English Quiz 138

(English Quiz 138)

1. Pity poor Xiang Xiang. Pampered from birth, his every need anticipated by a loyal band of caregivers at Sichuan's Wolong Giant Panda Breeding Center, the baffled bear received the shock of his young life soon after his fourth birthday. Last April 28, he was driven into the middle of thick bamboo forest and abandoned, making him the first giant panda bred in captivity to be released by Chinese scientists into the wild.

Q: 試翻 "Pampered from birth, ... after his fourth birthday."

2. Chinese scientists have spent millions of dollars and gone to extraordinary (some might say absurd) lengths to perfect a captive breeding program for the notoriously shy bears. After several decades of frustration, 2006 was a banner year. Using methods ranging from electric rectal probes and Viagra (the drug didn't work) to movies of pandas mating, China produced 34 panda cubs last year. That compares with only nine births in 2000. The program was initially spurred by a desire to save the species from extinction. But in 1975 China set aside 10 nature reserves for the bears, covering almost 1 million hectares in Sichuan province. That move, bolstered by years of worldwide publicity for the panda's plight, has reduced the threat. China's population of about 1,600 wild pandas has been stable for several years, says Fan Zhiyong of the WWF.

Q: 試翻 "Chinese scientists have spent ... the notoriously shy bears."

3. The fact that China's pandas are no longer in jeopardy makes it harder to justify the more questionable aspects of its breeding programs. The 200,000-hectare Wolong Nature Reserve, for example, faces pressure from human development and is barely large enough to support its wild bear population, let alone additional pen-reared animals like Xiang Xiang. Then there's the problem that, with the exception of ungulates like deer, animals raised in captivity are rarely able to adjust to the rigors of the wild. So why go to such lengths to breed pandas if the threat of extinction has eased? Harkness says national pride in the program's success and bureaucratic self-preservation are factors. There also may be an economic motive. Zoos are eager to donate money to China in exchange for the right to display pandas.

Q: 試翻 "The 200,000-hectare ... animals like Xiang Xiang."

English Quiz 137

(English Quiz 137)

1. FOR DECADES, THE PREVAILING DOGMA IN neuroscience was that the adult human brain is essentially immutable, hardwired, fixed in form and function, so that by the time we reach adulthood we are pretty much stuck with what we have. Yes, it can create (and lose) synapses, the connections between neurons that encode memories and learning. And it can suffer injury and degeneration. But this view held that if genes and development dictate that one cluster of neurons will process signals from the eye and another cluster will move the fingers of the right hand, then they'll do that and nothing else until the day you die. There was good reason for lavishly illustrated brain books to show the function, size and location of the brain's structures in permanent ink.
Q: 試翻 "There was good reason ... in permanent ink."

2. But research in the past few years has overthrown the dogma. In its place has come the realization that the adult brain retains impressive powers of "neuroplasticity"--the ability to change its structure and function in response to experience. These aren't minor tweaks either. Something as basic as the function of the visual or auditory cortex can change as a result of a person's experience of becoming deaf or blind at a young age. Even when the brain suffers a trauma late in life, it can rezone itself like a city in a frenzy of urban renewal. If a stroke knocks out, say, the neighborhood of motor cortex that moves the right arm, a new technique called constraint-induced movement therapy can coax next-door regions to take over the function of the damaged area. The brain can be rewired.
Q: 試翻 "In its place ... in response to experience."

3. The first discoveries of neuroplasticity came from studies of how changes in the messages the brain receives through the senses can alter its structure and function. When no transmissions arrive from the eyes in someone who has been blind from a young age, for instance, the visual cortex can learn to hear or feel or even support verbal memory. When signals from the skin or muscles bombard the motor cortex or the somatosensory cortex (which processes touch), the brain expands the area that is wired to move, say, the fingers. In this sense, the very structure of our brain--the relative size of different regions, the strength of connections between them, even their functions--reflects the lives we have led. Like sand on a beach, the brain bears the footprints of the decisions we have made, the skills we have learned, the actions we have taken.
Q: 試翻 "Like sand on a beach, ... we have taken."

