如何养活世界(来自经济学人的英语阅读精品,含翻译)

Disney Star Wars, Disney and myth-makingHow one company came to master the business of storytellingFROM a galaxy far, far away to a cinema just down the road: “The Force Awakens”, the newest instalment of the Star Wars saga, is inescapable this Christmas. The first Star Wars title since Lucasfilm, the owner of the franchise, was acquired by Disney in 2012 for $4.1 billion, it represents more than just the revival of a beloved science-fiction series. It is the latest example of the way Disney has prospered over the past decade from a series of shrewd acquisitions (see article). Having bought Pixar, Marvel and Lucasfilm, Disney has skilfullycapitalised on their intellectual property—and in so doing, cemented its position as the market leader in the industrialisation of mythology. Its success rests on its mastery of the three elements of modern myth-making: tropes, technology and toys.From Homer to Han SoloStart with the tropes. Disney properties, which include everything from “Thor” to “Toy Story”, draw on well-worn devices of mythic structure to give their stories cultural resonance. Walt Disney himself had an intuitive grasp of the power of fables. George Lucas, the creator of Star Wars, is an avid student of the work of Joseph Campbell, an American comparative mythologist who outlined the “monomyth” structure in which a hero answers a call, is assisted by a mentor figure, voyages to another world, survives various trials and emerges triumphant. Bothfilm-makers merrily plundered ancient mythology and folklore. The Marvel universe goes even further, directly appropriating chunks of Greco-Roman and Norse mythology. (This makes Disney's enthusiasm for fierce enforcement of intellectual-property laws, and the seemingly perpetual extension of copyright, somewhat ironic.)The internal mechanics of myths may not have changed much over the ages, but the technology used to impart them certainly has. That highlights Disney's second area of expertise. In Homer's day, legends were passed on in the form of dactylic hexameters; modern myth-makers prefer computer graphics, special effects, 3D projection, surround sound and internet video distribution,among other things. When Disney bought Lucasfilm it did not just acquire the Star Wars franchise; it also gained Industrial Light & Magic, one of the best special-effects houses in the business, whose high-tech wizardry is as vital to Marvel's Avengers films as it is to the Star Wars epics. And when Disney was left behind by the shift to digital animation, it cannily revitalised its own film-making brand by buying Pixar, a firm as pioneering in its field as Walt Disney had been in hand-drawn animation. Moreover, modern myths come in multiple media formats. The Marvel and Star Wars fantasy universes are chronicled in interlocking films, television series, books, graphic novels and video games. Marvel's plans are mapped out until the mid-2020s.But these days myths are also expected to take physical form as toys, merchandise and theme-park rides. This is the third myth-making ingredient. Again, Walt Disney led the way, licensing Mickey Mouse and other characters starting in the 1930s, and opening the original Disneyland park in 1955. Mr Lucas took cinema-related merchandise into a new dimension, accepting a pay cut as director in return for all the merchandising rights to Star Wars—a deal that was to earn him billions. Those rights now belong to Disney, and it is making the most of them: sales of “The Force Awakens” merchandise, from toys to clothing, are expected to be worth up to $5 billion alone in the coming year. In all, more than $32 billion-worth of Star Wars merchandise has been sold since 1977, according to NPD Group, a market-research firm. Even Harry Potter and James Bond are scruffy-looking nerf-herders by comparison.Those other franchises are reminders that Disney's approach is not unique. Other studios are doing their best to imitate its approach. But Disney has some of the most valuable properties and exploits them to their fullest potential. It is particularly good at refreshing and repackaging its franchises to encourage adults to revisit their childhood favourites and, in the process, to introduce them to their own children. This was one reason why Pixar, whose films are known for their cross-generational appeal, was such a natural fit. Now the next generation is being introduced to Star Wars by their nostalgic parents. At the same time, Disney has extended its franchises by adding sub-brands that appeal to particular age groups: children's television series spun off from Star Wars, for example, or darker, more adult tales from the Marvel universe, such as the “Daredevil” and “Jessica Jones” series on.Do, or do not—there is no tryWhat explains the power of all this modern-day mythology? There is more to it than archetypal storytelling, clever technology and powerful marketing. In part, it may fill a void left by the decline of religion in a more secular world. But it also provides an expression for today's fears.T he original “Star Wars” film, in which a band of plucky rebels defeat a technological superpower, was a none-too-subtle inversion of the Vietnam war. The Marvel universe, originally a product of the cold-war era, has adapted well on screen to a post-9/11 world of surveillance and the conspiratorial mistrust of governments, large corporations and the power of technology. Inuncertain times, when governments and military might seem unable to keep people safe or stay honest, audiences take comfort in the idea of superheroes who ride to the rescue. Modern myths also have the power to unify people across generations, social groups and cultures, creating frameworks of shared references even as other forms of media consumption become ever more fragmented.Ultimately, however, these modern myths are so compelling because they tap primordial human urges—for refuge, redemption and harmony. In this respect they are like social-media platforms, which use technology to industrialise social interaction. Similarly, modern myth-making, reliant though it is on new tools and techniques, is really just pushing the same old buttons in stone-age brains. That is something that Walt Disney understood instinctively—and that the company he founded is now exploiting so proficiently.迪士尼星球大战,迪士尼和神话创造一个公司如何成为兜售故事的商业传奇从遥远的星际抵达你周边的电影院—《星球大战7：原力觉醒》这部星战系列的最新影片就在圣诞期间上映，不容错过。

