• 新东方网>英语>口译翻译>试题>模拟试题>口译模拟题>正文


    2017-12-28 11:01



      Test for Interpreters of Level 1

      Speeches for Consecutive Interpreting

      Transcripts for the Recorded Speeches

      Part I Interpret the following passages from English into Chinese. Start

      interpreting at the signal and stop at the signal. You may take notes while you are

      listening. You will hear each passage only once. Now let’s begin.

      Passage 1 下面你将听到的是一段对联合国前秘书长?#26448;?#30340;评论。

      Whatever disadvantages Ban Ki-moon, the new Secretary-General, brings with

      him, he at least lacks the baggage that burdened Kofi Annan heading out of the door.

      Mr Annan took the top job at the UN a decade ago, already battered from his years in

      charge of UN peacekeeping, after the organization (and everybody else) failed to stop

      the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. He leaves weighed down by a miserable relationship

      with the world’s most powerful country.

      Mr. Annan’s record, inevitably, is a mixed one. Enjoying few powers of his own,

      the Secretary-General has influence only when strong states cooperate. Last week he

      used a talk in Missouri to scold America for not working better with other countries.

      He referred repeatedly to Harry Truman, quoting the former president as saying that

      “no matter how great our strength, we must deny ourselves the license to do always as

      we please.”

      In some areas Mr. Annan and the superpower have been of one mind. The UN can

      claim significant successes in encouraging Nigeria to give up military rule and in

      deploying a peacekeeping force to East Timor. On Mr. Annan’s watch, the UN also

      contributed to peace efforts in Congo, Sierra Leone, Liberia and elsewhere. In 2001,

      Mr. Annan and the organization picked up a Nobel peace prize. At other times Mr.

      Annan’s office and the White House agreed on what should be done, but achieved

      little. In Sudan, Mr. Annan wants the deployment of a powerful UN peacekeeping

      force. Darfur is a case study for his principle of the “responsibility to protect”.

      Although the member states endorsed his idea at a summit in late 2005, in the absence

      of a standing army deployed by the Secretary-General, or of substantial military

      support from member states, his idea has yet translated into anything meaningful.

      But Mr. Annan experienced his greatest difficulties when in opposition to the

      United States. After America and its allies failed to get Security Council endorsement

      for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, hostility towards Mr. Annan grew in Washington, DC.

      By September 2004 Mr. Annan was openly calling the invasion of Iraq illegal, which

      in turn provoked complaints from Republicans that he was trying to influence that

      year’s American presidential election. Some of Mr. Annan’s American critics called

      for his removal as Secretary-General and cast around for sticks to beat him with. Late

      in 2005, an American investigation into the UN’s oil-for-food program in Iraq

      concluded that waste, inefficiency and corruption had cost billions of dollars and

      could be blamed in part on UN staff at headquarters and in the field, though it failed

      to show any evidence that Mr. Annan himself was involved.

      Given such frosty relations and the ongoing debacle in Iraq, it is perhaps

      remarkable that there have since been any substantial attempts at cooperation at all.

      Yet the UN and America have striven to find the killers of a former Lebanese prime

      minister; there is joint opposition to nuclear proliferation, for example, in Iran; and, as

      mentioned, there is a shared approach to Sudan. And in a conciliatory gesture, also

      last week, Mr. Annan used a speech to the UN to express sympathy with the notion

      widely held in America that the organization, especially its General Assembly, is too

      often mindlessly opposed to Israel. Such efforts to reach out to America, along with

      the removal of John Bolton as America’s representative at the UN, may mean a

      friendlier start for Mr. Ban in 2007. And that may, possibly, mean a greater chance of

      getting America’s help for protecting the weak in Darfur and elsewhere.

      Passage 2 下面你将听到的是一段有关?#31216;?#23433;全的?#19981;啊?/strong>

      Ten years ago, food safety was not on many people’s mind in Europe. We all

      expected our food to be safe, not only because it generally was safe, but also because

      incidences of chemical or microbiological contamination were local in nature. What a

      contrast with the present. Today, food safety is one of the highest priority issues for

      consumers, producers and governments alike, all over Europe.

      What has caused this change? The occurrence of mad cow disease, of course,

      which brought with it the link to the terrible and fatal disease, created a widespread

      and deep-set unease about meat products. To date, the consequences of mad cow

      disease are felt across Europe and beyond.

      The recent occurrence of foot-and-mouth disease and other incidents let European

      consumers wake up to the reality that the trade in food and farm products is truly

      international. They are starting to discover the intricate network of international trade

      that underlies the food industry and brings products to supermarket shelves.

      Between the 1950s and 1980s, we saw tremendous improvements in the safety of

      the food we eat in Europe. What we can call the “first wave” of food safety measures

      came with the sterilization of milk and milk products and the introduction of rigid and

      effective hygiene systems in the production chain, mainly from the dairy and the

      abattoir to the supermarket. The “second wave” of food safety measures came with

      the widespread introduction of the hazard control system for the production chain.

      Yet, since the early 1980s, we have seen a marked increase in the reports of

      food-borne diseases, resulting from chemical contamination. This situation, and

      associated loss of public confidence, suggest that something has gone wrong. We need

      a “third wave” of food safety measures. This third wave must focus on the direct risk

      to humans. We need to begin with the epidemiology of food-borne diseases and track

      them back through the food chain, all the way to the farm.

      It means building up the capacity — and making effective use of expertise in

      assessing risks to human health. It means building up capacity for epidemiological

      tracking and mapping of food-related diseases. It means improving our data collection

      efforts for both the pathogens in the food and human disease.

      And it will mean that officials concerned with agricultural productivity, and

      officials responsible for the health of populations, work together. Not only must they

      communicate. They must collaborate closely so that they can quickly trace back each

      incident of suspected food-borne disease to its source, analyze the size and geography

      of the problem and suggest both short- and long-term remedial measures.

      This all calls for political action. People — both as consumers and producers —

      expect their government officials to work together for the common good. Not only do

      they expect their politicians to make sure that government works in the primary

      interests of those who consume food: they also expect politicians to take action based

      on expert evidence.

      This will mean a restructuring of agricultural ministries so that they move beyond

      a primary focus on economic issues. They need to represent the interests of the whole

      community — producers, processors and consumers. This kind of transformation

      will make for a healthier base for the future of the industry.

      It will also mean that ministries of health have to take interest in, and give priority

      to, action to monitor and prevent food-borne illness. They would need to strengthen

      their food safety resources and improve collaboration with other ministries. An

      incident of suspected food poisoning should no longer just be seen by doctors as a

      temporary health problem. It should be considered as a possible symptom of the

      break-down in the food-safety system.

      Part II Interpret the following passages from Chinese into English. Start

      interpreting at the signal and stop at the signal. You may take notes while you are

      listening. You will hear each passage only once. Now let’s begin.

      Passage 1 下面你将听到的是一段有关中国经济发展的?#19981;啊?/strong>




















      Passage 2 下面你将听到的是一段建设社会主义新农村的?#19981;啊?/strong>

























    • 听力
    • 口语
    • 阅读
    • 娱乐
    • 词汇
    • 写作


              班级名称 上课地点 上课时间 费用 详细




              凡本网注明"稿件来源:新东方"的所有文字、图片和音视频稿件,版权均属新东方教育科技集团(含本网和新东方网) 所?#26657;?#20219;何媒体、网站或个人未经本网协议授权不得转载、链接、转贴或以其他任何方式复制、发表。已经本网协议授权的媒体、网站,在下载使用时必须注明"稿件来源:新东方",违者本网将依法追究法律责任。