为了方便大家在雅思阅读练习结束后，更好的对文章的内容进行分析，小编为大家带来了雅思5阅读翻译精准版详细介绍，希望大家在练习结束后，可以参照以下原文翻译更好的了解文章的内容。
TEST 1 PASSAGE 1参考译文：
Johnson’s Dictionary
约翰逊博士的字典
For the century before Johnson’s Dictionary was published in 1775, there had been concern about the state of the English language. There was no standard way of speaking or writing and no agreement as to the best way of bringing some order to the chaos of English spelling. Dr Johnson provided the solution.
约翰逊博士的《字典》于1775年出版，在此之前的一个世纪，人们一直对英语的发展状况担忧。口语和书面语没有统一的标准，对于如何整顿英语拼写混乱的局面也没有统一的看法。正是约翰逊博士为这一问题提供了解决方案。
There had, of course, been dictionaries in the past, the first of these being a little book of some 120 pages, compiled by a certain Robert Cawdray, published in 1604 under the title A Table Alphabeticall ‘of hard usuall English wordes’. Like the various dictionaries that came after it during the seventeenth century, Cawdray’s tended to concentrate on ‘scholarly’ words; one function of the dictionary was to enable its student to convey an impression of fine learning.
当然，在此之前也有过一些字典《其中最早的是一本约120页的小册子，由一个叫Robert Cawdray的人编辑，于1604年出版，名为《按字母排序的罕见英语词汇表》。正如后来17世纪出版的许多字典一样，Cawdray倾向于着重收录学术词汇。这本字典的功能之一就是使字典的使用者能体现出良好的学术修养。
Beyond the practical need to make order out of chaos, the rise of dictionaries is associated with the rise of the English middle class, who were anxious to define and circumscribe the various worlds to conquer — lexical as well as social and commercial. it is highly appropriate that Dr Samuel Johnson, the very model of an eighteenth-century literary man, as famous in his own time as in ours, should have published his Dictionary at the very beginning of the heyday of the middle class.
除了规范英语混乱状态的实际需要外，英语字典的兴盛也与英国中产阶级的兴起有关。这些中产阶级渴望对各种要征服的环境进行定义和约束，包括词汇环境、社会环境和商业环境。塞缪尔?约翰逊博士作为18世纪文学家的典型代表，在当时和现在都享有盛誉，他在中产阶级正如日中天之时出版他的《字典》真是再合“时”不过了。
Johnson was a poet and critic who raised common sense to the heights of genius. His approach to the problems that had worried writers throughout the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries was intensely practical. Up until his time, the task of producing a dictionary on such a large scale had seemed impossible without the establishment of an academy to make decisions about right and wrong usage. Johnson decided he did not need an academy to settle arguments about language; he would write a dictionary himself and he would do it single-handed. Johnson signed the contract for the Dictionary with the bookseller Robert Dosley at a breakfast held at the Golden Anchor Inn near Holbom Bar on 18 June 1764.He was to be paid ￡1.575 in instalments, and from this he took money to rent Gough Square, in which he set up his ‘dictionary workshop’.
约翰逊是诗人、批评家，他将常识提髙到了天赋的髙度。对于那些从17世纪晚期到18世纪早期一直困扰着作家的问题，约翰逊的解决方法是非常实用的。在约翰逊之前，如果没有专门的学术机构判别正确与错误的用法，要出版这样一部大型字典几乎是不可能的。约翰逊则认为不需要学术机构来解决语言上的争端，他要自己编一本字典，而且要自己亲手去编。1764年6月18日，约翰逊与书商Robert Dosley在Holbom酒店附近的Golden Anchor旅店吃早餐时，签订了关于这本《字典》的合同。约翰逊因此获得了总价值1575英镑的分期付款，他从这些钱中拿出一些租下了17Gough广场，在这里建起了自己的“字典作坊”。
James Boswell, his biographer, described the garret where Johnson worked as ‘fitted up like a counting house’ with a long desk running down the middle at which the copying clerks would work standing up. Johnson himself was stationed on a rickety chair at an ‘old crazy deal table’ surrounded by a chaos of borrowed books. He was also helped by six assistants, two of whom died whilst the Dictionary was still in preparation.
James Boswell曾为约翰逊作传，他描述说约翰逊工作的阁楼就像“一个账房”，中间有一张长长的的桌子，负责抄写的工作人员站着工作。约翰逊坐在一把快要散架的椅子上，面前是一张老式的摇摇晃晃的文案桌，周围乱七八糟堆放着一堆借来的书。同时旁边有六个助手帮助，其中两个在《字典》编纂的筹备阶段就去世了。
The work was immense; filling about eighty large notebooks (and without a library to hand), Johnson wrote the definitions of over 40,000 words, and illustrated their many meanings with some 114,000 quotations drawn from English writing on every subject, from the Elizabethans to his own time. He did not expect to achieve complete originality. Working to a deadline, he had to draw on the best of all previous dictionaries, and to make his work one of heroic synthesis. In fact, it was very much more. Unlike his predecessors, Johnson treated English very practically, as a living language, with many different shades of meaning. He adopted his definitions on the principle of English common law — according to precedent. After its publication, his Dictionary was not seriously rivalled for over a century.
工作量是巨大的。当时，约翰逊在身边还没有图书馆可参阅的条件下，将80大本笔记进行了分类整理，撰写了4万多条词的定义，并将这些词的多个义项用约11.4万条从各个学科的英语书面材料中摘出的引例加以佐证上些引例来源极广，从伊丽莎白时代到当时作家的作品都被涵盖在内。约翰逊并没有想进行完全的自我创作。由于有最后期限，他不得不吸收先前所有字典的精华之处，这就使他的工作成了一项规模宏大的整合工作。事实上，约翰逊所做的工作绝不仅限于此。和以前的字典编基者不同的是，约翰逊对待英语的态度十分务实。他将英语看成是活的语言，意思上有许多细微的差别。他对词的定义采取英语普通法则：遵照先例。因此，约翰逊的《字典》出版后，在长达一个多世纪的时间里，都没有出现一本真正能与其相媲美的字典。
After many vicissitudes the Dictionary was finally published on 15 April 1775. It was instantly recognised as a landmark throughout Europe. ‘This very noble work,’ wrote the leading Italian lexicographer, ‘will be a perpetual monument of Fame to the Author, an Honour to his own Country in particular, and a general Benefit to the republic of Letters throughout Europe" The fact that Johnson had taken on the Academies of Europe and matched them (everyone knew that forty French academics had taken forty years to produce the first French national dictionary) was cause for much English celebration.
