Part1 Summary Writing

　　A. Read the following English passage and then write a Chinese summary of approximately 300 words that expresses its main ideas and basic information (40 points, 50 minutes)

　　Deceptively small in column inches, a recent New York Times article holds large meaning for us in business. The item concerned one Daniel Provenzano, 38, of Upper Saddle River, N.J. Here is the relevant portion:

　　When he owned a Fort Lee printing company called Advice Inc., Mr. Provenzano said he found out that a sales representative he employment had stolen $9,000. Mr. Provenzano said he told the man that “if he wanted to keep his employment, I would have to break his thumb.” He said another Advice employee drove the sales representative to Holy Name Hospital in Teaneck, broke the thumb with a hammer outside the hospital, and then had a car service take the man home after the thumb was repaired.

　　Mr. Provenzano explained that he “didn’t want to set an example” that workers could get away with stealing. The worker eventually paid back $4,500 and kept his job, he said. I know that you’re thinking: This is an outrage. I, too, was shocked that Provenzano was being prosecuted for his astute management. Indeed, I think his “modest proposal” has a lot to teach managers as they struggle with the problems of our people-centered business environment. Problems such as ….

　　Dealing with the bottom 10%. GE made the system famous, but plenty of companies are using it: Every year you get rid of the worst-evaluated workers. Many managers object that this practice is inhumane, but not dealing with that bottom 10% leads to big performance problems. Provenzano found a kinder, gentler answer. After all, this employee would have been fired virtually anywhere else. But at Advice Inc., he stayed on the job. And you know what? I bet he become a very, very — very — productive employee. For most managers Provenzano’s innovative response will be a welcome new addition to their executive tool kit. And by the way, “executive tool kit” is clearly more than just a metaphor at Advice Inc.

　　Being the employer of choice. With top talent scarce everywhere, most companies now want to be their industry’s or their community’s most desirable. Advice Inc. understood. The employee in question wasn’t simply disciplined in his supervisor’s office and sent home. No, that’s how an ordinary employer would have done it. But at Advice Inc., another employee — the HR manager, perhaps? — took time out his busy day and drove the guy right to the emergency room. And then — the detail that says it all — the company provided a car service to drive the employee home. The message to talented job candidates comes through loud and clear: Advice Inc. is a company that cares.

　　Setting an example to others. An eternal problem for managers is how to let all employees know what happens to those who perform especially well or badly. A few companies actually post everyone’s salary and bonus on their intranet. But pay is so one-dimensional. At Advice Inc., a problem that would hardly be mentioned at most companies — embezzlement — was undoubtedly the topic of rich discussions for weeks, at least until the employee’s cast came off. Any employee theft probably went way, way — way — down.

　　When the great Roberto Goizueta was CEO of Coca-Cola he used to talk about this problem of setting examples and once observed, “Sometimes you must have an execution in the public square!” But of course he was speaking only figuratively. If he had just listened to his own words, Goizueta might have been an even better CEO.

　　Differentiation. This is one of Jack Welch’s favorite concepts — the idea that managers should treat different employees very differently based on performance. Welch liked to differentiate with salary, bonus, and stock options, but now, in what must henceforth be known as the post-Provenzano management era, we can see that GE’s great management thinker just wasn’t thinking big enough.

　　This Times article is tantalizing and frustrating. In just a few sentences it opens a whole new world of management, yet much more surely remains to be told. We must all urge Provenzano to write a book explaining his complete managerial philosophy.

　　B. Read the following Chinese passage and then write an English summary of approximately 250 words that expresses its central ideas and main viewpoints (40 points, 50 minutes)

　　越是對原作體會(huì)深刻，越是欣賞原文的每秒，越覺得心長力 ，越覺得譯文遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)的傳達(dá)不出原作的神韻。返工的次數(shù)愈來愈多，時(shí)間也花得愈來愈多，結(jié)果卻總是不滿意。……例如句子的轉(zhuǎn)彎抹角太生硬，色彩單調(diào)，說理強(qiáng)而描繪弱，處處都和我性格的缺陷與偏差有關(guān)。自然，我并不因此灰心，照樣“知其不可為而為之”，不過要心情愉快也很難了。工作有成績才是最大的快樂：這一點(diǎn)你我都一樣。