English Quiz 136

(English Quiz 136)

1. It was a fairly modest experiment, as these things go, with volunteers trooping into the lab at Harvard Medical School to learn and practice a little five-finger piano exercise. Neuroscientist Alvaro Pascual-Leone instructed the members of one group to play as fluidly as they could, trying to keep to the metronome's 60 beats per minute. Every day for five days, the volunteers practiced for two hours. Then they took a test. At the end of each day's practice session, they sat beneath a coil of wire that sent a brief magnetic pulse into the motor cortex of their brain, located in a strip running from the crown of the head toward each ear. The so-called transcranial-magnetic-stimulation (TMS) test allows scientists to infer the function of neurons just beneath the coil. In the piano players, the TMS mapped how much of the motor cortex controlled the finger movements needed for the piano exercise. What the scientists found was that after a week of practice, the stretch of motor cortex devoted to these finger movements took over surrounding areas like dandelions on a suburban lawn.

2. The finding was in line with a growing number of discoveries at the time showing that greater use of a particular muscle causes the brain to devote more cortical real estate to it. But Pascual-Leone did not stop there. He extended the experiment by having another group of volunteers merely think about practicing the piano exercise. They played the simple piece of music in their head, holding their hands still while imagining how they would move their fingers. Then they too sat beneath the TMS coil.
Q: 試翻 "The finding was ... cortical real estate to it."

3. When the scientists compared the TMS data on the two groups--those who actually tickled the ivories and those who only imagined doing so--they glimpsed a revolutionary idea about the brain: the ability of mere thought to alter the physical structure and function of our gray matter. For what the TMS revealed was that the region of motor cortex that controls the piano-playing fingers also expanded in the brains of volunteers who imagined playing the music--just as it had in those who actually played it. "Mental practice resulted in a similar reorganization" of the brain, Pascual-Leone later wrote. If his results hold for other forms of movement (and there is no reason to think they don't), then mentally practicing a golf swing or a forward pass or a swimming turn could lead to mastery with less physical practice. Even more profound, the discovery showed that mental training had the power to change the physical structure of the brain
.Q: 試翻 "When the scientists ... our gray matter."

English Quiz 135

(English Quiz 135)

1. TO APPRECIATE THE HARDNESS OF THE HARD PROBLEM, CONSIDER how you could ever know whether you see colors the same way that I do. Sure, you and I both call grass green, but perhaps you see grass as having the color that I would describe, if I were in your shoes, as purple. Or ponder whether there could be a true zombie--a being who acts just like you or me but in whom there is no self actually feeling anything. No one knows what to do with the Hard Problem. Some people may see it as an opening to sneak the soul back in, but this just relabels the mystery of "consciousness" as the mystery of "the soul"--a word game that provides no insight.

2. Many philosophers, like Daniel Dennett, deny that the Hard Problem exists at all. Speculating about zombies and inverted colors is a waste of time, they say, because nothing could ever settle the issue one way or another. Anything you could do to understand consciousness--like finding out what wavelengths make people see green or how similar they say it is to blue, or what emotions they associate with it--boils down to information processing in the brain and thus gets sucked back into the Easy Problem, leaving nothing else to explain. Most people react to this argument with incredulity because it seems to deny the ultimate undeniable fact: our own experience.

Q: 試翻 "Most people react ... our own experience."

3. And then there is the theory put forward by philosopher Colin McGinn that our vertigo when pondering the Hard Problem is itself a quirk of our brains. The brain is a product of evolution, and just as animal brains have their limitations, we have ours. Our brains can't hold a hundred numbers in memory, can't visualize seven-dimensional space and perhaps can't intuitively grasp why neural information processing observed from the outside should give rise to subjective experience on the inside. This is where I place my bet, though I admit that the theory could be demolished when an unborn genius--a Darwin or Einstein of consciousness--comes up with a flabbergasting new idea that suddenly makes it all clear to us

.Q: 試翻 "Our brains can't hold ... on the inside."