几经周折后，约翰逊的这本《字典》终于在1775年4月15日出版了。一经出版，这本字典就在整个欧洲获得了一致认可，被誉为里程碑式的著作?一位意大利著名的辞书编築者写道:“这项崇高的作品将成为其著者永恒的荣誉丰碑，也是其祖国的一项特别荣耀，这部作品惠及了整个欧洲大陆文学界。”众所周知，40个法国学者花了40年的时间才出版了第一部法语字典。而约翰逊一个人就承担了一项欧洲学术界所做的工作并毫不逊色地把它完成，这一切都让英国人引以为傲。
Johnson had worked for nine years, ‘with little assistance of the learned, and without any patronage of the great; not in the soft obscurities of retirement, or under the shelter of academic bowers, but amidst inconvenience and distraction, in sickness and in sorrow’. For all its faults and eccentricities his two-volume work is a masterpiece and a landmark, in his own words, ‘setting the orthography, displaying the analogy, regulating the structures, and ascertaining the significations of English words’. It is the cornerstone of Standard English an achievement which, in James Boswell’s words ‘conferred stability on the language of his country.’
约翰逊几乎没有得到学者的帮助或伟人的赞助，也没有退休后的舒适条件，更不是在凉爽的书房中完成工作。他是在种种不便与干扰中、在疾病折磨和忧伤中一直工作了九年。尽管存在瑕疵和怪异之处，他的这部两卷本的著作仍然称得上是一部杰作，一座里程碑。用他自己的话说，这本字典“规范了拼写，进行了词汇比较，规范了结构，明确了英文字词的含义”。这部字典为后来的标准英语奠定了基础，这一成就，用James Boswell的话说，就是“为英语的稳定做出了贡献”。
The Dictionary, together with his other writing, made Johnson famous and so well esteemed that his friends were able to prevail upon King George Ⅲ to offer him a pension. From then on, he was to become the Johnson of folklore.
约翰逊因为这部《字典》和其他一些作品而闻名于世并备受尊重，这使得他的朋友能够说服国王乔治三世赏赐给他养老金。从那时起，他就成了家喻户晓的约翰逊。
TEST 1 PASSAGE 2 参考译文：
Nature or Nurture?
是先天本性还是后天控制?
A A few years ago, in one of the most fascinating and disturbing experiments in behavioural psychology, Stanley Milgram of Yale University tested 40 subjects from all walks of life for their willingness to obey instructions given by a ‘leader’ in a situation in which the subjects might feel a personal distaste for the actions they were called upon to perform. Specifically Milgram told each volunteer ‘teacher-subject’ that the experiment was in the noble cause of education, and was designed to test whether or not punishing pupils for their mistakes would have a positive effect on the pupils’ ability to learn.
A 几年前，耶鲁大学的Stanley Milgram进行了一项行为心理学试验，这项试验十分有趣但又令试验对象深感不安。40名试验对象分别来自社会各界。试验要测试在对某领导命令做的事情可能产生反感的情况下，这些试验对象是否愿意执行命令。Milgram向每位在试验中扮演教师角色的志愿者明确地解释，试验是为了崇高的教育事业而进行的，是要测试体罚犯错误的学生是否会对学生的学习能力产生积极的影响。
B Milgram’s experimental set-up involved placing the teacher-subject before a panel of thirty switches with labels ranging from ‘15 volts of electricity (slight shock)’ to ‘450 volts (danger — severe shock)’ in steps of 15 volts each. The teacher-subject was told that whenever the pupil gave the wrong answer to a question, a shock was to be administered, beginning at the lowest level and increasing in severity with each successive wrong answer. The supposed ‘pupil’ was in reality an actor hired by Milgram to simulate receiving the shocks by emitting a spectrum of groans, screams and writings together with an assortment of statements and expletives denouncing both the experiment and the experimenter. Milgram told the teacher-subject to ignore the reactions of the pupil, and to administer whatever level of shock was called for, as per the rule governing the experimental situation of the moment.
B Milgram的试验方案是让这些扮演教师角色的试验对象到一个有30个切换开关的控电板前，开关上面分别贴着电压标签，从15伏(轻度电击)开始，每个开关依次增大15伏，一直增大到450伏(危险的严重电击)。然后告诉这些试验对象，学生每回答错一个问题，就施加一次电击, 从最低电压开始，随着错误题数的增加，电击强度也依次增加。试验中的学生实际上是Mifgram雇佣的演员，他发出各种呻吟、叫喊声并痛苦地扭动身体甚至用污言移语谩骂试验者和试验本身，来模拟出学生遭受电击后的反应Milgram让这些扮演教师角色的试验对象不要理会学生的反应，按照控制试验条件的规则，不管电压多髙都要直接施加。
C As the experiment unfolded, the pupil would deliberately give the wrong answers to questions posed by the teacher, thereby bringing on various electrical punishments, even up to the danger level of 300 volts and beyond. Many of the teacher-subjects balked at administering the higher levels of punishment, and turned to Milgram with questioning looks and/or complaints about continuing the experiment. In these situations, Milgram calmly explained that the teacher-subject was to ignore the pupil’s cries for mercy and carry on with the experiment. If the subject was still reluctant to proceed, Milgram said that it was important for the sake of the experiment that the procedure be followed through to the end. His final argument was ‘you have no other choice. You must go on’. What Milgram was trying to discover was the number of teacher-subjects who would be willing to administer the highest levels of shock, even in the face of strong personal and moral revulsion against the rules and conditions of the experiment.
C 随着试验的展开，这个学生要故意答错老师提出的问题，从而受到各种级别电击的惩罚，甚至是高达300伏的危险电压或更高电压的电击惩罚。许多扮演教师的试验对象在实施高电压惩罚时犹豫不决，面带疑惑地看着Milgram或者对继续试验颇有微词。一旦遇到这种情况，Milgram就会冷静地向扮演教师的试验对象解释说，不要理会学生请求怜悯的呼喊，继续试验。如果试验对象仍不肯继续试验，Milgram就告诉他们，为了完成试验将试验步骤进行到底是很重要的。如果这样仍不奏效的话, Milgram就会说：“你别无选择，必须继续试验。”Milgram想要找出的是，面对人性和道德对试验规则和条件强烈的反感，有多少扮演教师的试验对象会愿意施加最高电压的电击惩罚。
D Prior to carrying out the experiment, Milgram explained his idea to a group of 39 psychiatrists and asked them to predict the average percentage of people in an ordinary population who would be willing to administer the highest shock level of 450 volts. The overwhelming consensus was that virtually all the teacher-subjects would refuse to obey the experimenter. The psychiatrists felt that ‘most subjects would not go beyond 150 volts’ and they further anticipated that only four per cent would go up to 300 volts. Furthermore, they thought that only a lunatic fringe of about one in 1,000 would give the highest shock of 450 volts.
