• 2026考研英語(yǔ)全程班 6班
• 2027考研全科上岸規(guī)劃營(yíng)「擇校▪規(guī)劃▪備考」
• 2026考研專業(yè)課復(fù)習(xí)資料「真題▪筆記▪講義▪題庫(kù)」

1. Priestly explains how the deep bluecolor of the assistant’s sweater descended over the years from fashion shows todepartment stores and to the bargain bin in which the poor girl doubtless foundher garment.(2013 T1 P1)

翻譯：Priestly解釋了她的女助理身穿的那件毛衣的深藍(lán)色多年來(lái)是怎樣從T臺(tái)淪落到百貨商店,又如何從百貨商店淪落到打折區(qū)中, 毫無(wú)疑問(wèn),這個(gè)可憐的姑娘最后在這里(打折區(qū))淘到了它。(2013 T1 P1)

2. This top-down conception of thefashion business couldn’t be more out of date or at odds with the feverishworld described in Overdressed, Elizabeth Cline’s three-year indictment of“fast fashion”. (2013 T1 P2)

翻譯：這個(gè)時(shí)尚業(yè)自上而下的概念太過(guò)時(shí)了,或者說(shuō)它和Elizabeth Cline在《過(guò)度著裝》(Elizabeth Cline用三年時(shí)間所寫的對(duì)于“快時(shí)尚”的控訴)一書中所描述的狂熱世界大相徑庭。(2013 T1 P2)

3.In December 2010 America’s FederalTrade Commission (FTC) proposed adding a “do not track” (DNT) option tointernet browsers, so that users could tell advertisers that they did not wantto be followed.(2013 T2 P3)

翻譯：2010年12月,美國(guó)聯(lián)邦貿(mào)易委員會(huì)提議在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)瀏覽器中添加一個(gè)“禁止追蹤”的選項(xiàng),這樣用戶可以告知廣告商們他們不想被追蹤。(2013 T2 P3)

4. Unable to tell whether someonereally objects to behavioural ads or whether they are sticking with Microsoft’sdefault, some may ignore a DNT signal and press on anyway. (2013 T2 P6)

翻譯：由于無(wú)法判斷人們是真的反對(duì)行為廣告還是他們堅(jiān)持使用微軟瀏覽器的默認(rèn)設(shè)置,一些廣告商可能會(huì)忽視“禁止追蹤” 的標(biāo)簽,繼續(xù)追蹤(人們的網(wǎng)上痕跡)。(2013 T2 P6)

5. If it is trying to upset Google, which relies almost wholly on advertising, ithas chosen an indirect method: There is no guarantee that DNT by default willbecome the norm. (2013 T2 P7)

翻譯：如果微軟試圖擊敗幾乎完全依靠廣告業(yè)務(wù)的谷歌,那么它選擇了一個(gè)并不直接的方法: 我們無(wú)法保證把“禁止追蹤”作為默認(rèn)設(shè)置會(huì)成為行業(yè)準(zhǔn)則。(2013 T2 P7)

6. Look up Homo sapiens in the “Red List” of threatenedspecies of the International Union for the Conversation of Nature (IUCN) andyou will read: “Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widelydistributed, adaptable, currently increasing, and there are no major threatsresulting in an overall population decline.”(2013 T3 P3)

翻譯：在國(guó)際自然保護(hù)聯(lián)盟的“瀕危物種紅色名單”中查閱“智人” 這一條目,你會(huì)看到:“因?yàn)榇宋锓N分布廣泛,適應(yīng)性強(qiáng),目前數(shù)量正在不斷增加, 并且沒(méi)有導(dǎo)致該物種數(shù)量下降的主要威脅, 因此該物種被列為了無(wú)危物種。”(2013 T3 P3)

7. As so often, the past holds the key to the future: wehave now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of theplanet, and our species, to make evidence-based forecasts about the situationsin which our descendants will find themselves.(2013 T3 P6)

翻譯：正如很多時(shí)候,過(guò)去掌握著通往未來(lái)的鑰匙:我們現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)對(duì)塑造地球和歷史的長(zhǎng)期模式有了很充分的認(rèn)識(shí),我們可以以此為依據(jù)來(lái)預(yù)測(cè)我們子孫后代的生存環(huán)境。(2013 T3 P6)

8. The Constitutional principles that Washington alonehas the power to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization” and that federallaws precede state laws are noncontroversial.(2013 T4 P2)