4. MY OWN VIEW IS THAT THIS IS backward: the biology of consciousness offers a sounder basis for morality than the unprovable dogma of an immortal soul. It's not just that an understanding of the physiology of consciousness will reduce human suffering through new treatments for pain and depression. That understanding can also force us to recognize the interests of other beings--the core of morality. As every student in Philosophy 101 learns, nothing can force me to believe that anyone except me is conscious. This power to deny that other people have feelings is not just an academic exercise but an all-too-common vice, as we see in the long history of human cruelty. Yet once we realize that our own consciousness is a product of our brains and that other people have brains like ours, a denial of other people's sentience becomes ludicrous.

Q: 試翻 "Yet once we realize that ... becomes ludicrous."

English Quiz 134

(English Quiz 134)

1. ANOTHER STARTLING CONCLUSION FROM the science of consciousness is that the intuitive feeling we have that there's an executive "I" that sits in a control room of our brain, scanning the screens of the senses and pushing the buttons of the muscles, is an illusion. Consciousness turns out to consist of a maelstrom of events distributed across the brain. These events compete for attention, and as one process outshouts the others, the brain rationalizes the outcome after the fact and concocts the impression that a single self was in charge all along.
Q: 試翻 "These events compete ... was in charge all along."

2. Why does consciousness exist at all, at least in the Easy Problem sense in which some kinds of information are accessible and others hidden? One reason is information overload. Just as a person can be overwhelmed today by the gusher of data coming in from electronic media, decision circuits inside the brain would be swamped if every curlicue and muscle twitch that was registered somewhere in the brain were constantly being delivered to them. Instead, our working memory and spotlight of attention receive executive summaries of the events and states that are most relevant to updating an understanding of the world and figuring out what to do next. The cognitive psychologist Bernard Baars likens consciousness to a global blackboard on which brain processes post their results and monitor the results of the others.
Q: 試翻 "Instead, our working memory ... what to do next."

3. A SECOND REASON THAT INFORMATION MAY BE SEALED OFF FROM consciousness is strategic. Evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers has noted that people have a motive to sell themselves as beneficent, rational, competent agents. The best propagandist is the one who believes his own lies, ensuring that he can't leak his deceit through nervous twitches or self-contradictions. So the brain might have been shaped to keep compromising data away from the conscious processes that govern our interaction with other people. At the same time, it keeps the data around in unconscious processes to prevent the person from getting too far out of touch with reality.
Q: 試翻 "The best propagandist ... or self-contradictions."
Note: 不禁讓我想起某位自以為清廉高尚的政治人物,不但騙別人拿手,恐怕更是個自我催眠高手.我看根本是"一路走來,始終貪腐".

English Quiz 133

(English Quiz 133)

1. WHAT REMAINS IS NOT ONE PROBLEM ABOUT CONSCIOUSNESS BUT two, which the philosopher David Chalmers has dubbed the Easy Problem and the Hard Problem. Calling the first one easy is an in-joke: it is easy in the sense that curing cancer or sending someone to Mars is easy. That is, scientists more or less know what to look for, and with enough brainpower and funding, they would probably crack it in this century.

2. What exactly is the Easy Problem? It's the one that Freud made famous, the difference between conscious and unconscious thoughts. Some kinds of information in the brain--such as the surfaces in front of you, your daydreams, your plans for the day, your pleasures and peeves--are conscious. You can ponder them, discuss them and let them guide your behavior. Other kinds, like the control of your heart rate, the rules that order the words as you speak and the sequence of muscle contractions that allow you to hold a pencil, are unconscious. They must be in the brain somewhere because you couldn't walk and talk and see without them, but they are sealed off from your planning and reasoning circuits, and you can't say a thing about them. The Easy Problem, then, is to distinguish conscious from unconscious mental computation, identify its correlates in the brain and explain why it evolved.
Q: 試翻 "The Easy Problem, then, ... why it evolved."

