1998年Passage 2 

Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain? Everywhere you go in America, you hear tales of corporate revival. What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.

The official statistics are mildly discouraging. They show that, if you lump manufacturing and services together, productivity has grown on average by 1.2% since 1987. That is somewhat faster than the average during the previous decade. And since 1991, productivity has increased by about 2% a year, which is more than twice the 1978 87 average. The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend. There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.

Some of this can be easily explained. New ways of organizing the workplace all that re engineering and downsizing - are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training. Moreover, most of the changes that companies make are intended to keep them profitable, and this need not always mean increasing productivity: switching to new markets or improving quality can matter just as much.

Two other explanations are more speculative. First, some of the business restructuring of recent years may have been ineptly done. Second, even if it was well done, it may have spread much less widely than people suppose.

Leonard Schlesinger, a Harvard academic and former chief executive of Au Bong Pain, a rapidly growing chain of bakery cafes, says that much "re engineering" has been crude. In many cases, he believes, the loss of revenue has been greater than the reductions in cost. His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long term profitability. BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re engineering consultants as mere rubbish - "the worst sort of ambulance cashing."

55. According to the author, the American economic situation is _____ .
[A] not as good as it seems
[B] at its turning point
[C] much better than it seems
[D] near to complete recovery

[答案] A

[解題思路]

文章第一段最后一句話指出"What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real"（但是，更加難以確定的是商家自認為他們發動的這場生產率革命是否真的名副其實），緊接著第二段第五句話進一步認為"The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend"（而問題在于，近年出現的生產力快速增長部分是由于商業周期通常到了這時候常出現的反彈造成的，因而還不能以此作為最終的證據來證明這種趨勢預示出經濟復蘇的姿態），這些都說明了作者并不認為美國經濟已經從根本上復蘇，現在看到的只是表面現象，因而A為正確選項。做好本題的關鍵就是要抓住這些分布在不同地方的相關信息，理解長句的含義并將它們結合起來一起幫助做題。

[題目譯文]

文章作者認為美國的經濟形勢是           。
[A] 不如看起來那么好
[B] 正處于轉折點
[C] 比看起來好多了
[D] 接近完全的復蘇

56. The official statistics on productivity growth _____ .
[A] exclude the usual rebound in a business cycle
[B] fall short of businessmen's anticipation
[C] meet the expectation of business people
[D] fail to reflect the true state of economy

[答案] B

[解題思路]

本文對應的信息主要在文章的第二段，可以采用排除法一一排除。首先，第一句話說"The official statistics are mildly discouraging"（官方的統計數字卻有點不容樂觀），顯然C選項與該句的意思相左。另外，該段最后一句話指出"There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics"（正如財政部長羅伯特·魯賓所說的那樣，生產力發生大幅提高的商業傳奇與官方的統計數字所反映的情況之間存在著一種"脫節"），因此官方數據重點是與business anecdote的情況相異，但與business cycle 和state of economy無關，因此A、D選項都可以排除。B選項中"fall short of"是"沒有達到，不符合"的意思，符合原文的語境。

[題目譯文]

關于生產力增長的官方統計數據            。
[A] 沒有包括商業周期中通常出現的反彈
[B] 沒有達到商人們的預期
[C] 達到了商人們的預期
[D] 沒有反映出經濟的真實狀況

57. The author raises the question "what about pain without gain?" because _____ .
[A] he questions the truth of "no gain without pain"
[B] he does not think the productivity revolution works
[C] he wonders if the official statistics are misleading
[D] he has conclusive evidence for the revival of businesses

[答案] B

[解題思路]

本題可以采用排除法。題干提到的這句話出現在文章的第一句，是作者用來引出話題的，而并不是文章的主題，因此A選項首先可以排除。關于C選項，文章第二段的開頭說到"The official statistics are mildly discouraging"（官方的統計數字卻有點不容樂觀），但是discouraging并不代表misleading，所以C選項也錯誤。關于D選項，第二段第五句話認為"The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend"，因此D選項與原文意思相反，是錯誤選項。文章最后一句指出"He dismisses a lot of the work of re engineering consultants as mere rubbish - "the worst sort of ambulance cashing.""（BBDO的艾爾·羅森夏恩更加直率，他把許多重組咨詢專家所做的工作視為垃圾--"典型的勞而無獲"），可見作者對于生產力革命是持否定態度的，因此正確選項為B。

[題目譯文]

作者提出了"如果是有勞無獲呢？"這個問題的原因是        。
[A] 他懷疑"不勞而獲"這一說法的真實性
[B] 他認為生產力革命不起作用
[C] 他懷疑官方的統計數據有誤導作用
[D] 他有關于經濟復蘇的確鑿證據

58. Which of the following statements is NOT mentioned in the passage?
[A] Radical reforms are essential for the increase of productivity.
[B] New ways of organizing workplaces may help to increase productivity.
[C] The reduction of costs is not a sure way to gain long term profitability.
[D] The consultants are a bunch of good for nothings.

[答案] A

[解題思路]

本題要求選擇在文章中沒有提到的說法，因此應該與原文一一對應采用排除法來排除。首先，文章第三段第二句話指出："New ways of organizing the workplace all that re engineering and downsizing - are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training"（新的工作場所組織方式--包括所有那些重組和縮小規模的做法--只是促進某一個經濟實體的綜合生產力水平的一項措施，而這種生產力的提高還受到許多其他因素的驅動，如對機械設備的聯合投資，采用新技術，以及在教育和培訓上的投資），因此可見B選項與該句意思吻合，是對該句的一個簡要概括，因此B選項表述正確。C和D選項分別對應于文章最后一段的最后兩句話，"His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long term profitability"（他的同事邁克·比爾說，太多的公司用簡單機械的方式進行重組，在沒有充分考慮到長期贏利能力的情況下降低了成本）和"He dismisses a lot of the work of re engineering consultants as mere rubbish - "the worst sort of ambulance cashing.""（BBDO的艾爾·羅森夏恩更加直率，他把許多重組咨詢專家所做的工作視為垃圾--"典型的勞而無獲"），因此這兩個選項的表述都是正確的。而A選項在文中則沒有明確的對應信息，因此答案為A。

[題目譯文]

下面哪一項說法沒有在文中提到？
[A] 激進的改革對生產力的提高十分重要。
[B] 企業重組的新方式可能有助于提高生產力。
[C] 降低成本并不能保證獲得長期的效益。
[D] 那些咨詢顧問都是沒有的人

　　相關推薦：考研英語閱讀理解命題思路透析和真題揭秘(31)

　　　　　　　2009考研英語考前狂背作文：應用文范文匯總