ChaseDream
标题: OG13 Q120-127 翻译 Jon Clark's study of the effect of the modernization [打印本页]
作者: jinnuhong 时间: 2013-8-19 14:50
标题: OG13 Q120-127 翻译 Jon Clark's study of the effect of the modernization
参考了CD上以前的讨论试着翻译了一下, 蓝色部分是不确定的, 想跟大家讨论一下
CLARK对电信交换的现代化影响的研究是一个可信任的贡献,对于一个争论—包含两个真实的问题:技术决定论或社会构建论.
CLARK认为, 对工作技能和工作结构, 技术的物质有着决定性的影响. 话说白了就是,对于社会和管理结构, 技术可以是一个主要的决定性因素. CLARK相信这种可能性已经被强调机器反应社会选择的社会学流派搞模糊了, 例如B的分析. B认为, 科技系统的构架是次要的, 相比于管理者的欲望去从工人那里夺取labor process. 技术的改变是多个有兴趣的组织们在寻求结合他们的兴趣和机械设计和配置的一种产物. 这种观点代表着新主流- 称为社会构建论.
构建论学者通过歪曲技决定论来得到认可:例如, 技术决定论者假定去相信: 机器施加适当的规则形式影响给社会. 换句话说, 可替代社会构建论的观点视技术为脱离社会的一种存在, 能够直接影响技能和工作结构.(但CLARK说技术是决定性因素)
CLARK通过理论和经验的两方面论证反驳结构学家的极端观点. 理论上,他定义技术是社会和技术变量的一个关系. 把科技的意义简化为冰冷,坚固的金属的企图是失败的, 因为机械不过是碎片,除非是被功能性的组织起来, 并且由适当的操作系统和维护所支持. 从 经验上,CLARK展示了电信交换的(从维护密集型机电转换到半电子交换系统)转换如何改变工作内容, 技能, 培训机会,管理, 工作人员的组织. CLARK把一些变化归因为管理层和工会组织协商技术引进的一种特殊的方式,另一些则视为科技自身的自然性质和性能的一种体现. 所以CLARK帮助回答了问题:何时社会选择是决定性的,何时科技坚定特性更重要.
作者: jinnuhong 时间: 2013-8-19 15:04
125. According to the passage, constructivists employed which of the following to promote their argument?
(A) Empirical studies of business situations involving technological change
(B) Citation of managers supportive of their position
(C) Construction of hypothetical situations that support their view
(D) Contrasts of their view with a misstatement of an opposing view
(E) Descriptions of the breadth of impact of technological change
OA: D
我知道这个选项来自于 The constructivists gain acceptance by misrepresenting technological determinism
contrast sth. with sth. 意思是 与…形成对比；和…相对照
(D) Contrasts of their view with a misstatement of an opposing view: 通过对比他们的观点和一个反对观点的误述.
这个成立吗？？？？我觉得应该是通过employ a s misstatement to promote their argument.
作者: jinnuhong 时间: 2013-8-19 15:05
full context
Jon Clark’s study of the effect of
the modernization of a telephone
exchange on exchange maintenance
work and workers is a solid contribution
(5) to a debate that encompasses two
lively issues in the history and sociology of technology: technological
determinism and social constructivism.
Clark makes the point that the char-
(10) acteristics of a technology have a
decisive influence on job skills and
work organization. Put more strongly,
technology can be a primary determinant
of social and managerial organ-
(15) ization. Clark believes this possibility
has been obscured by the recent sociological
fashion, exemplified by
Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes
the way machinery reflects social
(20) choices. For Braverman, the shape of
a technological system is subordinate
to the manager’s desire to wrest control
of the labor process from the
workers. Technological change is
(25) construed as the outcome of negotiations
among interested parties who
seek to incorporate their own interests
into the design and configuration of the
machinery. This position represents
(30) the new mainstream called social constructivism.
The constructivists gain acceptance
by misrepresenting technological determinism:
technological determinists are
(35) supposed to believe, for example, that
machinery imposes appropriate forms
of order on society. The alternative to
constructivism, in other words, is to
view technology as existing outside
(40) society, capable of directly influencing
skills and work organization.