3. The Hard Problem, on the other hand, is why it feels like something to have a conscious process going on in one's head--why there is first-person, subjective experience. Not only does a green thing look different from a red thing, remind us of other green things and inspire us to say, "That's green" (the Easy Problem), but it also actually looks green: it produces an experience of sheer greenness that isn't reducible to anything else. As Louis Armstrong said in response to a request to define jazz, "When you got to ask what it is, you never get to know." The Hard Problem is explaining how subjective experience arises from neural computation. The problem is hard because no one knows what a solution might look like or even whether it is a genuine scientific problem in the first place. And not surprisingly, everyone agrees that the hard problem (if it is a problem) remains a mystery.
Q: 試翻 "The Hard Problem is explaining ... in the first place."

4. Although neither problem has been solved, neuroscientists agree on many features of both of them, and the feature they find least controversial is the one that many people outside the field find the most shocking. Francis Crick called it "the astonishing hypothesis"--the idea that our thoughts, sensations, joys and aches consist entirely of physiological activity in the tissues of the brain. Consciousness does not reside in an ethereal soul that uses the brain like a PDA; consciousness is the activity of the brain.
Q: 試翻 "Francis Crick called it ... tissues of the brain."

English Quiz 132

(English Quiz 132)

1. Trying to map the brain has always been cartography for fools. Most of the other parts of the body reveal their workings with little more than a glance. The heart is self-evidently a pump; the lungs are clearly bellows. But the brain, which does more than any organ, reveals least of all. The 3-lb. lump of wrinkled tissue--with no moving parts, no joints or valves--not only serves as the motherboard for all the body's other systems but also is the seat of your mind, your thoughts, your sense that you exist at all. You have a liver; you have your limbs. You are your brain. The struggle of the mind to fathom the brain it inhabits is the most circular kind of search--the cognitive equivalent of M.C. Escher's lithograph of two hands drawing one another. But that has not stopped us from trying. In the 19th century, German physician Franz Joseph Gall claimed to have licked the problem with his system of phrenology, which divided the brain into dozens of personality organs to which the skull was said to conform. Learn to read those bony bumps, and you could know the mind within. The artificial--and, ultimately, racist--field of craniometry made similar claims, relying on the overall size and shape of the skull to try to determine intelligence and moral capacity.

Q: 試翻 "The struggle of the mind ... drawing one another."

2. Modern scientists have done a far better job of things, dividing the brain into multiple, discrete regions with satisfyingly technical names--hypothalamus, caudate nucleus, neocortex--and mapping particular functions to particular sites. Here lives abstract thought; here lives creativity; here is emotion; here is speech. But what about here and here and here and here--all the countless places and ways the brain continues to baffle us? Here still be dragons. Slowly, that is changing. As 21st century science and technology open the brain to us as never before, accepted truths are becoming less true. The brain, we're finding, is indeed a bordered organ, subdivided into zones and functions. But the lines are blurrier than we ever imagined. Lose your vision, and the lobe that processed light may repurpose itself for other senses. Suffer a stroke in the area that controls your right arm, and another area may take over at least some of the job.

Q: 試翻 "Lose your vision, ... some of the job."

English Quiz 131

(English Quiz 131)

1. In 1962, a government study of mutual funds revealed that they were, on average, average, or worse. This was an affront to many on Wall Street who assumed that, of course, professional investors beat the market. It was left to legendary investor Benjamin Graham to explain in a speech to securities analysts that "neither the financial analysts as a whole nor the investment funds as a whole can expect to 'beat the market,' because in a significant sense they (or you) are the market." At the time, the pros controlled only 15% of the U.S. stock market (the figure is now more than 60%). But they did the bulk of the trading. They moved the market. And therefore they could not, as a group, beat it. The mutual-fund industry's attempts to move this boulder by taking bigger risks ended badly. When the stock market plunged in the 1970s, the funds followed.

Q: 試翻 "neither the financial analysts ... are the market."