D 在进行试验之前， Milgram向39名精神科医生解释了他的想法，让他们预测一下普通人群中平均会有多大比例的人愿意施加最高达450伏的电击。这些医生几乎一致认为差不多所有扮演教师的试验对象都会拒绝遵从试验人的命令。这些精神科医生感到大多数扮演教师的试验对象不会施加超过150伏电压的电击，并进一步预测说，只有4%的人会施力P300伏以上电压的电击。而且，他们认为只有约千分之一的像疯子一样的人才会施加450伏的电压。
E What were the actual resultsWell, over 60 per cent of the teacher-subjects continued to obey Milgram up to the 450-volt limit in repetitions of the experiment in other countries, the percentage of obedient teacher-subjects was even higher, reaching 85 per cent in one country. How can we possibly account for this vast discrepancy between what calm, rational, knowledgeable people predict in the comfort of their study and what pressured, flustered, but cooperative ‘teachers’ actually do in the laboratory of real life?
E 实际结果如何呢60%以上的扮演教师的试验对象一直遵从Milgram的命令，直到施加最高电压450伏的电击。在其他国家进行的重复试验中，愿意遵从命令的试验对象的比例更髙, 在某个国家：甚至髙达85%。那些冷静、理性、有学识的人们依靠他们的研究所得出的轻松的结论，与这些面临压力、紧张不安却遵守命令的扮演教师的试验对象在模拟真实生活的实验室中的所作所为竟然存在这么大的差异，我们怎样才能解释这种差异呢?
F One’s first inclination might be to argue that there must be some sort of built-in animal aggression instinct that was activated by the experiment, and that Milgram’s teache-subjects were just following a genetic need to discharge this pent-up primal urge onto the pupil by administering the electrical shock. A modern hard-core sociobiologist might even go so far as to claim that this aggressive instinct evolved as an advantageous trait, having been of survival value to our ancestors in their struggle against the hardships of life on the plains and in the caves, ultimately finding its way into our genetic make-up as a remnant of our ancient animal ways.
F人们第一反应可能会说，一定是试验激发了人内在的某种侵略性动物本能。Milgram试验中那些扮演教师的试验对象正是本能地靠施加电击来向学生发泄他们这种受到压抑的原始冲动。典型的现代社会生物学家甚至会称这种侵略性的本能是作为一种优势特征进化而来的，当我们的祖先在岩洞中和平原上与艰苦的生活作斗争时，这种本能对他们的生存起到了重要的作用。因此，这种本能最终作为远古时人类动物行为的遗留产物融人到我们的基因当中。
G An alternative to this notion of genetic programming is to see the teacher-subjects’ actions as a result of the social environment under which the experiment was carried out. As Milgram himself pointed out, ‘Most subjects in the experiment see their behaviour in a larger context that is benevolent and useful to society — the pursuit of scientific truth. The psychological laboratory has a strong claim to legitimacy and evokes trust and confidence in those who perform there. An action such as shocking a victim, which in isolation appears evil, acquires a completely different meaning when placed in this setting.’
G 与这种基因说不同的观点是将那些扮演教师的试验对象的行为看作是进行试验的社会环境所造成的。正如Milgram自己所说：“大多数试验对象从大的背景出发，认为自己的行为是仁慈的，对社会有益的，是在追求科学真理。心理实验室又大力强调此举的合法性，因此使试验参与人员对其产生了信任和信心。像对受害人施加电击这件事，单独看来似乎是恶行，但在这种情况下却有了完全不同的意义。”
H Thus, in this explanation the subject merges his unique personality and personal and moral code with that of larger institutional structures, surrendering individual properties like loyalty, self-sacrifice and discipline to the service of malevolent systems of authority.
H因此，按这种解释，扮演教师的试验对象是将自己的个性、个人准则和道德准则与更广泛的体制结构结合了起来，使个人的一些特性，如忠诚、自我牺牲和遵守规定，为恶毒的权威体制服务。
I Here we have two radically different explanations for why so many teacher-subjects were willing to forgo their sense of personal responsibility for the sake of an institutional authority figure. The problem for biologists, psychologists and anthropologists is to sort out which of these two polar explanations is more plausible. This, in essence, is the problem of modern sociobiology — to discover the degree to which hard-wired genetic programming dictates, or at least strongly biases, the interaction of animals and humans with their environment, that is, their behaviour. Put another way, sociobiology is concerned with elucidating the biological basis of all behaviour.
I对于众多扮演教师的试验对象为了一个机构权威人物而愿意放弃他们个人责任感的这种行为，我们有两种完全不同的解释。生物学家、心理学家和人类学家所要解决的问题就是找出这两种截然对立的解释哪种更合理。从本质讲，这是一个当代社会生物学的问题一探索人自身相关基因组成能在多大程度上掌控，或至少说是强烈影响动物和人与环境的交互活动，即他们的行为。换句话说，社会生物学关注的是如何去阐释所有行为的生物学基础。
TEST 1 PASSAGE 3 参考译文：
The Truth about the Environment
环境问题真相
For many environmentalists, the world seems to be getting worse. They have developed a hit-list of our main fears: that natural resources are running out; that the population is ever growing, leaving less and less to eat; that species are becoming extinct in vast numbers, and that the planet’s air and water are becoming ever more polluted.
在许多环境论者看来，我们的世界似乎变得越来越糟。他们列出了一系列我们担忧的问题：自然资源正在枯竭，人口不断增长，粮食越来越少，物种大批灭绝，地球的空气污染和水污染越来越严重。
But a quick look at the facts shows a different picture. First, energy and other natural resources have become more abundant, not less so, since the book ‘The Limits to Growth’ was published in 1972 by a group of scientists. Second, more food is now produced per head of the world’s population than at any time in history. Fewer people are starving. Third, although species are indeed becoming extinct, only about 0.7% of them are expected to disappear in the next 50 years, not 25-50%, as has so often been predicted. And finally, most forms of environmental pollution either appear to have been exaggerated, or are transient — associated with the early phases of industrialisation and therefore best cured not by restricting economic growth, but by accelerating it. One form of pollution — the release of greenhouse gases that causes global warming — does appear to be a phenomenon that is going to extend well into our future, but its total impact is unlikely to pose a devastating problem. A bigger problem may well turn out to be an inappropriate response to it.
但我们只要简单分析一下事实就会发现另外一种情况。首先，自1972年一组科学家出版了《增长的极限》这本书以来，能源和其他自然资源是变得越来越丰富了，而不是越来越少。其次，人均粮食产量比以往任何时候都要高，挨饿的人越来越少。第三，尽管物种的确在灭绝，但未来50年只会有0.7%的物种灭绝，而不是像人们通常所预计的25～50%。最后，大多数环境污染问题或者被夸大其词或者只是暂时的，只是与工业化的早期阶段相联系的，因此解决这些污染问题的最佳方法不是限制经济的发展, 而是加速经济的发展。有一种污染，即由于排放温室气体所引起的全球变暖问题，似乎会在未来长期存在，但其总效应却不大可能会带来特别严重的问题。更大的问题反而可能出在应对措施不得力上。
Yet opinion polls suggest that many people nurture the belief that environmental standards are declining and four factors seem to cause this disjunction between perception and reality.