Clark refutes the extremes of the
constructivists by both theoretical and
empirical arguments. Theoretically he
(45) defines “technology” in terms of relationships
between social and technical
variables. Attempts to reduce the
meaning of technology to cold, hard
metal are bound to fail, for machinery
(50) is just scrap unless it is organized
functionally and supported by appropriate
systems of operation and maintenance. At the empirical level Clark
shows how a change at the telephone
(55) exchange from maintenance-intensive
electromechanical switches to semielectronic
switching systems altered
work tasks, skills, training opportunities,
administration, and organization of
(60) workers. Some changes Clark attributes
to the particular way management
and labor unions negotiated the introduction
of the technology, whereas
others are seen as arisi
Jon Clark’s study of the effect of
the modernization of a telephone
exchange on exchange maintenance
work and workers is a solid contribution
(5) to a debate that encompasses two
lively issues in the history and sociology of technology: technological
determinism and social constructivism.
Clark makes the point that the char-
(10) acteristics of a technology have a
decisive influence on job skills and
work organization. Put more strongly,
technology can be a primary determinant
of social and managerial organ-
(15) ization. Clark believes this possibility
has been obscured by the recent sociological
fashion, exemplified by
Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes
the way machinery reflects social
(20) choices. For Braverman, the shape of
a technological system is subordinate
to the manager’s desire to wrest control
of the labor process from the
workers. Technological change is
(25) construed as the outcome of negotiations
among interested parties who
seek to incorporate their own interests
into the design and configuration of the
machinery. This position represents
(30) the new mainstream called social constructivism.
The constructivists gain acceptance
by misrepresenting technological determinism:
technological determinists are
(35) supposed to believe, for example, that
machinery imposes appropriate forms
of order on society. The alternative to
constructivism, in other words, is to
view technology as existing outside
(40) society, capable of directly influencing
skills and work organization.
Clark refutes the extremes of the
constructivists by both theoretical and
empirical arguments. Theoretically he
(45) defines “technology” in terms of relationships
between social and technical
variables. Attempts to reduce the
meaning of technology to cold, hard
metal are bound to fail, for machinery
(50) is just scrap unless it is organized
functionally and supported by appropriate
systems of operation and maintenance.
At the empirical level Clark
shows how a change at the telephone
(55) exchange from maintenance-intensive
electromechanical switches to semielectronic
switching systems altered
work tasks, skills, training opportunities,
administration, and organization of
(60) workers. Some changes Clark attributes
to the particular way management
and labor unions negotiated the introduction
of the technology, whereas
others are seen as arising from the
(65) capabilities and nature of the technology
itself. Thus Clark helps answer
the question: “When is social choice
decisive and when are the concrete
characteristics of technology more
important?”
ng from the
(65) capabilities and nature of the technology
itself. Thus Clark helps answer
the question: “When is social choice
decisive and when are the concrete
characteristics of technology more
important?”
作者: jinnuhong 时间: 2013-8-21 21:12
up Q125. still waiting....
作者: jinnuhong 时间: 2013-8-22 17:23
Hi, U guys, drop me a line~ 
作者: suapplle 时间: 2013-12-18 17:26
我觉得在给出的选项中，D选项是最合适的了，我比较纠结123和127题...等牛牛解答...
作者: 一粒黄豆。 时间: 2013-12-22 13:09
看了这位nn的翻译以后我恍然大悟 有的文章不管用中文来表述还是英文表述 咱都是看不懂的 所以。。。还是走技术流吧
作者: hedy.zhang 时间: 2014-4-28 21:33
开始我也觉得看不懂，后来看了大牛翻译也看不懂，就自己看文章~~
静下心来，逻辑关系是一定能够理顺的！
作者: joannahope 时间: 2014-8-22 16:09
好像最后一句话翻译的不太好 那个concrete 翻译成 具体的 要更好一点，因为前面都有is 了 所以要用形容词词性 我理解 为何时具体的科技特性更重要 文章看完翻译以后收获很大 几处不通的地方也明白了
作者: PhoenixPenn 时间: 2014-10-13 10:26
contrast是对的
首先，TD与Cons是opposing对立的，Cons先是misrepresent曲解了TD的观点，这样就形成了a misstatement of an opposing view，然后Cons再去contrast反驳这个曲解的观点，用这种伎俩为自己赢得声誉。
主要是文中这句话太难理解了“The alternative to constructivism, in other words”…
作者: PhoenixPenn 时间: 2014-10-13 10:48
JC 在针对Telephone Exchange的现代化对维护工作和工人的影响的研究中，阐述了Technological Determinism “技术决定论”与Social Constructivism.“社会构建论”之间的矛盾
JC 相信技术的种种特性对skills工作技能及work organization工作模式有决定性影响，且本可以成为社会或管理结构的决定因素。但老B的新流派阻碍了这个趋势。老B他强调机器仅仅反应了社会的选择，Technological System只是管理者控制工人的工具，或利益集团追逐利益的基础工作， 这便是Social Constructivism。
Constructivists为获得认同而曲解了TD：TDs are supposed to believe本认为机械能以适当的形式改变社会规范。而这点到了Cons的嘴里，就变成了“是技术，而不是人，改变了社会进程。（直译：直接影响了工作技能及模式）
C哥从理论和实际两方面反驳了Cons。从理论上，C哥定义technology是社会与技术之间千丝万缕的联系，机械需要人类使用和维护，而Cons将其定义为单纯地的金属是明显错误的。从实际上，C哥展示了TE的变革影响了工人的各种方面（work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers）。这样的变化既归因工人与管理层的谈判，也得益于能力与技术自然提升。因此，C哥很好地回答了"When is social choice decisive and when are the concrete characteristics of technology more important?"
