignments with producers of prerecorded tapes reinforced the VHS format further expanded VHS’s share of the market. By the end of the 1980s, beta was no longer in production.

按照惯例，第一个把新技术商业化的公司会从中获益，因为只有这一公司有机会给新产品下定义。这将迫使其仿效者适应这一规范产品或投资另一种未经检验的替代品。但是今天，只有那些以批量生产经销为目的，领先发展综合方法的公司才可能获得最大的收益。
例如，1975年，Bata录影带的生产商首次将他们的产品商业化，结果获得更大成功的却是其对手VHS录影带的生产商，因为他们与其他生产商和经销商建立战略性联盟来生产和销售他们的产品。然而，Bata录影带生产商为了继续独霸录影带的销售，对这种联盟的建立犹豫不决，最终在全球录影带市场的竞争下失去了一席之地。
Bata以价值巨大的技术占领先机，VHS在技术上不比Bata强，在价格上也不便宜，然而 VHS很快在重要领域的销售上略有领先。与磁带生产商的战略性联盟加强了VHS的优势。消费者认为VHS格式的磁带更容易买到，这也使得VHS获得了更大的市场份额。到80年代末，Bata已经停产了。

pansy

4.During the 1960s and 1970s, the primary economic development strategy of local governments in the United States was to attract manufacturing industries. Unfortunately, this strategy was usually implemented at another community’s expense: many manufacturing facilities were lured away from their moorings elsewhere through tax incentives and slick promotional efforts. Through the transfer of jobs and related revenues that resulted from this practice, one town’s triumph could become another town’s tragedy.
  On the 1980s the strategy shifted from this zero-sum game to one called “high-technology development,” in which local governments competed to attract newly formed high-technology manufacturing firms. Although this approach was preferable to victimizing other geographical areas by taking their jobs, it also had its shortcomings: high-tech manufacturing firms employ only a specially trained fraction of the manufacturing workforce, and there simply are not enough high-tech firms to satisfy all geographic areas.
  Recently, local governments have increasingly come to recognize the advantages of yet a third strategy; the promotion of homegrown small businesses. Small indigenous businesses are created by a nearly ubiquitous resource, local entrepreneurs. With roots in their communities, these individuals are less likely to be enticed away by incentives offered by another community. Indigenous industry and talent are kept at home, creating an environment that both provides jobs and fosters further entrepreneurship.

二十世纪六七十年代，美国地方政府主要的经济发展策略是吸引制造业。而这一策略的实施使其它地区付出代价。由于税收刺激和促销努力许多生产设备被转移到了其他地方。由此带来的职业转变和相关财政收益使得一个市镇的成功可能成为另一个城镇的不幸。
在八十年代，政府战略从以前的零和对策变成所谓的“高科技发展”策略——当地政府争相吸引新成立的高科技生产公司。虽然这种方法比夺取其它地域工作使其利益受到损害的方法更可取，它还是有缺点的。高科技生产公司只雇佣那些经过特殊培训的生产工人，并且没有足够多的高科技生产公司来满足所有地域的需求。
最近，地方政府日渐意识到第三种策略——推广本地小型企业——的优势。小型当地企业由当地企业家建立，拥有近乎无所不在的资源。这些企业家植根于自己所在的地区中不太可能被其它地区吸引走。当地的产业和人才都被留住了，这为工作岗位的提供以及未来企业家的培养创建了环境。

pansy

5.In 1988 services moved ahead of manufacturing as the main product of the United States economy. But what is meant by “services”? Some economists define a service as something that is produced and consumed simultaneously, for example, a haircut. The broader, classical definition is that a service is an intangible something that cannot be touched or stored. Yet electric utilities can store energy, and computer programmers save information electronically. Thus, the classical definition is hard to sustain.
  The United States government’s definition is more practical: services are the residual category that includes everything that is not agriculture or industry. Under this definition, services include activities as diverse as engineering and driving a bus. However, besides lacking a strong conceptual framework, this definition falls to recognize the distinction between service industries and service occupations. It categorizes workers based on their company’s final product rather than on the actual work the employees perform. Thus, the many service workers employed by manufacturers—bookkeepers or janitors, for example—would fall under the industrial rather than the services category. Such ambiguities reveal the arbitrariness of this definition and suggest that, although practical for government purposes, it does not accurately reflect the composition of the current United States economy.