，许多人所持的观念认为环境质量标准在下降，造成这种事实与人们观念间的差异的原因大致有四个：
One is the lopsidedness built into scientific research. Scientific funding goes mainly to areas with many problems. That may be wise policy, but it will also create an impression that many more potential problems exist than is the case.
一是科学研究上的偏颇。科学基金主要投人到存在问题的领域。这似乎是一项明智的决策，但是这同样也给人们造成了一种印象，似乎存在许多潜在的问题，而事实并非如此。
Secondly, environmental groups need to be noticed by the mass media. They also need to keep the money rolling in. Understandably, perhaps, they sometimes overstate their arguments. In 1997, for example, the World Wide Fund for Nature issued a press release entitled: ‘Two thirds of the world’s forests lost forever.’ The truth turns out to be nearer 20%.
第二，环保组织需要得到媒体的注意，也需要支持资金源源不断地流入。因此对于这些团体有时会有夸大其词的情况就不难理解了。比如说，1997年世界自然基金就发布一篇名为《世界森林2/3已不复存在》的新闻稿。而事实上世界森林只减少了20%左右。
Though these groups are run overwhelmingly by selfless folk, they nevertheless share many of the characteristics of other lobby groups. That would matter less if people applied the same degree of scepticism to environmental lobbying as they do to lobby groups in other fields. A trade organisation arguing for, say, weaker pollution controls is instantly seen as self-interested. Yet a green organisation opposing such a weakening is seen as altruistic, even if an impartial view of the controls in question might suggest they are doing more harm than good.
尽管这些组织绝大多数都是由无私的人们管理运营的，但他们和其他游说团体有许多共同之处。除非人们对待环境问题的游说活动也像对待其他问题的游说活动一样，持同等的怀疑态度, 这种共同之处才不会发挥那么大的作用。比如说，一个贸易组织如果要求降低污染控制标准，这个组织马上就会被认为是在谋私利。而即使对这一污染控制标准的客观审视可能会证明环保组织反对这种污染控制的低标准是弊大于利，这个环保组织仍会被认为是无私的。
A third source of confusion is the attitude of the media. People are clearly more curious about bad news than good. Newspapers and broadcasters are there to provide what the public wants. That, however, can lead to significant distortions of perception. An example was America’s encounter with El Nino in 1997 and 1998. This climatic phenomenon was accused of wrecking tourism, causing allergies, melting the ski-slopes and causing 22 deaths. However, according to an article in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, the damage it did was estimated at US$4 billion but the benefits amounted to some US$19 billion. These came from higher winter temperatures (which saved an estimated 850 lives, reduced heating costs and diminished spring floods caused by meltwaters).
另一个使人们印象错位的因素就是媒体的态度。显然，人们对坏消息比对好消息更好奇。新闻和广播就是要提供大众所需要的东西。而这一点可能会导致人们认识上的巨大偏差J997年和1998年美国受到了厄尔尼诺现象的影响就是一个例子。人们责难这一气候现象使旅游业陷于瘫痪，引起人们的过敏症状, 使一个滑雪坡融化造成22人死亡。尽管如此，美国气象协会公告上的一篇文章却认为, 尽管厄尔尼诺造成的损失估计有40亿美元，但它带来的收益却髙达约190亿美元。这主要得益于冬季气温的升髙，这种升温拯救了大约850人的生命，降低了取暖费用，缓解了由于冰峰河流春季融化造成的春洪。
The fourth factor is poor individual perception. People worry that the endless rise in the amount of stuff everyone throws away will cause the world to run out of places to dispose of waste. Yet, even if America’s trash output continues to rise as it has done in the past, and even if the American population doubles by 2100, all the rubbish America produces through the entire 21st century will still take up only one-12,000th of the area of the entire United States.
第四个因素是个人见识的狭隘。人们担心人均垃圾产生量的日益增多将使世界无处存放垃圾。但是，即使美国的垃圾产生量像以前那样继续增加，即使到2100年美国的人口加倍，,000。
So what of global warmingAs we know, carbon dioxide emissions are causing the planet to warm. The best estimates are that the temperatures will rise by 2-3℃ in this century, causing considerable problems, at a total cost of US$5,000 billion.
那么全球变暖这一问题怎么样呢?众所周知，二氧化碳的排放导致地球变暖。据估计本世纪气温最髙会上升2～3℃，这将带来严重的问题，造成5万亿美元的损失。
Despite the intuition that something drastic needs to be done about such a costly problem, economic analyses clearly show it will be far more expensive to cut carbon dioxide emissions radically than to pay the costs of adaptation to the increased temperatures. A model by one of the main authors of the United Nations Climate Change Panel shows how an expected temperature increase of 2.1 degrees in 2100 would only be diminished to an increase of 1.9 degrees. Or to put it another way, the temperature increase that the planet would have experienced in 2094 would be postponed to 2100.
尽管人们直觉上认为应当采取一些激进的措施，解决这一可能需要付出髙昂代价的问题，但是经济方面的分析表明，采取激进措施削减二氧化碳的排放量，将比采取措施适应温度的上升付出更大的代价。, 如何将2100年时2.1度的气温上升减少到只上升1.9度。换句话说，2094年地球会出现的升温推迟到2100年出现。
So this does not prevent global warming, but merely buys the world six years. Yet the cost of reducing carbon dioxide emissions, for the United States alone, will be higher than the cost of solving the world’s single, most pressing health problem: providing universal access to clean drinking water and sanitation. Such measures would avoid 2 million deaths every year, and prevent half a billion people from becoming seriously ill.
所以这并不会防止全球变暖，而只是给了世界6年的宽限期。但仅对美国而言，与解决人人都能获得清洁的饮用水和卫生设施这一世界上最紧迫的健康问题相比，减少二氧化碳排放量要付出更髙的代价。而解决了这一健康问题，毎年将可以避免200万人死亡，防止5亿人患上严重疾病。
It is crucial that we look at the facts if we want to make the best possible decisions for the future. It may be costly to be overly optimistic — but more costly still to be too pessimistic.
要做出有关未来的最佳决定就应当审视一下事实，这一点很关键。过度乐观可能要付出代价，但过度悲观则要付出更大的代价。
TEST 2 PASSAGE 1参考译文：
BAKELITE The birth of modern plastics
酚醛塑料——现代塑料的诞生
In 1907, Leo Hendrick Baekeland, a Belgian scientist working in New York, discovered and patented a revolutionary new synthetic material. His invention, which he named ‘Bakelite,’ was of enormous technological importance, and effectively launched the modern plastics industry.