翻譯：憲法規(guī)定只有華盛頓政府有權(quán)利去“制定統(tǒng)一的入籍規(guī)則”,以及聯(lián)邦法律優(yōu)先于州法律,這兩項(xiàng)都是毋庸置疑的。(2013 T4 P2)

9. The Administration was in essence asserting thatbecause it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes, no stateshould be allowed to do so either. (2013 T4 P7)

翻譯：政府實(shí)質(zhì)上一直聲稱因?yàn)樽约翰⒉幌雸?zhí)行國(guó)會(huì)的移民意愿,所以它(政府)也不允許任何州這樣做。(2013 T4 P7)

10. On first hearing, this was the socially concernedchancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with “reforms” toan obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newlyunemployed to find work, and subsidises laziness. (2014 T1 P2)

翻譯：乍一聽(tīng),這是一位關(guān)心民生的財(cái)政大臣正試著去幫人們改善生活,包括去“改革”一個(gè)明顯縱容的社會(huì)(福利)系統(tǒng), 它對(duì)新失業(yè)者要求甚少并且還滋生懶惰。(2014 T1 P2)

11. What motivated him, we were to understand, was hiszeal for “fundamental fairness”— protecting the taxpayer, controlling spendingand ensuring that only the most deserving claimants received their benefits. (2014 T1 P2)

翻譯：然而我們要明白,他的動(dòng)機(jī)是源自于對(duì) “基本公平”的熱情—保護(hù)納稅人,控制開(kāi)銷并且確保只有那些最應(yīng)得的救濟(jì)的申請(qǐng)者才能申領(lǐng)救濟(jì)金。(2014 T1 P2)

12. There is pressure for change from within theprofession, but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keepingoutsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make moneyrather than serve clients ethically. (2014 T2 P5)

翻譯：行業(yè)內(nèi)部也有改革的壓力,但是反對(duì)改革的管理者堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為禁止外人(外部資金) 進(jìn)入律師事務(wù)所使得律師遠(yuǎn)離賺錢的壓力, 而按照職業(yè)道德更好地為客戶服務(wù)。(2014 T2 P5)

13. In fact, allowing non-lawyers to own shares in lawfirms would reduce costs and improve services to customers, by encouraging lawfirms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus onimproving firms’ efficiency. (2014 T2 P6)

翻譯：實(shí)際上,通過(guò)律所運(yùn)用新的技術(shù), 招募致力于提升公司效率的職業(yè)經(jīng)理人, 允許非律師擁有律師事務(wù)所的股份,將會(huì)降低成本,提升服務(wù)(質(zhì)量)。(2014 T2 P6)

14. There is just one path for a lawyer in most Americanstates: a four-year undergraduate degree in some unrelated subject, then athree- year law degree at one of 200 law schools authorized by the American BarAssociation and an expensive preparation for the bar exam. (2014 T2 P3)

翻譯：在美國(guó)的絕大多數(shù)州想成為律師只有一條途徑: 首先在(與法律專業(yè))不相關(guān)的專業(yè)讀四年本科,然后在經(jīng)過(guò)美國(guó)律師協(xié)會(huì)授權(quán)的200所法學(xué)院中讀 3 年的法學(xué)學(xué)位,并且再花巨資準(zhǔn)備律師資格考試。(2014 T2 P3)

15. But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipientsper prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by thecollaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by theinevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discoveryof the Higgs boson. (2014 T3 P4)

翻譯：但是諾貝爾學(xué)獎(jiǎng)關(guān)于每個(gè)獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)限三名獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)?而且他們必須在世的限制已經(jīng)因?yàn)楝F(xiàn)代科學(xué)的合作方式而變得不再適用,并將會(huì)在承認(rèn)希格斯玻色子的發(fā)現(xiàn)時(shí)被證明,因?yàn)榈綍r(shí)會(huì)不可避免的出現(xiàn)哪位科學(xué)家被忽視了這樣的爭(zhēng)論。(2014 T3 P4)

16. Among the commission’s 51 members are top-tier-university presidents, scholars, lawyers, judges, and business executives, aswell as prominent figures from diplomacy, filmmaking, music and journalism. (2014 T4 P2)

翻譯：該委員會(huì)由51名委員組成,在他們當(dāng)中,有頂級(jí)高等學(xué)校的校長(zhǎng)、學(xué)者、律師、法官以及企業(yè)經(jīng)理,還包括了外交、電影、音樂(lè)和新聞界的杰出的人物。(2014 T4 P2)