1988年，服务业超过制造业成为美国经济的首要产业。但是“服务”是指什么？一些经济学家把服务定义成生产和消费同时进行的行为，例如理发。更宽泛些，服务传统上是指无形的，摸不着的，不能储存的东西。可是电力设施可以储存能量，电脑程序可以保存电子信息。所以传统上的定义很难成立。
美国政府下的定义要更实际些。服务业是指除农业和工业外的其它所有行业。但是这个定义除了缺少概念上的结构，还无法区分服务性产业和服务性职业的差别。这个定义以雇员所在公司的最终产品为标准将雇员分类，而不是以雇员的实际工作为标准。这样，那些在工厂从事服务业的雇员（如图书管理员，门卫）就会被划分到工业类而不是服务业。 由此表明，这一定义不仅模棱两可、主观武断，还不能真实地反映美国当今的经济结构，尽管它对于政府目的而言是实际可行的。

pansy

6.Current feminist theory, in validating women’s own stories of their experience, has incouraged scholars of women’s history to view the use of women’s oral narratives as the methodology, next to the use of women’s written autobiography, that brings historians closest to the “reality” of women’s lives. Such narratives, unlike most standard histories, represent experience from the perspective of women, affirm the importance of women’s contributions, and furnish present-day women with historical continuity that is essential to their identity, individually and collectively.
  Scholars of women’s history should, however, be as cautious about accepting oral narratives at face value as they already are about written memories. Oral narratives are no more likely than are written narratives to provide a disinterested commentary on events or people. Moreover, the stories people tell to explain themselves are shaped by narrative devices and storytelling conventions, as well as by other cultural and historical factors, in ways that the storytellers may be unaware of. The political rhetoric of a particular era, may influence women’s interpretations of the significance of their experience. Thus a woman who views the Second World War as pivotal in increasing the social acceptance of women’s paid work outside the home may teach that conclusion partly and unwittingly because of war Time rhetoric encouraging a positive view of women’s participation in such work.

女性传记能使历史学家最大限度地接近女性生活的实质。当今的女权主义理论鼓励了从事女性历史研究的学者将女性的口头叙述当做仅次于传记的方法来证实女性自身经历故事。与大多数普通的故事不同，这种叙述是从女性观点出发的经历故事，申明了女性所作出贡献的重要性，还为当今女性作为个体和集体的身份提供了重要的历史性衔接。
但是，研究女性历史的学者应该注意不能像以往以表面价值接受“写下来的记忆”那样来接受口头叙述。口头叙述不像书面叙述那样客观地评价人或事，而且在人们讲述自己的故事时，可能会无意识受到叙述技巧，风俗习惯以及其它文化历史因素的影响。例如，某个特殊时期的政治言论可能会影响女性对自我经历意义的理解。如果一个女性把第二次世界大战看做引起社会越来越认可女性外出工作的关键性事件，她可能在一定程度上稀里糊涂地认为这是因为战时宣言鼓励女性参加这些工作。

pansy

7.In recent years, teachers of introductory courses in Asian American studies have been facing a dilemma nonexistent a few decades ago, when hardly any texts in that field were available. Today, excellent anthologies and other introductory texts exist, and books on general issues important for Asian American are published almost weekly. Even professors who are experts in the field find it difficult to decide which of these to assign to students; nonexperts who teach in related areas and are looking for writings for and by Asian American to include in survey courses are in an even worse position.
  A complicating factor has been the continuing lack of specialized one-volume reference works on Asian American, such as biographical dictionaries or desktop encyclopedias. Such works would enable students taking Asian American studies courses (and professors in related fields) to look up basic information on Asian American Asian American individuals, institutions, history, and culture without having to wade through mountains of primary source material. In addition, given such works, Asian American studies professors might feel more free to include more challenging Asian American material in their introductory reading lists, since good reference works allow students to acquire on their own the background information necessary to interpret difficult or unfamiliar material.