1907年，比利时科学家Leo Hendrick Baekeland在纽约工作时发现了一种全新的合成材料，并申请了专利。他将自己的发明称作“酚醛塑料”，他的这一发明在技术上起到了极其重要的作用，并有效地催生了现代塑料业。
The term ‘plastic’ comes from the Greek plassein, meaning ‘to mould’. Some plastics are derived from natural sources, some are semi-synthetic (the result of chemical action on a natural substance), and some are entirely synthetic, that is, chemically engineered from the constituents of coal or oil. Some are ‘thermoplastic’, which means that, like candlewax, they melt when heated and can then be reshaped. Others are ‘thermosetting’: like eggs, they cannot revert to their original viscous state, and their shape is thus fixed for ever. Bakelite had the distinction of being the first totally synthetic thermosetting plastic.
“塑料(plastic) ”这一术语原于希腊词plassein，意思就是“塑造”。某些塑料源自天然材料，某些塑料是半人工合成塑料，即由天然材料发生化学反应形成的。还有的塑料是完全由人工合成的，也就是通过煤或布油的成分发生化学反应形成的。有些塑料是热塑性塑料，即像赠烛一样，受热后形状可以重塑。有些塑枳隄热固性塑料，就像鸡蛋一样，受热后无法再回到原来的黏滞状态，是永久定型的。酚醛塑料是第一种完全由人工合成的热固性塑料。
The history of today’s plastics begins with the discovery of a series of semi-synthetic thermoplastic materials in the mid-nineteenth century. The impetus behind the development of these early plastics was generated by a number of factors — immense technological progress in the domain of chemistry, coupled with wider cultural changes, and the pragmatic need to find acceptable substitutes for dwindling supplies of ‘luxury’ materials such as tortoiseshell and ivory.
当代塑料的历史源于19世纪中期对一系列半人工合成的热塑材料的发现。早期研制这些塑料材料有多个动因：化学领域的巨大的技术进步，文化观念的巨大转变，以及等找合适的材料代替供应量日益减少的奢侈原料(如玳瑁壳和象牙)的实际需要。
Baekeland’s interest in plastics began in 1885 when, as a young chemistry student in Belgium, he embarked on research into phenolic resins, the group of sticky substances produced when phenol (carbolic acid) combines with an aldehyde (a volatile fluid similar to alcohol). He soon abandoned the subject, however, only returning to it some years later. By 1905 he was a wealthy New Yorker, having recently made his fortune with the invention of a new photographic paper. While Baekeland had been busily amassing dollars, some advances had been made in the development of plastics. The years 1899 and 1900 had seen the patenting of the first semi-synthetic thermosetting material that could be manufactured on an industrial scale. In purely scientific terms, Baekeland’s major contribution to the field is not so much the actual discovery of the material to which he gave his name, but rather the method by which a reaction between phenol and formaldehyde could be controlled, thus making possible its preparation on a commercial basis. On 13 July 1907, Baekeland took out his famous patent describing this preparation, the essential features of which are still in use today.
Baekeland对塑料的兴趣始于1885年，当时他还是比利时的一个年轻的化学专业学生。 Baekeland开始研究的是酚醛树脂。酚醛树脂是苯酚(石炭酸)和一种醛(与酒精类似的挥发性液体)结合的粘稠状的产物。不过，他很快就放弃了这一课题，直到多年以后才重新开始这一研究。到了1905年，由于当时刚发明了一种新型照相纸，他赚了些钱，成为了纽约市的一位富人。当Baekeland忙着赚钱的时候，塑料研究方面取得了几项重大进展。1899年至1900 年间，第一种可以投入大规模工业生产的半人工合成热塑材料获得了专利。从纯科学的角度讲，Baelcelmid对塑料这一领域的贡献并不在于他发现了酚醛塑料这种以他名字命名的材料，而是在于控制苯酚和甲醛反应的方法，正是这种控制方法使酚醛塑料可以进行大规模的商业制备。1907年7月13日，Baekeland获得了描述这一制备过程的专利，其中主要步骤至今仍在使用。
The original patent outlined a three-stage process, in which phenol and formaldehyde (from wood or coal) were initially combined under vacuum inside a large egg-shaped kettle. The result was a resin known as Novalak which became soluble and malleable when heated. The resin was allowed to cool in shallow trays until it hardened, and then broken up and ground into powder. Other substances were then introduced: including fillers, such as woodflour, asbestos or cotton, which increase strength and moisture resistance, catalysts (substances to speed up the reaction between two chemicals without joining to either) and hexa, a compound of ammonia and formaldehyde which supplied the additional formaldehyde necessary to form a thermosetting resin. This resin was then left to cool and harden, and ground up a second time. The resulting granular powder was raw Bakelite, ready to be made into a vast range of manufactured objects. In the last stage, the heated Bakelite was poured into a hollow mould of the required shape and subjected to extreme heat and pressure, thereby ‘setting’ its form for life.
Baekeland的这个专利列举了三个步骤：首先，苯酿和甲醛(从木材或煤中提取)在真空的卵形瓶中进行反应，生成一种叫Novalak的树脂，这种树脂可溶且受热后有延展性。然后使这种树脂在浅盘中冷却、变硬，最后破碎，碾成粉末。接着加入其他的物质，包括填料， 如木屑、石棉或棉花，以增加强度和防潮，还要加入催化剂(加速两种化学物质的反应但自身在反应后却不发生变化的物质)和六元化合物(一种有氨和甲醛的化合物，为生成热塑性树脂提供必要的甲醛)。然后将得到的树脂再次冷却，使其变硬，重新碾成粉末。由此形成的颗粒状粉末就是粗质酚醛塑料，可以用来制造一系列的其他物品。在最后一步，将受热的酚醛塑料浇进所需形状的中空模具中，施以高温髙压，使其永久定型。
The design of Bakelite objects, everything from earrings to television sets, was governed to a large extent by the technical requirements of the molding process. The object could not be designed so that it was locked into the mould and therefore difficult to extract. A common general rule was that objects should taper towards the deepest part of the mould, and if necessary the product was molded in separate pieces. Moulds had to be carefully designed so that the molten Bakelite would flow evenly and completely into the mould. Sharp corners proved impractical and were thus avoided, giving rise to the smooth, ‘streamlined’ style popular in the 1930s. The thickness of the walls of the mould was also crucial: thick walls took longer to cool and harden, a factor which had to be considered by the designer in order to make the most efficient use of machines.