2. As mutual funds traveled this trail of tears, Southern California math professor Ed Thorp was delivering positive, usually double-digit, returns every year to investors in the fund he launched in 1969. Thorp, probably best known for figuring out how to beat the house at blackjack, did this by programming computers to identify small price discrepancies between securities that should have been trading in tandem. Then he borrowed tons of money to bet that these discrepancies would disappear. Such strategies were off-limits to mutual funds, but Thorp's Princeton Newport Partners was a hedge fund--an unregulated investment partnership catering to the rich. Today Thorp's progeny are everywhere, catering not just to rich people but also to pension funds and college endowments--and to not-so-rich people through listed hedge-fund stocks and hedgelike mutual funds. Thorp's was not the first hedge fund, and the term now covers all manner of investment beasts. But the approach he pioneered accounts for the bulk of the $1.43 trillion that Chicago-based Hedge Fund Research says hedge funds had under management at the end of the year. That's still puny compared with the $20 trillion in mutual funds worldwide. But because most hedgies trade avidly, usually with borrowed money that amplifies their clout, it is they who set the prices in many global markets. In a significant sense, they are the market, which means their days of beating the market must end.

Q: 試翻 "Today Thorp's progeny ... hedgelike mutual funds."

3. This raises an important question: Are hedge-fund managers going to react as their mutual-fund peers did 40 years ago, taking bigger and dumber risks in a continuing quest to justify their paychecks? Or are they going to slide calmly into respectability and mediocrity? Will the hedge-fund boom end in fire or in ice? The critical issue is leverage. Hedge funds make trades that are meant to be low risk, but do so with huge sums of borrowed money, so the consequences are magnified when the bets get too risky or too wrong. Thorp, who at 74 no longer runs a hedge fund but still invests in a few, doesn't worry too much about a meltdown. "My opinion is that the most likely scenario is not a blowup but rather that hedge funds as a group will gradually and continuously lose their edge (if they haven't already) over other asset classes," he writes in an e-mail. "Then they will 'top out'--like mutual funds, real estate, etc.--and then just be a fluctuating fraction of total financial assets--part of the financial landscape."

Q: 試翻 "The critical issue ... too risky or too wrong."

English Quiz 130

(English Quiz 130)

1. In 2007, the Russians were all over Davos once again — Russian politicians thinking ahead to the post-Putin era, and Russian businessmen riding the oil and commodities boom with a look of steely determination. Dmitri Medvedev, Russia 's First Deputy Prime Minister (and a rumored successor to Putin), spoke of Russia as "another country" from the way it had been in 2000, when its economy was marked by low productivity and high inflation. Those bothered by the sense that Russia was starting to throw its weight around were told to relax. Russia, Medvedev said, wanted to be recognized as a major economic and political power "not by the use of force but by the example of our own behavior and achievements." Any concerns about the way Russia sets about business and politics, Medvedev said, stemmed from "a lack of communication," rather than anything Russia did. But those worried by Russia's use of its energy resources as a political weapon — ask the Ukrainians or Belarusians about that — were granted little comfort. The days when Russia sent energy to its friends at less than market rates are gone for good. "There will no longer be any free gas for anyone," said Medvedev, for those who had not yet got the message.
Q: 試翻 "Russian politicians thinking ahead ... steely determination."

2. In the new climate, many developed countries have changed their legislation to crack down on bribery. One hundred and forty governments have now signed a 2003 United Nations convention against corruption. There are currently more than 100 foreign bribery investigations under way worldwide, according to Angel Gurria, the o.e.c.d.'s secretary-general. One of the cases with the highest profile involves the huge German firm Siemens, which is under investigation for allegedly paying bribes to win telecommunications contracts. The company said recently that, on checking its books for the past seven years, it has found $550 million in payments it could not clearly identify.
Q: 試翻 "There are currently ... to win telecommunications contracts."

3. Ever since the sfo announced it was dropping the case on Dec. 14, Blair has been plagued with questions. When it was signed in 1986, the deal with Saudi Arabia — known as the Al-Yamamah contract — was thought to provide a guaranteed stream of revenue for the British aerospace giant and safeguard thousands of jobs in the U.K. An extension of the deal, involving the sale of Eurofighter Typhoon jets, was agreed just last year. For Blair , Britain 's ties with the Saudis are paramount. "My advice was that this investigation would do enormous damage to our relations with Saudi Arabia," Blair told Parliament on Jan. 17, citing the Saudi role in combating terrorism. Blair also said that ending the contract could cause "thousands" of British jobs to be lost. Perhaps they would be. But Article 5 of the o.e.c.d. convention specifically states that neither national economic interests nor foreign-relations priorities should influence bribery investigations. If Britain gets away with shrugging off the convention's terms, it's hard to see what will be left of it. The convention has no mechanism for sanctioning governments other than peer pressure, and activists like Transparency International's Labelle fear "national security" may become an unofficial but accepted exemption. At the March meeting, British officials will once again be grilled on the case."We have to think through some difficult issues," says Pieth, the working group's chairman. No kidding.
Q: 試翻 "But Article 5 ... influence bribery investigations."

English Quiz 129

(English Quiz 129)

1. Not surprisingly, comparisons are being drawn between China's stock boom and the U.S. dotcom bubble of the late 1990s. Certainly there are similarities, such as a frenzy for initial public stock offerings. As investor demand for Chinese stocks has intensified, so has the list of mainland companies eager to cash in on the mania by going public. In 2006, Chinese companies raised more than $53 billion in the Hong Kong and Shanghai markets through IPOs and secondary share offerings, up from $24 billion the year before. Among them was the largest IPO in history, November's $22 billion listing in Hong Kong and Shanghai by Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC). Despite the fact that Chinese banks are known for their lack of transparency and weak management, ICBC was a wild success. Its share price at one point soared 70% above its initial offering price of 39? in Hong Kong. That pushed the bank's market cap so high that for a while it was valued as the second largest financial institution in the world behind giant Citigroup. The appetite for China stocks has encouraged other big corporations to tap the market. Analysts say they're expecting China Mobile, the world's largest mobile-phone company, to issue additional shares this year.

Q: 試翻 "As investor demand ... by going public."

2. If this is a bubble, is it about to burst? Maybe not. Peter Alexander, chief analyst for Z-Ben Advisors, a Shanghai investment consultancy, says Chinese companies are stronger and more efficient than they were a few years ago. "It's dangerous to bet against China," he says. That's what China's new investors think, too. Punters gathered to swap stocks and stories at the Beijing branch office of the China Galaxy Securities brokerage house on Jan. 29 certainly weren't letting a small drop in the market that day dampen their spirits. "I guess the fluctuation will go on for a while, maybe for another month or so," says Jiang Yulan, a trading aficionado, "but in a long term, the price will be going up by the end of this year." So confident are the assembled san hu that they don't even consider trading to be serious business. Instead, they use wan, the Chinese word for "play," to describe their activity. If the market tanks, the san hu won't be the first to discover that investing is not a game.

Q: 試翻 "Punters gathered to ... dampen their spirits."

English Quiz 128

(English Quiz 128)

1. Although he's 63 years old, Beijing retiree Du Shuzhan is not afraid to try new things. He has just discovered the stock market. A few weeks ago, Du deposited $1,500 in his first share-trading account, and on a recent January afternoon, visited his local broker to buy shares of seven Chinese companies. "All my friends started to invest in the stock market last year," Du says. "My wife and I decided to join the trend." Du admits that, when it comes to deciding which stocks to buy, he lacks expertise. "I don't know much about it. I just picked the ones with low prices." But he figures he'll do fine. "With all the money in the market, I don't see how it could go down."

2. Ah, such heady optimism. That unquestioning faith in the ability of China's soaring stock market to defy gravity has become worryingly common among Chinese investors -- so common that market observers and government officials are warning that a market correction might be on the way. Emboldened by a 130% rise in the Shanghai Composite Index last year -- which made Shanghai one of the best-performing exchanges in the world -- starry-eyed speculators and first-time punters like Du have been storming into Chinese stocks, ending the market's five-year slump and in recent weeks pushing daily trading volumes to all-time records. Last year, some 2.4 million investors began trading stocks through the Shanghai exchange, a 250% increase in new accounts. That's an average of about 7,000 per day, a flood of fresh blood from san hu (as the Chinese call small investors) that is making seasoned traders nervous. "When you see shop assistants and taxi drivers racing out to borrow money to buy stocks, you've got trouble," says commodities guru Jim Rogers. "That's the market sucking in a whole lot of neophytes priming to get slaughtered."
Q: 試翻 "That's the market sucking in a whole lot of neophytes priming to get slaughtered."