也献上一个小总结
作者: ET游戏狂 时间: 2014-12-7 15:56
PhoenixPenn 发表于 2014-10-13 10:48 
JC 在针对Telephone Exchange的现代化对维护工作和工人的影响的研究中，阐述了Technological Determinism ...
你的GMAT考得很好吧？这么难的文章都能翻译的这么好！
作者: PhoenixPenn 时间: 2015-1-24 13:49
ET游戏狂 发表于 2014-12-7 15:56
你的GMAT考得很好吧？这么难的文章都能翻译的这么好！
过奖了小哥，做过点业余翻译罢了
GMAT跟翻译肯定没关系，全是feeling，跟着感觉走就好
作者: lishi2015 时间: 2015-3-25 21:02
我感觉这篇实在是好难
作者: cristam 时间: 2015-7-19 22:02
Mark一下！
作者: 请救非洲大象 时间: 2016-6-19 18:45
请教各位大神一个问题：
原文中的这句话的结构应该怎么理解？
Some changes Clark attributes to the particular way management and labor unions negotiated the introduction of the technology, whereas others are seen as arising from the capabilities and nature of the technology itself.
句意我能够理解，但是结构上总感觉不太对：whereas的逗号前面本来应该是一个句子，为什么这里只有一个短语 some changes 呢？
谢谢大家～
作者: 请救非洲大象 时间: 2016-6-19 18:51
自己顶一下～
作者: Nievesma 时间: 2016-7-21 00:59
我试着回复一下，正在研究这篇文章，如果来得及，可以一起讨论。
刚开始看我也觉得有些别扭，你可以调整下词的顺序，如下所示：
Clark（主语）attributes(谓语) some changes （宾语）to the particular way {management and labor unions negotiated the introduction of the technology} (修饰the particular way),whereas others(other changes 主语) are seen.....不知道这样是不是能更好理解了
作者: 请救非洲大象 时间: 2016-7-21 12:32
蟹蟹蟹～好棒呀！虽然我已经考出来分手啦，不过这句话我突然懂了好开心！加油！
作者: 请救非洲大象 时间: 2016-7-21 12:37
而且我觉得 some changes 提前的原因，正是因为whereas 这个词！sc里面不是很要要求whereas 引导句子的话前后主语或者句式一样吗？所以倒也可以理解～
作者: Loreena0106 时间: 2016-9-26 21:16
同意！
作者: jennywho 时间: 2017-1-21 02:41
这篇文章还是有几个地方不是很懂：
1. 我大致上的理解是technological determinism和social constructivism的区别是：TD认为是科技影响了社会秩序和人的工作模式，而SC认为科技的改变是反过来受了管理层决策的影响。但是后面的题目又让我觉得不是这样，这其中又有一些细微的差别。具体看下面几点。
2. 这段话我没有看懂是什么意思
"The constructivists gain acceptance by misrepresenting technological determinism: technological determinists are supposed to believe, for example, that machinery imposes appropriate forms of order on society. The alternative to constructivism, in other words, is to view technology as existing outside society, capable of directly influencing skills and work organization."
a) 哪一点才是SC曲解的TD，是machinery imposes appropriate forms of order on society，还是to view technology as existing outside society, capable of directly influencing skills and work organization？如果是后者的话，为什么126题“The author of the passage uses the expression "are supposed to" in line 27 primarily in order to" OG对于B (define the generally accepted position of determinists regarding the implementation of technology) 的解释是"...and follows this claim with an example of this misrepresentation, stating that' technological determinists are supposed to believe, for example'..."