We must pay the cost of carbon if we are to cut it让每一个人都有减排的动力Shouldn’t we be doing more to respond to the climate emergency? It’s a natural question to ask. But, perhaps, we should turn the question around, and ask: why haven’t we solved the climate change problem already?为了应对气候紧急状态，我们难道不应该多做一点事情？这是个很自然的问题。

然而，也许我们应该反过来问：为什么我们还没有解决气候变化问题？Economics suggests a ready answer: externalities. Unfortunately, the concept of externalities is a century old, and it shows. So why do economists persist in using this dusty old term, and is it still useful?经济学给出了一个现成的答案：外部性。

可是，外部性的概念存在了一个世纪之久，而且得到了印证。

那么，经济学家们为什么还要使用这个陈旧的术语呢？它是否仍然有用？An externality is a cost — or sometimes, a benefit — that is not borne by either the buyer or the seller of a product. And, if neither has to bear the cost, neither has much reason to care.外部性是一种成本（有时是一种好处），是产品的买方和卖方都无需承担的成本。

第七单元译文Part B去全球化到底发生了什么?托马斯·P·M·巴奈特1 在严重的危机中，冷静的头脑很少会占据主导地位——至少在公共话语中是这样。

因此，就在一年前，我们从许多专家——以及兴高采烈的活动人士——那里听到，全球化正处于垂死边缘:全球经济正面临一场大规模永久性解体。

这将是对20世纪90年代活跃的全球化所具有的一切特征的一种不可阻挡的和确切的逆转，充满了最高层次的社会和政治动荡。

在有效地重现上世纪30年代大萧条(Great Depression)的过程中，我们甚至面临着重新爆发大国战争的不可思议的前景。

2 这种充满恐惧的视角并不局限于边缘。

《华尔街日报》(The Wall Street Journal)引用了“转向内部的危险”，而《经济学人》(The Economist)则哀叹“世界一体化在几乎所有方面都在后退”。

《华盛顿邮报》同样提到了“全球经济正在衰退”，而《新共和》则警告说，“如果你认为全球化正在破坏稳定，那就等着看去全球化会带来什么后果吧。

”用作家瓦尔登·贝娄(Walden Bellow)的话来说，全球化“最终名誉扫地”。

人们普遍认为，贝娄创造了“去全球化”一词。

3 唉，现实世界显然没有领会到这一点。

4 在一定程度上，去全球化确实发生了，其中包括大量外来工的反向流动，从而减少了流向较贫穷经济体的至关重要的全球汇款。

然而，发达经济体在2009年设法小幅增加了对世界贫困人口的官方发展援助，尽管国民总收入出现了损失，消费、财富持有量和政府信用都大幅下降。

5 与此同时，崛起的主要经济体的发展严重停滞，而他们对能源和商品的需求却依然飙升，这种需求继续支撑着大量的发展中经济体的发展。

总而言之，全球化首次真正意义上的全球性衰退提醒所有人，贫穷仍然是件糟糕的事情，生活在充满活力、积极进取的经济体中(或依赖于贸易)要好得多。

6 至于陷入广泛的政治和军事混乱，我们当然认为欧盟正处于生存危机之中——确切地说，这不是一个新景象。

172020年20期总第512期ENGLISH ON CAMPUS英文外刊对英语专业学生的重要性及其精读方法——以《经济学人》为例文/吴彦泽【摘要】当今英语专业学生不仅要掌握相应的英语语言知识，还要以语言为媒介更好地了解英语国家的社会与文化，发挥英语在全球化大背景下起到的桥梁作用。

