北京外国语大学高级译学院2001-2009硕士研究生入学考试英汉同声传译专业试卷.doc

北京外国语大学2009年硕士研究生入学考试复语同声传译专业试卷 　　北京外国语大学2009年硕士研究生入学考试复语同声传译专业试卷 　　I.将下列文章译成汉语 (50分) 　　India and China need help to grow, not hectoring 　　Every time there is a spike in oil prices, or when food costs more, or there is a renewed worry about carbon and climate change, academics, pundits, and the press immediately point to the high-consumption future of India and China. 　　They are wrong to do so when we consider the causes of energy and food challenges, and, more importantly, when we think of the actions and policies needed to manage changes in coming decades. If it is questionable that India and China are to blame for the global energy crunch, it is even less acceptable to expect them to adhere to pleas to moderate their energy consumption. 　　Historically, energy consumption has correlated with economic growth. The present debate over energy often focuses on two dimensions: climate change (from greenhouse gases), and the scarcity of fossil fuels. 　　With growing populations and economies, India and China will certainly consume a growing fraction of global resources, but they consume only 3 per cent and 9 per cent, respectively, of the worlds petroleum today. The global leader, the US, consumes just under a quarter. 　　Looking at future options, why does it matter if India and China are or are not similar in terms of energy consumption and needs? Global treaties aim to modify future consumption, and mechanisms or formulae that are considered fair (and likely to be ratified) must be cognizant of differences. Given the differences in their systems, needs, and incentives, a proposal meant to appeal to both may not appeal to either. Without global participation, no solution is likely work. 　　China already has the worlds second-largest electricity grid, and, at current rates of growth, it will soon become the largest electricity producer in the world. Like India, most of this is based on coal, the least “green” of the leading fossil fuels. 　　Indias present installed electric