近年来，教授“亚裔美国人研究”基础课程的老师正处于进退两难的境地，这在几十年前是不存在的，那时，几乎还没有有关这一领域文章；现在，有优秀的作品集和其它入门性文章，几乎每周都有关于个别亚裔美国人团体和关于亚裔美国人普遍问题的书出版。然而即便专门研究这一领域的教授也觉得很难决定给学生指定阅读哪些文章。对于那些不从事这一领域研究却教授与此相关领域的教师或是为了做调查来查阅相关文章的人，这种境况就更糟了。
其中一个复杂的因素就是一直缺少有关亚裔美国人一卷式的专业性参考文献，例如生物学辞典或电子百科全书。有了这类文献，修“亚裔美国人研究”课程的学生（或相关专业的教师）就可以从中查找有关亚裔美国人个体、机构、历史和文化的信息，而不用去翻阅一堆堆山也似的入门资料。此外，有了这些文献，从事亚裔美国人研究的教授可能更乐于在入门书单中加入更富挑战性的书目。因为好的参考书可以帮助学生在遇到难度大或不熟悉的资料时自己查阅所需的背景知识。

pansy

8.In the seventeenth-century Florentine textile industry, women were employed primarily in low-paying, low-skill jobs, to explain this segregation of labor by gender, economists have relied on the useful theory, investment in human capital—the acquisition of difficult job-related skills—generally benefits individuals by making them eligible to engage in well-paid occupations. Women’s role as child bearers, however, results in interruptions in their participation in the job market (as compared with men’s) and thus reduces their opportunities to acquire training for highly skilled work. In addition, the human capital theory explains why there was a high concentration of women workers in certain low-skill jobs, such as weaving, but not in others, such as combing or carding, by positing that because of their primary responsibility in child rearing women took occupations that could be carried out in the home.
  There were, however, differences in pay scales that cannot be explained by the human capital theory. For example, male constructions workers were paid significantly higher wages than female taffeta weavers. The wage difference between these two low-skill occupations stems from the segregation of labor by gender: because a limited number of occupations were open to women, there was a large supply of workers in their fields, and this “overcrowding” resulted in women receiving lower wages and men receiving higher wages.

在十七世纪佛罗伦萨的纺织业中，女性主要受雇于低收入低技能的工作。经济学家靠人力资本理论来解释这种劳动分配上的性别歧视。依据这一理论，在人力资本上的投入(获得与工作相关的有难度的技能)通常对个人有利，帮助他们获得从事高薪工作的技能。但是女性一直充当孩子抚养者的角色，这阻碍了她们加入就业市场（与男性相比）从而减少了她们获得高技能工作培训的机会。此外，人力资本理论解释了有大批女性集中于像纺织这种低技能工作，而没有集中在梳理棉、毛这类同样是低技能的工作的原因，这是因为女性抚养孩子的主要责任迫使她们从事可以在家中完成的工作。
但是男女之间不同的工资差别却没法用人力资本理论来解释。例如，建筑工人（男）的工资明显高于塔夫绸纺织女工。 这两种低技能工作的工资差距是源于劳动分配上的性别差异：因为只有有限的一部分职位是对女性开放的，而在这些领域有大量的应征者，这种“过度密集”导致女性获得较低的工资而男性获得较高的工资。

pansy

9.(This passage was adapted from an article written in 1992.)
Some observers have attributed the dramatic growth in temporary employment that occurred in the United States during the 1980s to increased participation in the workforce by certain groups, such as first-time or reentering workers, who supposedly prefer such arrangements. However, statistical analyses reveal that demographic changes in the workforce did not correlate with variations in the total number of temporary workers. Instead, these analyses suggest that factors affecting employers account for the rise in temporary employment. One factor is product demand: temporary employment is favored by employers who are adapting to fluctuating demand for products while at the same time seeking to reduce overall labor costs. Another factor is labor’s reduced bargaining strength, which allows employers more control over the terms of employment. Given the analyses, which reveal that growth in temporary employment now far exceeds the level explainable by recent workforce entry rates of groups said to prefer temporary jobs, firms should be discouraged from creating excessive numbers of temporary positions. Government policymakers should consider mandating benefit coverage for temporary employees, promoting pay equity between temporary and permanent workers, assisting labor unions in organizing temporary workers, and encouraging firms to assign temporary jobs primarily to employees who explicitly indicate that preference.

