ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2718|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD 31 Q4的讨论

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2010-10-12 18:55:19 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
看答案选的是B  我做题的时候也选了B
但是按照小安阅读法做的时候,感觉A是正确选项
望讨论

原文如下
The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which measures the dollar value of finished goods and services produced by an economy during a given period, serves as the chief indicator of the economic well-being of the United States. The GDP assumes that the economic significance of goods and services lies solely in their price, and that these goods and services add to the national well-being, not because of any intrinsic value they may possess, but simply because they were produced and bought.Additionally, only those goods and services involved in monetary transactions are included in the GDP. Thus, the GDP ignores the economic utility of such things as a clean environment and cohesive families and communities. It is therefore not merely coincidental, since national policies in capitalist and non-capitalist countries alike are dependent on indicators such as the GDP, that both the environment and the social structure have been eroded in recent decades. Not only does the GDP mask this erosion, it can actually portray it as an economic gain: an oil spill off a coastal region “adds” to the GDP because it generates commercial activity. In short, the nation’s central measure of economic well-being works like a calculating machine that adds but cannot subtract.

Q4:The passage implies that national policies that rely heavily on economic indicators such as the GDP tend to

我对于问题的翻译是这样的:
文章暗示国家严重依赖诸如GDP这样的的经济指标的政策是为了。。。
也就是说 that rely heavily on economic indicators such as the GDP 是policies的后置定语
那么就是在问政策的目的是什么?
结合文章说的起只涉及货币交易呀,erosion被当做gain只因为it generates commercial activity

感觉选项A :become increasingly capitalistic in nature  (国家)变得本质上更加资本主义不是挺对的


而选项B:disregard the economic importance of environmental and social factors that do not involve monetary transactions
忽视不存在于货币交易的环境社会因素的经济重要性是在形容GDP的,并不是问题所要问的内容啊

如果说tend后面是GDP的定语那主句就成了The passage implies that national policies  Does not make sense









收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-13 12:50:09 | 只看该作者
顶一下
板凳
发表于 2010-11-28 20:01:47 | 只看该作者
没看过小安阅读法所以抱歉不能从这方面回答

我的想法是A,没涉及到政策是否本质上变得更资本主义,你的理解不错,“erosion被当做gain只因为it generates commercial activity“, 但不要带入意识形态的东西哇,erosion被当作gain只因为it generates commerical activity的事儿咱社会主义国家也干呐!

B自然的就是呼应原文了,没什么还说的
地板
发表于 2012-7-26 14:23:58 | 只看该作者
感觉A不对。选项说become increasingly capitalistic in nature  ,变得更加资本主义,应该对何为资本主义有些解释吧,可原文只说了capitalist and non-capitalist countries alike ,资本主义并不是这段话的主题,所以感觉A选项偏了
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, 2025-12-9 13:22
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