【穿越研英】冲击翻译，不得不恋(第三十期，正在进行中)

转眼，在2007年10月17日，这个节目迎来了它的第三十期，在第二十一期时我就惊讶于自己的坚持.

说实话,自己不是个轻易放弃的人,但也不是个安分的人,整天想东想西恨不得十八班武艺全部精通,所以闲暇无事时喜欢在网络上晃悠,可一个论坛,一个网站让我整天挂念,留恋往返还是第一次,看来真是对沪江感情太深了,甚至穿着它的T-shirt去旅行,莫怪于看到旅行照片的来来无比惊讶地问我就不怕别人看到?记得以前看《青春之歌》那样的充满温情革命气息和青春朝气的小说时还嘲笑其中人感情的幼稚和狂热，可是现在的我，就仿佛处在那种执著情感的漩涡中，感受沪江给我的一切.

2007年9月12日，是我和沪江相遇的一周年，由于自己的粗心和健忘竟然忽略了这件事，一年啦，一年的欢乐和痛苦，有沪江，有你们的和我共同度过。

（★在进入学习之前，我想复习一下上一期，点这里）

【考研英译汉难点总结之五】(㊣资料来自《考研英语英译汉四步定位翻译法》)

英译汉中的非谓语动词之一

§将非谓语动词译成形容词§

非谓语动词修饰名词时一般翻译成形容词放在名词前面。

例一：There will be television chat shows hosted by robots, and cars with pollution monitors that will disable them when they offend.(2001年英译汉真题)

分析：过去分词hosted 修饰名词shows，译成形容词“由……主持的”。

例二：The existence of the giant clouds was virtually required for the Big Bang, first put forward in the 1920s, to maintain its reign as the dominant explanation of the cosmos. (1998年英译汉真题)

分析：put forward是过去分词短语，修饰前面的名词the Big Bang,可译成“提成的”。

例三：Science moves forward , they say, not so much through the insights of great men of genius as because of more ordinary things like improved techniques and tools. (1994年英译汉真题)

分析：过去分词improved 修饰techniques and tools, 译成“改进了的”。

例四：Astrophysicists working with ground-based detectors at the South Pole and balloon-borne instruments are closing in on such structures, and may report their finding soon. (1998年英译汉真题)

分析：句中有三个非谓语动词：working with ,ground-based 和balloon-borne,分别修饰名词astrophysicists, detectors 和instruments ,都可以译成形容词放在名词前面做定语。

向上追寻的道路中，我很高兴认识了你，让我一路微笑，阳光洒满一身！谢谢各位朋友一直的鼓励和陪伴，在这个美丽的季节里，让我们继续前行！~^_^

【高高兴兴做作业，轻轻松松收沪元】

以下是1997年的考研英语阅读文章，popo想如果用真题文章来“恋”翻译，难度系数或者上下文背景都能满足，而且绝对有实战的感觉吧~别等了,快开做啦！

It is said that in England death is pressing, in Canada inevitable and in California optional. Small wonder. Americans' life expectancy has nearly doubled over the past century. （1）Failing hips can be replaced, clinical depression controlled, cataracts removed in a 30-minute surgical procedure.Such advances offer the aging population a quality of life that was unimaginable when I entered medicine 50 years ago. But not even a great health-care system can cure death — and our failure to confront that reality now threatens this greatness of ours.

Death is normal; we are genetically programmed to disintegrate and perish, even under ideal conditions. We all understand that at some level, yet as medical consumers we treat death as a problem to be solved. （2）Shielded by third-party payers from the cost of our care, we demand everything that can possibly be done for us, even if it's useless. The most obvious example is late-stage cancer care. （3）Physicians — frustrated by their inability to cure the disease and fearing loss of hope in the patient — too often offer aggressive treatment far beyond what is scientifically justified.

　　In 1950, the US spent $12.7 billion on health care. In 2002, the cost will be $1540 billion. Anyone can see this trend is unsustainable. Yet few seem willing to try to reverse it. Some scholars conclude that a government with finite resources should simply stop paying for medical care that sustains life beyond a certain age — say 83 or so. Former Colorado governor Richard Lamm has been quoted as saying that the old and infirm "have a duty to die and get out of the way", so that younger, healthier people can realize their potential.

　　I would not go that far. Energetic people now routinely work through their 60s and beyond, and remain dazzlingly productive. At 78, Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone jokingly claims to be 53. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is in her 70s, and former surgeon general C.Everett Koop chairs an Internet start-up in his 80s. These leaders are living proof that prevention works and that we can manage the health problems that come naturally with age. As a mere 68-year-old, I wish to age as productively as they have.

　　Yet there are limits to what a society can spend in this pursuit. As a physician, I know the most costly and dramatic measures may be ineffective and painful. （4）I also know that people in Japan and Sweden, countries that spend far less on medical care, have achieved longer, healthier lives than we have. As a nation, we may be overfunding the quest for unlikely cures while underfunding research on humbler therapies that could improve people's lives.