3. Plenty of stock analysts and fund managers disagree, arguing that prices are simply keeping pace with China's remarkable economic rise. The country's GDP grew 10.7% last year, the highest rate since 1995. But the bulls are increasingly being drowned out by those who see the kind of reckless speculation that often occurs in overheated markets. Beijing officials, worried there could be another Chinese market meltdown like one in 2001 that soured the public on stocks for years, are sounding the alarm. On Dec. 30, Cheng Siwei, a vice chairman of the National People's Congress, cautioned investors against "blind optimism" in the country's relatively underdeveloped capital markets. Last week, China Central Television, the government TV network, broadcast a show warning citizens not to use their homes as collateral for loans to buy stock. Authorities are doing more than jawbone -- bank lending for stock purchases was barred last month. Regulators also temporarily halted the sale of new mutual funds.
Q: 試翻 "Beijing officials, ... are sounding the alarm."
Q: 試翻 "Authorities are doing ... last month."

English Quiz 127

(English Quiz 127)

1. Buoyed by a belief that the major emerging markets will handle the challenges facing them, and that the U.S. — despite the worries over the housing sector — will have a soft landing, business leaders made their way to Davos in the sunniest mood that they've been in for years. (Literally: the day before the conference started, the Alpine town was as warm as you'd expect it to be in April, not late January.) A survey of 1,100 ceos in 50 countries by consultants PricewaterhouseCoopers showed that more than 90% were confident about their revenue growth for the coming year and for the three years ahead. Those numbers are record highs. Indeed, business leaders are so bullish that PricewaterhouseCoopers' ceo, Samuel DiPiazza, worries about hubris. "It's such a high level of confidence, we're wondering: Is it overoptimism?" he asks. Oddly, given the fearsome state of global politics, the main concerns of these executives are business related rather than geopolitical.

Q: 試翻 "Buoyed by a belief that ... they've been in for years."

2. One factor that also doesn't show up large on the polled ceos' list of concerns, but which was a big worry for the economists on Time's panel, is the growing backlash against globalization in the U.S. and Western Europe. In the rich world, wages have remained largely stagnant even though productivity has been rising. Governments have made several moves to address such dissatisfaction this year. In the U.S., the new Democratic-majority Congress is proposing to increase the minimum wage, while, in Germany, unions are pushing for pay raises substantially above inflation. Consumer purchasing power has also emerged as a key issue in the French presidential election. Even though Europeans and Americans are worried about globalization, they may not be well-informed about its true ramifications. All the panelists said they were concerned that the big questions relating to globalization, including the huge power shifts under way from the developed economies to the developing ones, were not being well explained in the West. "There isn't adequate intellectual or political debate," said India's Ahluwalia. Pointing to a growing concern in the West about a widening disparity between rich and poor, he said, "For the past 20 years, you told the developing world: Don't worry about inequality, worry about poverty. Now it's the developed world that's worrying about inequality."

Q: 試翻 "One factor that ... in the U.S. and Western Europe."

3. The point, of course, is not just that some sectors of the population within developed economies are doing so much better than others. It is, rather, that all the developed economies are watching their relative power decline. Sure, Germany is showing signs of life after years of weak growth. In Britain, the Bank of England unexpectedly raised interest rates in January in another sign that European economies are rebounding faster than forecast. But the longer-term prospects for Europe are clouded by the fact that its population is set to shrink. Addressing the Forum, German Chancellor Angela Merkel acknowledged that, "for the past 200 years, we got used to a Eurocentric view of the world, but today we can see that this type of overview is over." As for the U.S., the rise of China, India and maybe even Russia as economic forces demanding attention will pose questions that the American political system and society have not even begun to address. "I do worry how the U.S. will respond to the fact that its hyperpower status in terms of finance and wealth has to be reduced over the next 25 years," said Tyson. She has reason to worry: most Americans have no idea so elemental a shift of power is now under way.