　　另外有一點(diǎn)是肯定的，就是西方人的思想方式同我們距離太大了。不做翻譯工作的人恐怕不會(huì)體會(huì)到這么深切。他們刻畫心理和描寫感情的時(shí)候，有些曲折和細(xì)膩的地方，復(fù)雜繁瑣，簡直與我們格格不入。我們對人生瑣事往往有許多是人為不值一提而省略，有許多只是羅列事實(shí)而不加分析的;如果要寫情就用詩人的態(tài)度來寫：西方作家卻多半用科學(xué)家的態(tài)度，歷史學(xué)家的態(tài)度(特別巴爾扎克)，像解剖昆蟲一半。譯的人固然懂得了，也感覺到它的特色，妙處，可是要叫思想方式完全不一樣的讀者領(lǐng)會(huì)就難了。思想方式反映整個(gè)的人生觀，宇宙觀，和幾千年文化的發(fā)展，怎能一下子就能和另一民族的思想溝通呢?你很幸運(yùn)，音樂不像語言的局限那么大，你還是用音符表達(dá)前人的音符，不是用另一種語言文字，另一種邏輯。(《博雷家書》)

　　Part 2 Reading Comprehension (20 points, 20 minutes)

　　In this section you will find after each of the passages a number of questions or unfinished statements about the passage, each with four (A, B, C and D) suggested answers or way of finishing. You must choose the one which you think fits best.

　　PASSAGE 1

　　To Err Is Human

　　by Lewis Thomas

　　Everyone must have had at least one personal experience with a computer error by this time. Bank balances are suddenly reported to have jumped form $379 into the millions, appeals for charitable contributions are mailed over and over to people with crazy sounding names at your address, department stores send the wrong bills, utility companies write that they’re turning everything off, that sort of thing. If you manage to get in touch with someone and complain, you then get instantaneously typed, guilty letters from the same computer, saying, “Our computer was in error, and an adjustment is being made in your account.”

　　These are supposed to be the sheerest, blindest accidents. Mistakes are not believed to be the normal behavior of a good machine. If things go wrong, it must be a personal, human error, the result of fingering, tampering a button getting stuck, someone hitting the wrong key. The computer, at its normal best, is infallible.

　　I wonder whether this can be true. After all, the whole point of computers is that they represent an extension of the human brain, vastly improved upon but nonetheless human, superhuman maybe. A good computer can think clearly and quickly enough to beat you at chess, and some of them have even been programmed to write obscure verse. They can do anything we can do, and more besides.

　　It is not yet known whether a computer has its own consciousness, and it would be hard to find out about this. When you walk into one of those great halls now built for the huge machines, and standing listening, it is easy to imagine that the faint, distant noises are the sound of thinking, and the turning of the spools gives them the look of wild creatures rolling their eyes in the effort to concentrate, choking with information. But real thinking, and dreaming, are other matters. On the other hand, the evidence of something like an unconscious, equivalent to ours, are all around, in every mail. As extensions of the human brain, they have been constructed the same property of error, spontaneous, uncontrolled, and rich in possibilities.

　　Question 1: The title of the writing “To Err Is Human” implies that

　　A. making mistakes is confined only to human beings.

　　B. every human being cannot avoid making mistakes.

　　C. all human beings are always making mistakes.

　　D. every human being is born to make bad mistakes.

　　Question 2: The first paragraph implies that

　　A. computer errors are so obvious that one can hardly prevent them form happening.

　　B. a computer is so capable of making errors that none of them is avoidable.

　　C. computers make such errors as miscalculation and inaccurate reporting.

　　D. computers can’t think so their errors are natural and unavoidable.

　　Question 3: The author uses his hypothesis that “computers represent an extension of the human brain” in order to indicate that

　　A. human beings are not infallible, nor are computers.

　　B. computers are bound to make as many errors as human beings.

　　C. errors made by computers can be avoided the same as human mistakes can be avoided.

　　D. computers are made by human beings and so are their errors.

　　Question 4: The rhetoric the author employed in writing the third paragraph, especially the sentence “A good computer can think clearly and quickly enough to beat you at chess…” is usually referred to in writing as

　　A. climax.

　　B. personification.

　　C. hyperbole.

　　D. onomatopoeia.

　　Question 5: The author compared the faint and distant sound of the computer to the sound of thinking and regarded it as the product of

　　A. dreaming and thinking

　　B. some property of errors.

　　C. consciousness.

　　D. possibilities.