英文外刊涵盖面广、时效性强，因此阅读英文外刊不仅可以提升学生的英语语言运用能力，还可以帮助其更好地了解英语国家社会文化。

本文将从多方面探讨英文外刊对英语专业学生的重要性以及以《经济学人》为例介绍英文外刊的精读方法。

【关键词】英文外刊；英语专业；重要性；精读方法【作者简介】吴彦泽，山东师范大学外国语学院。

大量的语言输入是学习好一种语言的前提，而阅读又在语言输入的方式中占据了举足轻重的地位。

对于英语专业的学生来说，大量的地道英语也就是我们常说的“authentic English”的输入显得尤为重要。

那么应该通过阅读什么材料来获得地道的英语输入呢？读英文外刊。

英文外刊内容包罗万象，题材丰富多彩并且时效性强，紧密结合当下英语国家社会时事热点。

通过阅读英文外刊，英语专业学生可以更好地了解当下英语国家的社会与文化。

一、英文外刊对英语专业学生的重要性1.英文外刊的重要性在《高等学校英语专业教学大纲》中的体现。

在英语专业四级考试中，阅读理解的分值为20分，占到了总分数的20%。

而在2015修改过后的《高校英语专业八级考试大纲中》，更是将英语专业八级考试中阅读理解的分数从20分提高到了30分，占到了考试总分值的30%。

英语专业四级、专业八级考试对于英语专业学生的重要性不言而喻，一定程度上是学生未来工作的一块敲门砖。

阅读能力也反映了英语专业学生的英语综合能力。

而英语专业四级考试、英语专业八级考试阅读理解题目的选材有很大一部分是来自于像《经济学人》这样的英文外刊。

由此我们不难看出，加强对英文外刊的阅读训练可以提高英语专业学生的英语能力。

2.关注文章中词汇的运用。

2021年6月英语四级阅读理解〔二〕翻译Some of the world’s most significant problems never hit headlines. One example comes from agriculture. Food riots and hunger make news. But the trend lying behind these matters is rarely talked about. This is the decline in the growth in yields of some of the world’s major crops.A new study by the University of Minnesota and McGill University in Montreal looks at where, and how far, this decline is occurring。

一些世界上最有影响的问题从不上头条新闻。

其中一个例子就是农业问题。

粮食暴动和饥饿产生新闻，但躺在这些问题背后的趋势却很少被谈及。

这是因为一些世界主要农作物产区的产量在下降。

蒙特利尔的明尼苏达和麦吉尔大学的一项新研究着眼于研究这种正在发生的下降趋势在哪，还有多远。

The authors take a vast number of data points for the four most important crops: rice, wheat corn and soybeans(大豆). They find that on between 24% and 39% of all harvested areas, the improvement in yields that tood place before the 1980s slowed down in the 1990s and 2000s。