b) "to view technology as existing outside society, capable of directly influencing skills and work organization."到底是什么意思，它和TD真正意义上的区别在哪里？
3. 123题"The information in the passage suggests that which of the following statements from hypothetical sociological studies of change in industry most clearly exemplifies the social constructivists' version of technological determinism?"
a) 参看第一点，我认为technological determinism和social constructivism的区别是：TD认为是科技影响了社会秩序和人的工作模式，而SC认为科技的改变是反过来受了管理层决策的影响。但是为什么说SD认为TD的理论是available technology that determines worker's skills就是曲解了TD的意思呢？是这里我们要区分order on society和worker's skills?
b) 答案A中还加了一句"...rather than worker's skills influencing the application of technology"我认为这是SC的观点，为什么这里变成了SD认为的TD的观点？也是因为要区分overall management and operation和worker's skills吗？
4. 127题为什么A不对。是因为不能直接判断Clark做这个研究的目的是为了undermine Braverman's analysis of the function of technology吗？
作者: zizihuang 时间: 2017-2-3 12:41
同意！
作者: zizihuang 时间: 2017-2-3 12:41
同意！
作者: zizihuang 时间: 2017-2-3 13:03
顶楼主！
作者: gongxiaorong 时间: 2017-3-7 03:51
Mark一下！
作者: SUSUWH 时间: 2017-7-24 12:35
J C 关于交换维护工作和工人间电信交换现代化影响的研究，为围绕历史和社会的技术论两个实在问题的辩论提供了坚实的贡献，这两个问题分别为：技术决定论和社会构建论。
C提及的重点是，技术特性是影响工作技能和工作制度的决定性因素。更有力的解释是，技术可以是社会和经管制度的首要决定因素。C认为这种可能性已经被近期的社会学风潮所掩盖，例如 B 的分析，他过分强调了机械反映社会选择的方式。对于 B，技术系统的形态是从属于管理者渴求，即从工人手中夺取劳动工序的控制权。技术的改变作为那些试图将自己的利益融合到机械的设计和组合当中利益相关方谈判的结果。这个观点是新主流的代表，被称为社会构建主义。
构建主义者通过扭曲技术决定论获得应可，他们说技术决定论相信，例如，机械把适当的制度形式强制实施于社会。换句话说，替代社会构建论的是把技术论看作存在于社会之外，可以直接影响技能和工作制度的。
C 同时在理论和实践两个方面驳斥极端的构建主义者。理论上，他把技术定义为社会和技术变量的关系。试图把技术的含义简化为冰冷的硬金属注定要失败的，因为机械只是零散的碎片，除非被功能性地组织起来和得到恰当的系统去运作与维护。在实践层面，C 展示了电信交换怎么从维护密集型机电转换到半电子转换系统来改变工作任务、技能、培训机会、管理和工人制度。C 把一些改变归因于管理和劳动组织谈判引进技术这种特殊方式，而其他人认为改变是由技术本身的功能和性质产生的。因此，C 可以帮助回答这个问题，什么时候是社会选择决定，什么时候是技术的具体特性起重要作用。
作者: xiyuzisu 时间: 2018-2-1 10:51
B认为, 科技系统的构架是次要的, 更重要的是管理者们渴望从工人们那儿重夺对劳动过程的控制
我稍微改了一下，感谢楼主
作者: 小陈冲鸭 时间: 2018-9-18 21:03
你好！！我想请教一下
Which of the following statements about Clark`s study of the telephone exchange can be inferred from information in the passage?
A Clark`s reason for undertaking the study was to undermine Braverman`s analysis of the function of technology.
B Clark`s study suggests that the implementation of technology should be discussed in the context of conflict between labor and management.
C Clark examined the impact of changes in the technology of switching at the exchange in terms of overall operations and organization.
D Clark concluded that the implementation of new switching technology was equally beneficial to management and labor.
E Clark`s analysis of the change in switching systems applies only narrowly to the situation at the particular exchange that he studied.
E是如何排除的？！谢谢大神！！
作者: Ivy蓝蓝蓝蓝 时间: 2018-11-11 12:12
同意！
作者: 贝西文迅 时间: 2019-8-27 10:51
misrepresent TD：后面两个都是SC对TD的误读，翻译过来就是，例如，在SC看来，TD是持有机器impose社会秩序的一群人。换言之（In other words）这种作为建构主义替代的观点（指的是被SC误解的TD的观点），认为技术独立存在于社会之外，能够直接作用于工作能力和组织结构。
作者: 雲翔 时间: 2019-9-16 18:22
真心难过OG19也有，我都全部翻译一次，然后做题还是错一半
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |