ChaseDream
搜索
123下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 18361|回复: 20
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求助 翻译:大全-1-14

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-4-27 00:27:00 | 只看该作者

求助 翻译:大全-1-14

14.   Federal agricultural programs aimed at benefiting one group whose livelihood depends on farming often end up harming another such group.



Which of the following statements provides support for the claim above?



I.      An effort to help feed-grain producers resulted in higher prices for their crops, but the higher prices decreased the profits of livestock producers.



II.     In order to reduce crop surpluses and increase prices, growers of certain crops were paid to leave a portion of their land idle, but the reduction was not achieved because improvements in efficiency resulted in higher production on the land in use.



III.   Many farm workers were put out of work when a program meant to raise the price of grain provided grain growers with an incentive to reduce production by giving them surplus grain from government reserves.



(A) I, but not II and not III



(B) II, but not I and not III



(C) I and III, but not II



(D) II and III, but not IC



(E) I, II and III


这题偶理解的意思是:政府的经济支持帮了一个群体连累了另一个群体。 但是提干中的end up harming another such group,直译是:结束了伤害另一个这样的群体。这和偶的理解相反,但原文应是第一种理解方式,请教偶的翻译错在什么地方?





沙发
发表于 2004-4-27 00:41:00 | 只看该作者
end up doing sth....  表示结果如何,不是结束。翻译的不好,大意如此。 建议楼主下载longman, 看英文解释。很清楚的。
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-4-27 01:21:00 | 只看该作者
谢谢!
地板
发表于 2005-2-21 18:59:00 | 只看该作者

那请问III该怎么翻译呢???

III.   Many farm workers were "put out of work" when a program meant to raise the price of grain provided grain growers with an incentive to reduce production by giving them surplus grain from government reserves.

是说”想降低产量来提高价钱,却又补助政府的存粮”吗


5#
发表于 2005-4-30 13:06:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用huawang在2005-2-21 18:59:00的发言:

那请问III该怎么翻译呢???



III.   Many farm workers were "put out of work" when a program meant to raise the price of grain provided grain growers with an incentive to reduce production by giving them surplus grain from government reserves.

是说”想降低产量来提高价钱,却又补助政府的存粮”吗




本来想通过利用政府的粮食储备来减少产量从而使粮食的价格提高,却没想到让很多农民失业了。

6#
发表于 2005-4-30 15:20:00 | 只看该作者
请问第3项为什么正确。
原题说,政府benefit one farming group结果导致harm another suchgroup。而在第3各选项中,grain growers是政府帮助的group,而伤害到的是many farmworkers.我的理解是many fram workers和grain growers 属于一个相同的farminggroup,政府的帮助法呢绕指了他们的失业。所以,第3个选项不好理解为什么是正确的。
不知道我的理解是否正确,请指教。谢谢
7#
发表于 2005-5-29 13:19:00 | 只看该作者
我这么理解:

3:  grain growers是农场主,farm workers是长工。由于政府的补贴,grain grower不需要种粮食了,也就不需要那么多farm workers了。



8#
发表于 2005-5-29 19:18:00 | 只看该作者

支持sensornet!


many workers这个概念本身就不明确,无法把many workers 和grain grower相区分开。


因此,我选A。

9#
发表于 2005-8-6 00:48:00 | 只看该作者

请问feed-grain producer就是livestock producers? 还是depend on farming?

10#
发表于 2005-8-6 01:00:00 | 只看该作者

问feed-grain producer就是livestock producers


嗯,因该是两种群体。


而且是种饲料什么的……


饲料价格上涨了,那么养牲畜的就倒霉啦

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-9-6 06:47
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部