酚醛塑料制成品形状的设计，无论是耳环还是电视机外壳，都在很大程度上取决于塑形过程中的技术要求。设计要避免物品在塑形过程中卡在模具中取不出来。一个常用的规则就是物品越深人模具的部分应越细。若有必要，则将物品分成几部分，单独塑形。模具的设计要十分小心，使熔化的酚醛塑料能平均地全部流人模具中。尖角不实用，因此要尽量避免， 由此也带来了20世纪30年代光滑的流线型形状的风行。模具壁的厚度也很关键。模具壁越厚，冷却硬化需要的时间就越长。为了使(生产)机器能得到高效的使用，模具厚度这个因素是设计者必须加以考虑的。
Baekeland’s invention, although treated with disdain in its early years, went on to enjoy an unparalleled popularity which lasted throughout the first half of the twentieth century. It became the wonder product of the new world of industrials expansion — ‘the material of a thousand uses’. Being both non-porous and heat-resistant, Bakelite kitchen goods were promoted as being germ-free and sterilisable. Electrical manufacturers seized on its insulating properties, and consumers everywhere relished its dazzling array of shades, delighted that they were now, at last, no longer restricted to the wood tones and drab browns of the preplastic era. It then fell from favour again during the 1950s, and was despised and destroyed in vast quantities. Recently, however, it has been experiencing something of a renaissance, with renewed demand for original Bakelite objects in the collectors’ marketplace, and museums, societies and dedicated individuals once again appreciating the style and originality of this innovative material.
尽管起初Baekeland的这一发明受到人们的鄙视，但后来却受到前所未有的欢迎，在20世纪前半叶一直都很流行。这一发明成了工业扩张时期的宠儿，被称为是“万能材料”。由于能防渗抗热，用酚醛塑料制成的厨房用品都在宣传中强调其无菌，可消毒的特点。电器制造商利用其绝缘的特性，消费者则享受到其鲜艳夺目的色彩，庆幸自己不用再忍受“前塑料时代”只有木色和棕色的单调了。到了20世纪50年代，酚醛塑料又再度失去人们的宠爱，遭到人们的鄙视，被大量销毁。而最近，酚醛塑料又好像重焕了生机，收藏品市场上对原来用酚醛塑料制成的物品需求又有所增加。博物馆、各种社团和热衷于此的个人收藏者又开始重新欣赏起这种创新型材料的风格和其新颖别致的特点。
TEST 2 PASSAGE 2 参考译文：
What’s so funny?
John McCrone reviews recent research on humor
什么这么好笑?
---John McCrone对近期幽默研究的回顾
The joke comes over the headphones: ‘Which side of a dog has the most hairThe left.’ No, not funny. Try again. ‘Which side of a dog has the most hairThe outside.’ Hah! The punchline is silly yet fitting, tempting a smile, even a laugh. Laughter has always struck people as deeply mysterious, perhaps pointless. The writer Arthur Koestler dubbed it the luxury reflex: ‘unique in that it serves no apparent biological purpose. ’
笑话从耳机中传出来：“狗哪一边的毛最多?左边。”不对，不好笑，再猜。“狗哪一边毛最多?外边。”哈!这句话的关键词语有些荒唐，却很合适，令人宛尔，甚至捧腹大笑。笑一直让人类感到神秘，或许笑没有什么意义。作家Arthur Koestler称笑为奢侈的反射作用，“笑的独特之处就在于它没有明显的生物学目的。”
Theories about humour have an ancient pedigree. Plato expressed the idea that humor is simply a delighted feeling of superiority over others. Kant and Freud felt that joke-telling relies on building up a psychic tension which is safely punctured by the ludicrousness of the punchline. But most modern humor theorists have settled on some version of Aristotle’s belief that jokes are based on a reaction to or resolution of incongruity, when the punchline is either a nonsense or, though appearing silly, has a clever second meaning.
幽默理论有着悠久的历史。柏拉图认为幽默就是一种因感到比别人优越而体会到的快乐的感觉。康德和弗洛伊德认为讲笑话則要营造一种精神上的紧张气氛，最后抖开笑话的包袱，让其滑稽有趣之处化解这种紧张气氛。但是大多数当代幽默理论家最终都采纳了亚里士多德的观点：笑话的基础就是一种对不和谐情况的反应或解释，这种情况下笑话的关键语句或者没有什么特殊意义，或者貌似荒唐却聪明地隐含了第二层含义。
Graeme Ritchie, a computational linguist in Edinburgh, studies the linguistic structure of jokes in order to understand not only humor but language understanding and reasoning in machines. He says that while there is no single format for jokes, many revolve around a sudden and surprising conceptual shift. A comedian will present a situation followed by an unexpected interpretation that is also apt.
爱丁堡的计算语言学家Graeme Ritchie在研究笑话的语言结构，不仅为了理解幽默，同时也为了了解机器的语言理解能力及推理能力他说，尽管笑话没有固定的模式，但是许多笑话都是围绕某个出其不意的概念转换展开的。喜剧演员会描述一个情景，然后给出一个出人意料却又恰如其分的解释。
So even if a punchline sounds silly, the listener can see there is a clever semantic fit and that sudden mental ‘Aha!’ is the buzz that makes us laugh. Viewed from this angle, humor is just a form of creative insight, a sudden leap to a new perspective.
所以，即使笑话的关键语句听起来有些荒唐，听众却可以意识到其中有一个机灵恰当的语义，而心头掠过的“对呀”这一恍然大悟的感叹就是令我们发笑的信号。从这个角度看来，幽默就是一种创造性的洞察力，一种向新视角的突越。
However, there is another type of laughter, the laughter of social appeasement and it is important to understand this too. Play is a crucial part of development in most young mammals. Rats produce ultrasonic squeaks to prevent their scuffles turning nasty. Chimpanzees have a ‘play-face’ — a gaping expression accompanied by a panting ‘ah ah’ noise. In humans, these signals have mutated into smiles and laughs. Researchers believe social situations, rather than cognitive events such as jokes, trigger these instinctual markers of play or appeasement. People laugh on fairground rides or when tickled to flag a play situation, whether they feel amused or not.
但是还有另外一种笑，就是社会交往中缓解紧张局面的笑。理解这种笑也是很重要的。在许多幼小的哺乳动物的发育当中，游戏都是关键的一部分。老鼠会在厮打游玩时发出超声波似的尖叫声，防止厮打变成真的争斗。黑猩猩有一种游戏表情，把嘴张得大大的，同时发出“啊、啊”的喘息声。对于人类来说，这些信号都已转化成为了微笑和大笑。研究人员认为，激发这种本能的游戏信号或缓解紧张局面信号的因素不是笑话等认知活动，而是社会场景。人们玩旋转木马或被别人逗痒，开始玩闹时，无论是否感到好笑都会发出笑声。
Both social and cognitive types of laughter tap into the same expressive machinery in our brains, the emotion and motor circuits that produce smiles and excited vocalisations. However, if cognitive laughter is the product of more general thought processes, it should result from more expansive brain activity.
无论是社交场合中的笑还是认知活动中的笑，都是我们大脑中的同一表达机制在起作用。情感和运动神经网络令人微笑，并发出笑声。但是，如果认知活动中的笑是更多元的思维过程的产物的话，那么这种笑应当源干更广泛的大脑活动。
Psychologist Vinod Goel investigated humour using the new technique of ‘single event’ functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). An MRI scanner uses magnetic fields and radio waves to track the changes in oxygenated blood that accompany mental activity. Until recently, MRI scanners needed several minutes of activity and so could not be used to track rapid thought processes such as comprehending a joke. New developments now allow half-second ‘snapshots’ of all sorts of reasoning and problem-solving activities.