一些观察者认为：八十年代美国临时性工作的突然增加是因为初进和再进工作岗位的人数增加。据说他们喜欢这种雇佣方式。然而数据分析显示，劳动人口统计数据的变化与从事临时性工作的总人数并没有相关性。一个原因是那些为适应产品需求不断波动的同时又想降低劳动力成本的雇主喜欢雇佣临时工人。另一个原因是雇员商讨力的减弱，这使雇主在雇佣问题上更有操纵权。以上分析表明：现在临时雇佣人数大为增加，已经远非喜欢这种雇佣方式的人的增加所能解释，应该阻止公司设立过多的临时职位。政府政策的制定者应该考虑保障临时雇员的利益，促进临时员工和长期员工的工资待遇平等，帮助工会组织临时雇员，并且鼓励公司将临时工作分配给那些真正喜欢临时工作的人。

pansy

10.In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held that the right to use waters flowing through or adjacent to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation was reserved to American Indians by the treaty establishing the reservation. Although this treaty did not mention water rights, the Court ruled that the federal government, when it created the reservation, intended to deal fairly with American Indians by reserving for them the waters without which their lands would have been useless. Later decisions, citing Winters, established that courts can find federal rights to reserve water for particular purposes if (1) the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction, (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands—i.e, withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws—and set aside or reserved, and (3) the circumstances reveal the government intended to reserve water as well as land when establishing the reservation.
  Some American Indians tribes have also established water rights through the courts based on their traditional diversion and use of certain waters prior to the United States’ acquisition of sovereignty. For example, the Rio Grande pueblos already existed when the United States acquired sovereignty over New Mexico in 1848. Although they at that time became part of the United States, the pueblo lands never formally constituted a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations. This fact, however, has mot barred application of the Winters doctrine. What constitutes an American Indian reservation is a question of practice, not of legal definition, and the pueblos have always been treated as reservations by the United States. This pragmatic approach is buttressed by Arizona v. California (1963), wherein the Supreme Court indicated that the manner in which any type of federal reservation is created does not affect the application to it of the Winters doctrine. Therefore, the reserved water rights of Pueblo Indians have priority over other citizens’ water rights as of 1848, the year in which pueblos must be considered to have become reservations.
在1908年的美国温特斯法案中，最高法院认定，贝克纳城堡印第安人保留地的印第安人使用流经或邻近该保留地水源的权利受建立此保留地的协约保护。尽管协约没有提及用水权，但是经法院裁定认为，联邦政府在建立保留地时，意在公平地对待美国印第安人，如果没有用水权，保留的土地也就没有用了。援引温特斯法案，后来规定在以下三种情况下，法院可以裁定联邦有权利因特殊目的保留水源。1、争议土地位于联邦管辖的印第安保留地中，2、这片土地已经正式脱离联邦公共用地，成为联邦土地使用法保护下的私人用地或留作它用，3、政府在建立保留地的同时有意图保留用水权。
基于美国独立之前他们就在使用的原有分水渠，一些美国印第安部落也通过法院确立了用水权。例如普韦布洛印第安人聚居地在1984年美国获得新墨西哥州统治权之前就已存在，尽管普韦布洛在1984年成了美国领土的一部分，在普韦布洛从未建立过联邦公共用地；从没有协约、法令或行政命令指明将普韦布洛脱离联邦政府作为保留地。然而这些事实并不影响温特斯法案在普韦布洛的适用性。事实上建立保留地只是一个实际操作问题，而不是法律定义的问题，因为普韦布洛一向被政府视作保留地。这种实际操作在1963年Arizona VS California的案例中得到支持，在该案例中最高法院表示保留地是通过何种方式建立起来的并不影响温特斯法案对它的适用性。因此，从1848年起，即普韦布洛被认定为保留地的那一年开始，普韦布洛部落的人就享有优先用水权。