prep1 essay 13,求救啊！

天叉包子

大家帮忙看看吧

Comparable worth, as a standard applied to eliminate inequities in pay, insists that the values of certain tasks performed in dissimilar jobs can be compared.  In the last decade, this approach has become a critical social policy issue, as large numbers of private-sector firms and industries as well as federal, state, and local governmental entities have adopted comparable worth policies or begun to consider doing so.

This widespread institutional awareness of comparable worth indicates increased public awareness that pay inequities--that is, situations in which pay is not "fair" because it does not reflect the true value of a job--exist in the labor market.  However, the question still remains:  have the gains already made in pay equity under comparable worth principles been of a precedent-setting nature or are they mostly transitory, a function of concessions made by employers to mislead female employees into believing that they have made long-term pay equity gains?

Comparable worth pay adjustments are indeed precedent-setting.  Because of the principles driving them, other mandates that can be applied to reduce or eliminate unjustified pay gaps between male and female workers have not remedied perceived pay inequities satisfactorily for the litigants in cases in which men and women hold different jobs.  But whenever comparable worth principles are applied to pay schedules, perceived unjustified pay differences are eliminated.  In this sense, then, comparable worth is more comprehensive than other mandates, such as the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Neither compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational categories) in an effort to determine whether or not what is necessary to perform these tasks--know-how, problem-solving, and accountability--can be quantified in terms of its dollar value to the employer.  Comparable worth, on the other hand, takes as its premise that certain tasks in dissimilar jobs may require a similar amount of training, effort, and skill; may carry similar responsibility; may be carried on in an environment having a similar impact upon the worker; and may have a similar dollar value to the employer.

Q43:
Which of the following most accurately states the central purpose of the passage?

A.    To criticize the implementation of a new procedure
B.    To assess the significance of a change in policy
C.    To illustrate how a new standard alters procedures
D.    To explain how a new policy is applied in specific cases
E.    To summarize the changes made to date as a result of social policy

这篇文章答案给的是B，怎么也没看明白，看了以前的帖子，发现也没个定论，这里的change哪里体现了啊，有没有童鞋能给我讲讲这篇文章的思路，不胜感激啊！

天叉包子

刚刚自己又看了一遍，好像有点明白但不知道对不对，说出来跟大家分析，也求各位帮帮忙指正一下，给我分析分析，让我理解的透彻些，怎么读都感觉这篇有些迷茫

第一段：CW： insists that the values of certain tasks performed in dissimilar jobs can be compared
             因为private firm和industries都adopt it，所以他成为了critical policy
第二段：这种现象反映了人们越来越多的认识到pay不公平的存在
             However, 问题依旧存在：到底这个CW是precedent-setting(PS),还是一种mislead（这段算是对CW的质
            疑）
第三段：CW pay adjustment（是不是就是B选项所谓的change） 肯定是PS的（肯定他是好的）
            对比：其他的方案因为本身principles的原因，并没有remedied perceived pay inequities对于不同工作中
                      的男女
             BUT，这点CW解决了（再次说他好）
             因此，CW比其他（举了两个例子）更comprehensive，（讲了为什么，这个句子不懂：Neither
             compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational categories) in an effort to determine
            whether or not what is necessary to perform these tasks--know-how, problem-solving, and
            accountability--can be quantified in terms of its dollar value to the employer.我的理解是，后面这两个与
            CW相比的例子，没有一个将对于完成工作重要的那些方面量化为dollar value）

以上就是我的理解，不知道1、那个第三段开头，CW pay adjustment是不是B选项的change
                                         2、Neither compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational
                                              categories) in an effort to determine whether or not what is necessary to perform
                                              these tasks--know-how, problem-solving, and accountability--can be quantified in
                                              terms of its dollar value to the employer怎么翻译啊！

恳请各位指点啊！

supercury

价值比较法被用来消除薪酬的不平等。在过去的十年，很多公司都已经采用或正在考虑采用这种方法。【change】
价值比较法确实是开创性的。因为其它方法解决的不满意。价值比较法比其它方法更全面。【assess】

天叉包子

啊，厉害厉害，一语道破啊，
再问一下：
Neither compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational categories) in an effort to determine whether or not what is necessary to perform these tasks--know-how, problem-solving, and accountability--can be quantified in terms of its dollar value to the employer怎么翻译啊！

supercury

不要试图通过比较不同工种的工作，以确定【完成这些工作所需要的技能-专业知识、解决问题能力、责任心】是否可以量化成金钱。
Neither compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational categories) in an effort to determine whether or not 【what is necessary to perform these tasks--know-how, problem-solving, and accountability--】can be quantified in terms of its dollar value to the employer

天叉包子

谢谢你的回答啊，不过我有一点不太明白
本句开头是Neither而不是never，而且后面what is necessary应该是确定的重要宾语，那要和（-）部分一起隔开吗？

不过这个翻译给了我极大的启示啊，好像有点看明白了，是不是说：

such as后面的那两个公司都没有试图去通过比较不同工种的工作，以确定那些完成这些工作的技能【专业知识、解决问题的能力、责任心】是否可以量化成金钱。

可是可能因为我对文章理解还有欠缺，我想问一下这个Neither指的是我所理解的such as后面的两个policy， 还是把such as后面两个看成整体，Neither指这个整体和CW啊！

rucstarchan

给你贴个，希望有帮助~
题目释义： 主旨题目
   考点：主旨（Main idea）   
  旨在考察我们对文章整体的把握程度，对文章的结构的分析能力和把控能力，以及对作者逻辑的
判断。
  作者的逻辑意思是要说明“可比价值”是已经变为了一个社会的策略。所有的后文都是在评价这个策略比之于其他的策略或以前有什么特别或优势。
选项分析：
A.    评价一个新的步骤的实施。不管这里“criticize”是评价还是批评，“Comparable worth”都不是一个步骤，而是一个社会策略。
B.    Correct。评价（确定）一个策略变化的意义。这里要首先注意，“significance”可以是“意义”的意思。文中没有说这个策略有多么重要，但是评价了它的意义。很多筒子有疑问“change”在哪里？其实是在一开始就说明了，上个10年，这个策略才被实行。那么也就是说，策略在上个十年从“其他的”策略变为了“可比价值”策略。文章正是要说明这个变化的意义。
C.    说明一个新标准如何替代一个步骤。文中没有提到过新的标准。
D.    解释一个新的策略是如何被应用到了一个特殊的情况下的。文中没有提及特殊情况，当然，作者通篇也没有讲述应用的过程。
E.    总结社会政策（实施）到目前为止带来的变化。这个比较来说是很好排除的。作者没有总结的意思。

天叉包子

有帮助有帮助，讲的很清楚啊，这个题现在是基本明白了，呵呵！
可是原谅我的较真，我还是很想知道我上面的那句话翻译的对不对啊~~有木有NN来帮忙！！！

okay325

回复 4# 天叉包子


    这句话的翻译要结合前句来进行。前面举了两个例子：

·
In this sense, then, comparable worth is more comprehensive than other mandates, such as the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Neither compares tasks in dissimilar jobs (that is, jobs across occupational categories) in an effort to determine whether or not what is necessary to perform these tasks--know-how, problem-solving, and accountability--can be quantified in terms of its dollar value to the employer。

·
也就是说，相对财富政策要比其他的政策全面，比如：EPA 1963 和 CRA 1964. 这两者（neither）没有通过比较不同工作中的工作任务来判断这些工作中的一些重要的因素－比如：掌握知识的程度，解决问题的能力，可靠性等，是否可以被量化为相对于雇主的金钱价值。