Looking good by doing good[Jan 15th 2009]Economics focusLooking good by doing goodJan 15th 2009From The Economist print editionRewarding people for their generosity may be counterproductiveIllustration by Jac Depczyk A LARGE plaque in the foyer of Boston’s Institute for Contemporary Art (ICA), a museum housed in a dramatic glass and metal building on the harbour’s edge, identifies its most generous patron s. Visitors who stop to look will notice that some donors—including two who gave the ICA over $2.5m—have chosen not to reveal their names. Such reticence is unusual: less than 1% of private gifts to charity are anonymous. Most people (including the vast majority of the ICA’s patrons) want their good deeds to be talked about. In “Richistan”, a book on America’s new rich, Robert Frank writes of the several society publications in Florida’s Palm Beach which exist largely to publicise the charity of its well-heeled residents (at least before Bernard Madoff’s alleged Ponzi scheme left some of them with little left to give).As it turns out, the distinction between private and public generosity is helpful in understanding what motivates people to give money to charities or donate blood, acts which are costly to the doer and primarily benefit others. Such actions are widespread, and growing. The $306 billion that Americans gave to charity in 2007 was more than triple the amount donated in 1965. And though a big chunk of this comes from plutocrat s like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, whose philanthropy has attracted much attention, modest earners also give generously of their time and money. A 2001 survey found that 89% of American households gave to charity, and that 44% of adults volunteered the equivalent of 9m full-time jobs. Tax break s explain some of the kindness of strangers. But by no means all.Economists, who tend to think self-interest governs most actions of man, are intrigue d, and have identified several reasons to explain good deeds of this kind. Tax breaks are, ofcourse, one of the main ones, but donors are also sometimes paid directly for their pains, and the mere thought of a thank-you letter can be enough to persuade others to cough up. Some even act out of sheer altruism. But most interesting is another explanation, which is that people do good in part because it makes them look good to those whose opinions they care about. Economists call this “image motivation”.Dan Ariely of Duke University, Anat Bracha of Tel Aviv University, and Stephan Meier of Columbia University sought, through experiments, to test the importance of image motivation, as well as to gain insights into how different motivating factors interact. Their results, which they report in a new paper*, suggest that image motivation matters a lot, at least in the laboratory. Even more intriguingly, they find evidence that monetary incentives can actually reduce charitable giving when people are driven in part by a desire to look good in others’ eyes.The crucial thing about charity as a means of image building is, of course, that it can work only if others know about it and think positively of the charity in question. So, the academics argue, people should give more when their actions are public.To test this, they conducted an experiment where the number of times participants clicked an awkward combination of computer keys determined how much money was donated on their behalf to the American Red Cross. Since 92% of participants thought highly of the Red Cross, giving to it could reasonably be assumed to make people look good to their peers. People were randomly assigned to either a private group, where only the participant knew the amount of the donation, or a public group, where the participant had to stand up at the end of the session and share this information with the group. Consistent with the hypothesis that image mattered, participants exerted much greater effort in the public case: the average number of clicks, at 900, was nearly double the average of 517 clicks in the private case.However, the academics wanted to go a step further. In this, they were influenced by the theoretical model of two economists, Roland Benabou, of Princeton University, and Jean Tirole, of Toulouse University’s Institut d’Economie Industrielle, who formalised the idea that if people do good to look good, introducing monetary or other rewards into the mix might complicate matters. An observer who sees someone getting paid for donating blood, for example, would find it hard to differentiate between the donor’s intrinsic “goodness” and his greed.Blood moneyThe idea that monetary incentives could be counterproductive has been around at least since 1970, when Richard Titmuss, a British social scientist, hypothesised that paying people to donate blood would reduce the amount of blood that they gave. But Mr Ariely and his colleagues demonstrate a mechanism through which such confound ing effects could operate. They presumed that the addition of a monetary incentive should have much less of an impact in public (where it muddle s the image signal of an action) than in private (where the image is not important). By adding a monetary reward for participants to theirexperiment, the academics were able to confirm their hypothesis. In private, being paid to click increased effort from 548 clicks to 740, but in public, there was next to no effect. The trio also raise the possibility that cleverly designed rewards could actually draw out more generosity by exploiting image motivation. Suppose, for example, that rewards were used to encourage people to support a certain cause with a minimum donation. If that cause then publicised those who were generous well beyond the minimum required of them, it would show that they were not just “in it for the money”. Behavioural economics may yet provide charities with some creative new fund-raising techniques.寻找好行善[ 2009年1月15日]经济焦点寻找好行善2009年1月15日来自经济学人印刷版回报人民的慷慨可能会适得其反插图由江淮Depczyk在波士顿当代艺术学院（ICA ），装在一个巨大的玻璃和金属建筑海港的边缘博物馆大厅一个大匾，确定其最慷慨的赞助人。

1、1、金融用语：受取手形：应收票据；外貨ポジジョン：外汇头寸；公定歩合：法定贴现率；最割引率：再贴现率；つなぎ融資：过渡性融资；変動為替レート：浮动汇率2、股市用语：上げ幅：升幅；先安：看跌；そこを割る：跌破最低大关；持ち合い：暂告平息；軟調：疲软3、缩略语：ADBゕジゕ開発銀行（亚洲开发银行）；CIEC 国際経済協力会議（国际经济合作会议）；GA TT関税貿易一般協定（国际关税和贸易总协定）；FAO 国連食料農業機構（联合国粮农组织）；IMF 国際通貨基金（国际货币基金组织）；JICA国際協力事業団（日本国际事业协力团）OPEC石油輸出国機構（石油输出国组织）；UNDP国連開発計画（联合国开发计划署）一、经济类文章○円の国際化変動相場制の第二の不均衡は、日本の貿易収支の大幅な黒字である。