心理学家Vinod Goel使用“单事件”官能磁共振成像这一新技术对幽默进行调查研究，磁共振成像扫描仪使用磁场和无线电波跟踪伴随着心理活动的充氧血液中发生的变化。直到最近，这种扫描议都还需要数分钟的时间才能完成扫描，所以无法用于跟踪理解笑话这样迅速的思维过程。而新的进展使所有的退理和解决问题活动都能在半秒钟就快速成像。
Although Goel felt being inside a brain scanner was hardly the ideal place for appreciating a joke, he found evidence that understanding a joke involves a widespread mental shift. His scans showed that at the beginning of a joke the listener’s prefrontal cortex lit up, particularly the right prefrontal believed to be critical for problem solving. But there was also activity in the temporal lobes at the side of the head (consistent with attempts to rouse stored knowledge) and in many other brain areas. Then when the punchline arrived, a new area sprang to life — the orbital prefrontal cortex. This patch of brain tucked behind the orbits of the eyes is associated with evaluating information.
尽管Goel感到弄清了大脑内部的活动并不能完美地解决笑话的理解问题，他却发现理解笑话需要思维的大转换。他的扫描仪显示听笑话的人在笑话开始时前额脑皮层会发亮，尤其是对 解决问题起关键作用的右前额会发亮。但是在头部侧面的颞叶也会有活动，表明在试图激发已有的知识，大脑其他许多区域也有活动。然后，当包揪抖开时，一个新的区域——前额眼眶脑皮层活跃起来。这个蜷缩在眼眶后边的大脑区域是与处理信息相联系的。
Making a rapid emotional assessment of the events of the moment is an extremely demanding job for the brain, animal or human. Energy and arousal levels may need to be retuned in the blink of an eye. These abrupt changes will produce either positive or negative feelings. The orbital cortex, the region that becomes active in Goel’s experiment, seems the best candidate for the site that feeds such feelings into higher-level thought processes, with its close connections to the brain’s sub-cortical arousal apparatus and centres of metabolic control.
无论人脑还是动物的大脑，迅速对眼前的事件作出情感上的判断都是一件非常艰巨的任务。能量和受激反应的程度都要在一眨眼的功夫作出调整。这些突然的改变产生的感觉既有积极的又有消极的。在Goel实验中变得活跃的眼眶脑皮层区域由于与大脑的次脑皮层唤激结构和新陈代谢控制中枢有着密切的联系，似乎最有可能是将这些感觉转入更高一层的思维过程的区域。
All warm-blooded animals make constant tiny adjustments in arousal in response to external events, but humans, who have developed a much more complicated internal life as a result of language, respond emotionally not only to their surroundings, but to their own thoughts. Whenever a sought-for answer snaps into place, there is a shudder of pleased recognition. Creative discovery being pleasurable, humans have learned to find ways of milking this natural response. The fact that jokes tap into our general evaluative machinery explains why the line between funny and disgusting, or funny and frightening, can be so fine. Whether a joke gives pleasure or pain depends on a person’s outlook.
所有的温血动物对外界变化的刺激都在不断地作出细微的调整，但人类由于拥有语言而有着更为复杂的内心活动，所以人类不仅会对周围的环境产生感情上的反应，而且会对自身的思维产生感情上的反应。一旦某一苦苦寻找的答案出现了，人就会突然产生一种快乐的认可感。由于创造性的发现是令人愉悦的，人类学会了寻找猎取这种自然反应的途径。笑话可以进人我们的一般评估机制，这就说明有趣与恶心，或者有趣与恐怖之间的界限是十分微妙的。一个笑话给人带来的是快乐还是痛苦取决于一个人的价值观。
Humor may be a luxury, but the mechanism behind it is no evolutionary accident. As Peter Derks, a psychologist at William and Mary College in Virginia, says: ‘I like to think of humour as the distorted mirror of the mind. It’s creative, perceptual, analytical and lingual. If we can figure out how the mind processes humor, then we’ll have a pretty good handle on how it works in general.’
幽默可能算是一种奢侈品，但其背后的机制却不是进化过程中的偶然事件。正如弗吉尼亚州威廉—玛丽学院的心理学家Peter Derks所说：“我乐意将幽默想像成是思维的歪曲镜，幽默是创造性的，感性的、与分析和语言有关的。如果我们能够找出思维是如何处理幽默的，我们就能从整体上处理好其运作机制。”
TEST 2 PASSAGE 3 参考译文：
The Birth of Scientific English
科技英语的诞生
World science is dominated today by a small number of languages, including Japanese, German and French, but it is English which is probably the most popular global language of science. This is not just because of the importance of English-speaking countries such as the USA in scientific research; the scientists of many non-English-speaking countries find that they need to write their research papers in English to reach a wide international audience. Given the prominence of scientific English today, it may seem surprising that no one really knew how to write science in English before the 17th century. Before that, Latin was regarded as the lingua franca1 for European intellectuals.
虽然当今世界科学为包括日语，德语和法语在内的少数几门语言所统治，但是英语可能才是科学界最普及的世界语言。这不仅仅是由于美国这样的英语国家在科学研究中所起的重要作用，而且还是因为许多非英语国家的科学家发现为了拥有广大的国际读者群，他们需要用英语写研究论文。今天，科技英语的地位已经显得非常重要。因此，你可能很难想到在17世纪之前竟没有人很淸楚在科学写作中如何使用英语，(事实上)在17世纪之前，被人们视为欧洲知识分子通用语言的是拉丁文。
The European Renaissance (c. 14th-16th century) is sometimes called the ‘revival of learning’, a time of renewed interest in the ‘lost knowledge’ of classical times. At the same time, however, scholars also began to test and extend this knowledge. The emergent nation states of Europe developed competitive interests in world exploration and the development of trade. Such expansion, which was to take the English language west to America and east to India, was supported by scientific developments such as the discovery of magnetism and hence the invention of the compass improvements in cartography and — perhaps the most important scientific revolution of them all — the new theories of astronomy and the movement of the Earth in relation to the planets and stars, developed by Copernicus (1473-1543).
约在14到16世纪间出现的欧洲“文艺复兴”有时被称作是“知识复兴”，在这一时期，人们对失落的古希腊罗马时期的知识重新萌发了兴趣。然而，与此同时，学者们也开始检验和扩展这种知识。欧洲新兴国家竞相进行世界探险、发展贸易，这些活动的增加，使英语向西传到了美洲，向东传到了印度。这些活动获得了科学进步的支持，如磁场的发现以及由此而发明的指南针，地图制作技术的改进，和其中或许最为重要的科学变革——由哥白尼(1473-1543)创立起来的地球与其他行星和恒星相对运动的理论和天文学的新理论。
England was one of the first countries where scientists adopted and publicised Copernican ideas with enthusiasm. Some of these scholars, including two with interests in language — John Wallis and John Wilkins — helped found the Royal Society in 1660 in order to promote empirical scientific research.
