杨继22（OG－10）搜索未果

mariewoo

PASSAGE 22
* Many United
States companies have, unfortunately,made the search for legal protection from
import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States
International Trade Commission
ITC)
5) has received about 280
complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by
foreigngovernments. Another 340 charge that foreign compa-nies "dumped" their
products in the United States at "less than fair value." Even when no unfair
practices
10)
            are alleged, the simple claim that an industry
has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief.
*Contrary
to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies
than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they
15)
develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research
relationships, The complexity of these relation-ships makes it unlikely that a
system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units
underthe same parent company.
*
20) Internationalization
increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against
the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United
States-owned company establishes an overseasplant to manufacture a product while
its competitor
25) makes the same product in the United States. If
thecompetitor can prove injury from the imports---andthat the United States
company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant
abroad—theUnited States
company's products will be uncompeti-
30)
            tive in the United
States, since they would be subject to duties.
* Perhaps the most brazen
case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were
injuring the United States salt industry by dumping
35) rock salt,
used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of thecomplaint was that a foreign
conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United
States company with foreign operations. The "United States" company claiming
injury was a subsidiary of a
40) Dutch conglomerate, while the
"Canadian" companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the
second-largest domestic producer of rock salt.

        

7. According to the passage, companies have the generalimpression that
International Trade Commission importrelief practices have
(A) caused
unpredictable fluctuations in volumes ofimports and exports
(B) achieved
their desired effect only under unusualcircumstances
(C) actually helped
companies that have requestedimport relief
(D) been opposed by the business
community
(E) had less impact on international companies than thebusiness
community expected

    

8. According to the passage, the International TradeCommission is
involved in which of the following?
(A) Investigating allegations of unfair
importcompetition
(B) Granting subsidies to companies in the United
Statesthat have been injured by import competition
(C) Recommending
legislation to ensure fair
(D) Identifying international corporations that
wish tobuild plants in the United States
(E) Assisting corporations in the
United States that wishto compete globally

这篇文章是10thOG－10，这两题是杨继里多出来的，答案分别是C、A

第
七题，我的定位是文中标红处，既然on the contrary。。。答案应该取反说ITC achieve the desired
effect，那这样的话我觉得B跟文章对应的更好一些，不过又觉得B后面那个only。。。怪怪的，可是C又不像是取反得来的呀，请指教！

第八题我错选了B，牛牛给翻译一下吧，granting subsidies to companies...是不是说给那些在US的公司money补助，跟文意不符？

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-8-21 13:55:01编辑过]

mariewoo

顶

安如夏

你帮助到我了第7题，第八题我是这么理解的，定位至第一段的最后Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief.
（1）ITC并没有直接给subsidy，而是import relief，可是设定一些法律啊之类的行为。这两者并不是等号的。
（2）根据第一段最后一句，ITC的主要职责是判定是否本地企业是否受到进口的影响，如果有就给它们relief。
所以，最主要的还是AInvestigating allegations of unfair importcompetition,是否有不公平竞争。