17. The commission ignores that for several decadesAmerica’s colleges and universities have produced graduates who don’t know thecontent and character of liberal education and are thus deprived of itsbenefits. (2014 T4 P4)

翻譯：委員會(huì)忽略了數(shù)十年來(lái)存在的問(wèn)題,美國(guó)大學(xué)所培養(yǎng)出來(lái)的畢業(yè)生并未真正了解人文教育的內(nèi)容和特點(diǎn),因此并沒(méi)有從中獲益。(2014 T4 P4)

18. At a time when Thomas Piketty and other economistsare warning of rising inequality and the increasing power of inherited wealth,it is bizarre that wealthy aristocratic families should still be the symbolicheart of modern democratic states. (2015 T1 P4)

翻譯：當(dāng) ThomasPiketty和其他經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家開(kāi)始對(duì)于日益加劇的不公和繼承財(cái)富的權(quán)利發(fā)出警告時(shí),那些富有的貴族家庭依然被看做是現(xiàn)代民主國(guó)家象征就顯得令人費(fèi)解了。(2015 T1 P4)

19. While Europe’s monarchies will no doubt be smartenough to survive for some time to come, it is the British royals who have mostto fear from the Spanish example. (2015 T1 P6)

翻譯：查爾斯應(yīng)該明白:正如英國(guó)歷史所示,共和黨并非君主制最大的敵人,國(guó)王(本身的言行) 才是君主制最大的敵人。(2015 T1 P6)

20. The Supreme Court will now consider whether policecan search the contents of a mobile phone without a warrant if the phone is onor around a person during an arrest. (2015 T2 P1)

翻譯：現(xiàn)在,最高法院將要考慮的是警察是否可以在沒(méi)有搜查令的情況下搜查在逮捕期間的嫌疑人的手機(jī)內(nèi)容。(2015 T2 P1)

21. They could still invalidate Fourth Amendmentprotections when facing severe, urgent circumstances, and they could takereasonable measures to ensure that phone data are not erased or altered while awarrant is pending. (2015 T2 P6)

翻譯：當(dāng)面臨嚴(yán)重緊急情況時(shí)他們?nèi)匀粫?huì)違反第四修正法案的保護(hù)條例,他們需要采取合理的措施來(lái)確保在沒(méi)有拿到搜查令的時(shí)候手機(jī)數(shù)據(jù)不會(huì)被刪除或修改。(2015 T2 P6)

22. Asked whether any particular papers had impelled thechange, McNutt said: “The creation of the ‘statistics board’ was motivated byconcerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis inscientific research and is part of Science’s overall drive to increasereproducibility in the research we publish.” (2015 T3 P3)

翻譯：當(dāng)被問(wèn)及是否是某篇特定的出版物促使了這個(gè)變化,McNutt回答道:“統(tǒng)計(jì)委員會(huì)的設(shè)立是受對(duì)科學(xué)調(diào)查的統(tǒng)計(jì)應(yīng)用和數(shù)據(jù)分析的廣泛擔(dān)憂所驅(qū)使的,并且它是雜志整體趨勢(shì)的一部分,用以增加出版文章的可復(fù)制性。” (2015 T3 P3)

23. Researchers should improve their standards, he wrotein 2012, but journals should also take a tougher line, “engaging reviewers whoare statistically literate and editors who can verify the process”. (2015 T3 P6)

翻譯：他在2012年寫到研究者應(yīng)該提升他們的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),而雜志也應(yīng)該采取一個(gè)更加嚴(yán)格的路線“參與的審查者應(yīng)該具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)知識(shí),并且編輯應(yīng)該核實(shí)這一流程”。(2015 T3 P6)

24. One of the astonishing revelations was how littleRebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought toask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived. (2015 T4 P4)

翻譯：其中一個(gè)令人驚訝的事實(shí)是Rebekah Brooks竟不知道她的編輯部所發(fā)生的事,也沒(méi)想到自己會(huì)被審問(wèn),事實(shí)上,她也從未過(guò)問(wèn)事情是怎樣發(fā)生的。(2015 T4 P4)

25. Ms Brooks may or may not have had suspicions abouthow her journalists got their stories, but she asked no questions, gave noinstructions—nor received traceable, recorded answers. (2015 T4 P6)

翻譯：Brooks女士可能懷疑或可能沒(méi)懷疑過(guò)她的記者們是如何得到他們所寫的故事的, 但是她沒(méi)有詢問(wèn),沒(méi)有做出指示,即沒(méi)有得到可追溯的記錄下來(lái)的回答。(2015 T4 P6)