英格兰是率先有科学家热情地接受并宣传哥白尼的思想的国家之一。这些学者当中，有两位对语言感兴趣，他们分别是John Wallis和John Wilkins。1660年，这两位学者帮助组建了英国皇家学会，来推广实证性的科学研究。
Across Europe similar academies and societies arose, creating new national traditions of science. In the initial stages of the scientific revolution, most publications in the national languages were popular works, encyclopaedias, educational textbooks and translations. Original science was not done in English until the second half of the 17th century. For example, Newton published his mathematical treatise, known as the Principia, in Latin, but published his later work on the properties of light — Opticks — in English.
整个欧洲大陆上都陆续出现了类似的研究院和协会，从而创立起了新的民族科学传统。在科学革命的初始阶段，大多以本国语言出版的出版物都是大众读物、百科全书、教科书和译著。直到17世纪下半叶，英语才成为原创科学所使用的语言。例如，牛顿发表自己的数学论文《自然哲学的数学原理》时用的是拉丁文，但后来发表他有关光的特性的论文《光学》时，用的却是英文。
There were several reasons why original science continued to be written in Latin. The first was simply a matter of audience. Latin was suitable for an international audience of scholars, whereas English reached a socially wider, but more local, audience. Hence, popular science was written in English.
原创科学一直使用拉丁文写作有多个原因。首先就是读者的问题。拉丁文适合广大国际学者阅读，而英语虽然可以被社会上更多的人所理解，但这些读者更多的是英国国内的读者。因此，大众科学是用英语写就的。
A second reason for writing in Latin may, perversely, have been a concern for secrecy. Open publication had dangers in putting into the public domain preliminary ideas which had not yet been fully exploited by their ‘author’. This growing concern about intellectual property rights was a feature of the period — it reflected both the humanist notion of the individual, rational scientist who invents and discovers through private intellectual labour, and the growing connection between original science and commercial exploitation. There was something of a social distinction between ‘scholars and gentlemen’ who understood Latin, and men of trade who lacked a classical education. And in the mid-17th century it was common practice for mathematicians to keep their discoveries and proofs secret, by writing them in cipher, in obscure languages, or in private messages deposited in a sealed box with the Royal Society. Some scientists might have felt more comfortable with Latin precisely because its audience, though international, was socially restricted. Doctors clung the most keenly to Latin as an ‘insider language’.
第二个用拉丁文写作的原因或许显得荒谬，那就是想要保守秘密。公开出版著作可能会导致还未被原作者研究透彻的初步理念进人公众领域。对知识产权的日益关注是那个时代的特征，这既反映出一种人文关怀，即对富于理性的科学家个人通过自己的脑力劳动进行发明和发现的关怀，又体现出原创科学与商业化利用间日益紧密的联系。那些懂拉丁文的学者、绅士与没有受过什么正规教育的商人是有社会差异的。17世纪中期的时候，数学家将自己的发现和例证用密码、晦涩的语言来描述，或写成个人的便条，封存在英国皇家学会的小盒子里，以保守秘密，这在当时是司空见惯的事情。有些科学家更愿用拉丁文的原因可能就是因为尽管拉丁文的读者是世界性的，却是非常有限的，社会上没有多少人懂，医生则对拉丁文万分钟爱，将其视为“内部人的语言”。
A third reason why the writing of original science in English was delayed may have been to do with the linguistic inadequacy of English in the early modern period. English was not well equipped to deal with scientific argument. First it lacked the necessary technical vocabulary. Second, it lacked the grammatical resources required to represent the world in an objective and impersonal way, and to discuss the relations, such as cause and effect, that might hold between complex and hypothetical entities.
原创科学迟迟未用英文书写的第三个原因可能与近代早期英语语言还不发达有关。英语还不能很好的用于科学说理。首先，英语缺乏必要的技术词汇;其次，英语没有必要的语法，无法客观公正地表现世界，也无法讨论各种关系，如复杂而又是假设性的各实体间可能存在的因果关系。
Fortunately, several members of the Royal Society possessed an interest in Language and became engaged in various linguistic projects. Although a proposal in 1664 to establish a committee for improving the English language came to little, the society’s members did a great deal to foster the publication of science in English and to encourage the development of a suitable writing style. Many members of the Royal Society also published monographs in English. One of the first was by Robert Hooke, the society’s first curator of experiments, who described his experiments with microscopes in Micrographia (1665). This work is largely narrative in style, based on a transcript of oral demonstrations and lectures.
幸运的是，有几名英国皇家学会的成员对语言感兴趣，并开始从事各种语言学方面的研究工作。尽管1664年关于建立改善英语委员会的提议没有什么结果，但是英国皇家学会的成员却做了大量的工作，促进用英语出版科学著作，鼓励恰当写作风格的形成。许多英国皇家学会的成员也用英文发表了学术专著，首批成员包括学会首任实验管理员罗伯特·胡克，他1665年出版了《显微图集》，书中描述了他的显微镜实验。这本著作以口头讲解示范和讲座的文字记录稿为蓝本，大体上是记叙文风格。
In 1665 a new scientific journal, Philosophical Transactions, was inaugurated. Perhaps the first international English-language scientific journal, it encouraged a new genre of scientific writing, that of short, focused accounts of particular experiments.
1665年，一份新的科学杂志《哲学汇刊》创刊。这或许算得上是首份英文国际科学期刊。该期刊鼓励新的科学写作风格：简洁、重点地描述某一特定实验。
The 17th century was thus a formative period in the establishment of scientific English. In the following century much of this momentum was lost as German established itself as the leading European language of science. It is estimated that by the end of the 18th century 401 German scientific journals had been established as opposed to 96 in France and 50 in England. However, in the 19th century scientific English again enjoyed substantial lexical growth as the industrial revolution created the need for new technical vocabulary, and new, specialized, professional societies were instituted to promote and publish in the new disciplines.
因此，17世纪算是科技英语形成的发展阶段。在接下来的一个世纪中，科技英语的这种发展势头却消失了，因为德语成为了欧洲科学领域的主导语言。据估计，到了18世纪末，德语科学杂志有401份，与之相对，法语科学杂志有96份，英语科学杂志有50份，尽管如此，到了19世纪，伴随着工业革命对新技术词汇的需要，科技英语在词汇上重新有了大幅度的增长。同时，新的专业学会也纷纷建立起来，促进新学科的发展和著作的出版。
以上是小编为大家带来的雅思5阅读翻译精准版详细介绍，希望能够对大家更好的进行练习有帮助。