问答题
While most studies look at inequality of outcomes among adults and help us understand how America is coming apart, Putnam"s group looked at inequality of opportunities among children. They help us understand what the country will look like in the decades ahead. The quick answer? More divided than ever.
1 Putnam"s data verifies what many of us have seen anecdotally, that the children of the more affluent and less affluent are raised in apparently different ways and have different opportunities.
Decades ago, college-graduate parents and high-school-graduate parents invested similarly in their children. Recently, more affluent parents have invested much more in their children"s futures while less affluent parents have not.
They"ve invested more time. Over the past decades, college-educated parents have quadrupled the amount of time they spend reading "Goodnight Moon," talking to their kids about their day and cheering them on from the sidelines. High-school-educated parents have increased child-care time, but only slightly.
Affluent parents also invest more money in their children.
2 Over the last 40 years upper-income parents have increased the amount they spend on their kids" enrichment activities by $ 5,300 a year, while the financially stressed lower classes by only $ 480, adjusted for inflation.
As a result, behavior gaps are opening up. In 1972, kids from the bottom quartile of earners participated in roughly the same number of activities as kids from the top quartile. Today, it"s a chasm. Richer kids are roughly twice as likely to play after-school sports. It"s not only that richer kids have become more active. Poorer kids have become more pessimistic and detached.
3 Social trust has fallen among all income groups, but, between 1975 and 1995, it plummeted among the poorest third of young Americans and has remained low ever since.
As Putnam writes in notes prepared for the Aspen Ideas Festival:
4 "It"s perfectly understandable that kids from working-class backgrounds have become cynical and even suspicious, for virtually all our major social institutions have failed them—family, friends, church, school and community."
As a result, poorer kids are less likely to participate in voluntary service work that might give them a sense of purpose and responsibility. Their test scores are lagging. Their opportunities are more limited.
Equal opportunity, once core to the nation"s identity, is now a tertiary concern.
5 If America really wants to change that, if the country wants to take advantage of all its human capital rather than just the most privileged two-thirds of it, then people are going to have to make some pretty uncomfortable decisions.
【正确答案】
【答案解析】Putnam的数据验证了我们许多人看到的奇闻轶事般的事情,即较为富裕的和不太富裕的孩子们由截然不同的方式抚养长大,并且他们有不同的机会。[解析] 本句为复合句。verify意为“证实,核实,验证”,主句译为“Putnam的数据验证了……”。what引导的宾语从句较短,信息量小,可以转译为名词短语“……的事情”,作主句的宾语。that引导的同位语从句较长,因此采用分译法,并加上起解释作用的“即”,译为“即较为富裕的和不太富裕的孩子们由截然不同的方式抚养长大”。这里的被动语态处理为主动语态。have different opportunities是that引导的同位语从句的第二个谓语部分。翻译时加上主语“他们”,与第一个谓语部分构成并列句:“并且他们有不同的机会”。
【正确答案】
【答案解析】在过去40年里,高收入父母花在他们孩子参加丰富活动上的数额每年增加5300美元,而有经济压力的下层阶级,经通货膨胀因素调整后每年用于这方面的投入仅增加了480美元。[解析] 本题的难点在于并列复合句的翻译。第一个分句中的upper-income与第二个分句中的lower classes形成对比,upper-income可翻译为“高收入”。第一个分句译成“在过去40年里,高收入父母已经增加了……数额”。they spend on their kids" enrichment activities为修饰the amount的定语从句,因其较短,可前置翻译为“花在他们孩子参加丰富活动上的数额”,by $5,300 a year为状语,修饰increased。increased...by $5,300 a year可译为“每年增加5300美元”,因此第一个分句译为“在过去40年里,高收入父母花在他们孩子参加丰富活动上的数额每年增加5300美元”。第二个分句为省略句,按照汉语的表达习惯,将省略的成分翻译出来,同时为了避免语言的重复,我们适当增添“用于这方面的投入”,故第二分句可译为“而有经济压力的下层阶级每年用于这方面的投入仅增加了480美元”。adjusted for inflation“经通货膨胀因素调整后”为过去分词短语作状语,翻译时放在谓语动词之前。
【正确答案】
【答案解析】社会信任度在各种收入群体中已经下降,但是,在1975年至1995年间,社会信任度在美国三分之一的最贫穷的年轻人中急剧下滑,并且自此之后仍持续较低。[解析] 本句是由but连接的并列句。第一个分句中all income groups为“各种收入群体”,不可译为“各种工薪阶层”。第一个分句翻译成“社会信任度在各种收入群体中已经下降”。第二个分句中,it指代social trust;plummet意为“铅锤;铅垂线”,这里用作动词,指“大幅度或快速落下”;poorest third of young Americans指的是“美国三分之一的最贫穷的年轻人”,不可译为“美国最贫穷的第三代年轻人”。因此第二个分句可译为“但是,在1975年至1995年间,社会信任度在美国三分之一的最贫穷的年轻人中急剧下滑。”系表结构是第二个分句的第二个谓语部分,译为“自此之后仍持续较低”。
【正确答案】
【答案解析】来自工人阶级的孩子们已变得愤世嫉俗,甚至猜忌多疑,这是完全可以理解的,因为几乎我们所有的主要社会机制——家庭、朋友、教会、学校和社区,都辜负了他们。[解析] 本句是由for连接的并列复合句。It作形式主语,指代主语从句的内容,因为主语从句较长,不宜作句子主语,故将主语从句和主句处理成两个并列分句。It"s perfectly understandable翻译为“这是完全可以理解的”。主语从句转换译为一个单句,与主句并列,因此第一个分句可以译为“来自工人阶级的孩子们已变得愤世嫉俗,甚至猜忌多疑,这是完全可以理解的”。第二个分句中fail的含义为“辜负,让……失望”;social institutions与其同位语family,friends,church,school and community被谓语部分分隔,翻译时用破折号将两部分联系起来,译为“因为几乎我们所有的主要社会机制——家庭、朋友、教会、学校和社区,都辜负了他们”。
【正确答案】
【答案解析】如果美国确实想改变这一状况,如果这个国家想发挥其所有人力资本的作用,而不仅仅是发挥最有特权的三分之二的人口的作用,那么人们就要不得不做出一些让人很不舒服的决定了。[解析] 本题的难点在于条件状语从句的翻译。第一个条件句中的that翻译为它所指代的内容“机会均等现在是第三考虑的事情这一状况”,或者也可译为“这一状况”。因此第一个条件句可翻译为“如果美国确实想改变这一状况”。rather than连接两个并列的成分:all its human capital和just the most privileged two-thirds of it。human capital译为“人力资本”,不可按字面意思译为“人头”。the most privileged two-thirds译为“最有特权的三分之二的人口”。故第二个条件状语从句可译为“如果这个国家想发挥其所有人力资本的作用,而不仅仅是发挥最有特权的三分之二的人口的作用”。主句的一般将来时在翻译时要体现出来,另外pretty在此处的含义不是“漂亮的”,而是用作副词,意为“相当,颇”,因此主句译为“那么人们就要不得不做出一些让人很不舒服的决定了”。