高等院校英语专业八级考试样题Ⅲ（2）
|
Section B： Translate the following underlined part of the English text into Chinese （原 文） I agree to some extent with my imaginary English reader. American literary historians are perhaps prone to view their own national scene too narrowly， mistaking prominence for uniqueness. They do over-phrase their own literature， or certainly its minor figures. And Americans do swing from aggressive overphrase of their literature to an equally unfortunate， imitative deference. But then， the English themselves are somewhat insular in their literary appraisals. Moreover， in fields where they are not pre-eminent - e.g. in painting and music -they too alternate between boasting of native products and copying those of the Continent. How many English paintings try to look as though they were done in Paris； how many times have we read in articles that they really represent an “English tradition” after all. To speak of American literature， then， is not to assert that it is completely unlike that of Europe. Broadly speaking， America and Europe have kept step. At any given moment the traveler could find examples in both of the same architecture， the same styles in dress， the same books on the shelves. Ideas have crossed the Atlantic as freely as men and merchandise， though sometimes more slowly. When I refer to American habit， thoughts， etc.， I intend some sort of qualification to precede the word， for frequently the difference between America and Europe （especially England） will be one of degree， sometimes only of a small degree. The amount of divergence is a subtle affair， liable to perplex the Englishman when he looks at America. He is looking at a country which in important senses grew out of his own， which in several ways still resembles his own - and which is yet a foreign country. There are odd overlappings and abrupt unfamiliarities； kinship yields to a sudden alienation， as when we hail a person across the street， only to discover from his blank response that we have mistaken a stranger for a friend. （参考译文） 在某种程度上，我赞同我那假想中的英国读者的观点。美国文学史家或许惯于过分狭隘地看待其本国文坛，误将卓着当作独特。他们确实会用过多的笔墨来渲染其本国文学，至少，对其次要作家他们肯定会这样做。此外，美国人确实会走极端，要么咄咄逼人地大肆渲染其文学，要么进行着同样不幸的亦步亦趋式的顶礼膜拜。但反过来说，英国人自己在其文学鉴赏中也显得有些狭隘愚陋。此外，在他们并无上乘表现的领域——例如绘画与音乐，他们也会走极端，不是吹嘘他们本国的作品，就是大肆模仿欧洲大陆的作品。有多少幅英国绘画试图看上去仿佛是在巴黎完成的；但我们又有多少次曾在文章中读到它们真正代表着一种“英国式的传统”呢？ 那么，要谈论美国文学，倒并非意欲断言，它与欧洲文学全然大相径庭。广而言之，美国与欧洲一直同步发展，协调一致。在任何一个特定的时刻，旅行者在两地均能目睹同一样式的建筑实例，相同款式的服饰，书架上相同的书籍。在大西洋两岸，思想如同人员与货物往来一样自由交流，尽管有时会略显迟缓。当我提及美国式的习惯、思想等概念时，我意欲在“美国式的”这一词汇之前加上某种限定，因为欧美（尤其是英美）之间的差异往往只是程度上的差异而已，并且有时候仅仅只是微乎其微的一点程度差异而已。差异的多寡是件极为微妙的事务，这极容易使一个英国人在审视美国时大惑不解。他所审视的那个国家，从某些重要的意义上来说，诞生于他自己的国家，并在某些方面仍与他自己的国家相差无几——然而，它却实实在在是一个异邦。两者间存在着某些古怪的交替重迭，以及令人甚感突兀的陌生感；亲缘关系已让位于一种突如其来的异化与疏远，这种情景仿佛就像我们隔着马路向另一个人打招呼，结果却从这个人漠无表情的反应中发现，我们原来竟然错将生人当成了熟人。 相关资料 |