確かに第二次石油ショックの直後こそ貿易収支は赤字またはわずかな黒字だったが、数年後には大幅黒字が復活している。

79年の第二次石油ショックの後も、79－80年こそ、貿易収支は２０億ドル前後の赤字、経常収支は大幅の赤字だったが、81年以降再び黒字を増やし、83年には経常収支も黒字となった。

85年、86年は貿易収支各461億ドル、828億ドル、経常収支は各350億ドル、492億ドルの黒字である。

普通ならとっくに円高となってよさそうだが、そうならなかったのは、日本からゕメリカへ莫大な金利稼ぎの長期資本が流出したからである。

この時期の貿易黒字の急増は、日本の輸出努力とともに、ゕメリカのドル高のあおりを受けたと見るのが正しいだろう。

かつては通貨レートは貿易の動きに依存していたが、現在では、資本収支の動きが大きな影響を持つようになっている。

それだけに、貿易摩擦問題が通貨レート調整によって解決する見通しは少ない。

むしろ日本側は、経常収支の黒字を対外投資の推進に振り向け、円高を避けてきた。

实行浮动汇率制度的第二个不均衡问题是日本的贸易收支顺差大幅度。

考研英语《经济学⼈》翻译实践+词汇积累（6）This picture of dedication and loneliness stands in sharp contrast to the popular image. Mr Zhang says he is as disgusted as the general public is with official corruption. He notes that, like many civil servants, he works in a job without the kind of power that could be abused. The leaders in his office work longer hours than he does and still ride bicycles to work.虽尽⼼尽⼒，但总感到孤独，与⼤众对公务员的印象形成鲜明对⽐。

Zhang Minfu说，与普通⼤众⼀样，⾃⼰也痛恨贪腐。

他特别提醒，如同众多公务员那般，⾃⼰没有可滥⽤的职权。

其办公室的领导⼯作时间⽐他还长，现在仍是蹬车上班。

译后习得Dedication解释：V-T If you say that someone has dedicated themselves to something, you approve of the fact that they have decided to give a lot of time and effort to it because they think that it is important.投⾝举例：For the next few years, she dedicated herself to her work.随后的⼏年⾥，她全⾝⼼地投⼊⼯作。

解释：ADJ投⾝于…的举例：He's quite dedicated to his students.他奉献很多给他的学⽣们。

（2）：食品公司与减肥斗士【翻译交流】Feb 9th 2006From The Economist Global AgendaFood firms and fat-fighters食品公司与减肥斗士Five leading food companies have introduced a labelling scheme for their products in the British market, in an attempt to assuage critics who say they encourage obesity. But consumer groups are unhappy all the same. Is the food industry, like tobacco before it, about to be *engulfed[1]by a wave of lawsuits brought on health grounds?五家业内领先的食品公司采取了一项方案，就是在其投入英国市场的食品上作出标注，力图堵住那些说他们鼓励肥胖的批评人士的嘴。

不过，消费者团体仍然不开心。

食品业会像之前的烟草一样，被卷入一场关乎健康的诉讼之中吗？KEEPING fit requires a combination of healthy eating and regular exercise. On the second of these at least, the world’s food companies can claim to be setting a good example :they have been working up quite a sweat in their attempts to fend off assaults by governments, consumer groups and lawyers who accuse them of peddling products that encourage obesity. This week saw the unveiling of another industry initiative :five leading food producers—Danone, Kellogg, Nestlé, Kraft and PepsiCo—introduced a labelling scheme for the British market which will show “guideline daily amounts” for calories, fats, sugar and salt on packaging. The new labels will start to appear on the firms’ crisps, chocolate bars, cheese slices *and the like[2] over the next few months. A number of other food giants, such as Cadbury Schweppes and Masterfoods, have already started putting guideline labels on their products.将健康的饮食习惯和经常性的锻炼二者结合才可以让身体保持健康。