Q: 試翻 "It is, rather, ... their relative power decline."

4. But for now, barring an unexpected crisis, the world economy should keep growing at more than 4%, the fourth year in a row at that level. Tyson, for one, bases her optimism on a variety of signs that the world economy is becoming more balanced, from the convergence of European, Japanese and U.S. growth rates at around an expected 2% annually to the growing importance of world trade, which last year for the first time accounted for more than 30% of the global gross domestic product. She and the other panelists aren't becoming cocksure, even in the short term, however. "The Big Bad Wolf is often hiding in the forest where we economists can't see him," Tyson cautioned. But for now, the wolves of the world economy are lurking far afield — and all you can hear is their howling in the distance.

English Quiz 126

(English Quiz 126)

1. But even if this upbeat scenario does come true, 2007 will also go down in history as a year of transition, in the phrase of Zhu Min, vice president of the Bank of China. High among his worries for the future are growing imbalances in the structure of the world economy, as Asia produces ever more of the goods that the U.S. consumes, and ends up investing ever more of the proceeds in U.S. government debt. These lopsided trade and financial flows are particularly acute between China and the U.S.: China's central bank currently holds $1 trillion in reserves, and that amount will probably swell by another $200 billion this year. "I am more and more convinced that we'll have a much tougher situation in the coming years," Zhu said, uneasy that policymakers around the globe have not yet begun addressing critical structural issues. Top of his wish list: some action by the U.S. to end its consumer-spending binge and encourage saving. As a banker, Zhu is also concerned about an explosion of complex and potentially perilous new instruments in financial markets, as hedge funds and many others leverage their investments worldwide.
Q: 試翻 "I am more and more convinced that ... critical structural issues."
Q: 試翻 "As a banker, ... leverage their investments worldwide."

2. Whoever ends up being right about this year's prospects for the U.S. economy, there was no dispute that the world is undergoing monumental shifts that will affect everyone, and in the not-so-distant future. Tyson described last year as "a landmark" because, as measured by purchasing power, emerging market economies for the first time overtook the developed world as a share of the global economy. But that rebalancing process still has a long way to go. Frenkel cited statistics showing that China and India together account for about 40% of the world's population but only 6% of world economic output. By contrast, the U.S., Japan and Western Europe make up 15% of the global population but account for 80% of its output. "There is a great gap, and it is going to be bridged over the next 20 years," he said. "We are going to see fundamental changes in the center of gravity and the center of power."
Q: 試翻 "Whoever ends up ... not-so-distant future."

English Quiz 125

(English Quiz 125)

1. What's the world's most worrisome nuclear-proliferation hotspot? Answer: the diplomatic table in Beijing where six-party talks are periodically convened to discuss North Korean nuclear disarmament. Every time the international negotiators gather—or even threaten to gather—Pyongyang seems to take another step toward unrestrained nuclear breakout.

Q: 試翻 "Every time ... unrestrained nuclear breakout."

2. In the summer of 2003, when the talks were first planned, Pyongyang merely insisted on its right to hold what it coyly called a "war deterrent." Five rounds of dialogue later, there has been real progress—not in the negotiations, but in North Korea's nuclear program. After defiantly admitting that the nation already possessed nukes and later stating it would not get rid of them "under any circumstances," the North last October shocked the world with its first nuclear test. You might think that the diplomatic sophisticates in charge of the negotiations would have detected a discouraging pattern by now. Apparently not. Recent reports suggesting that Pyongyang may be preparing for a second test have only increased urgent calls for the North to return to the bargaining table, possibly as soon as early February.

Q: 試翻 "Recent reports suggesting that ... as soon as early February."

3. Perhaps most astonishing of all, even Washington is now straining for another chance to coax Pyongyang into voluntary nuclear self-disarmament. Over the past year, the Bush Administration, once the only actor in the cast committed to pressing North Korea into nonproliferation compliance, has performed a dizzying climb-down. Gone are U.S. demands for the complete, verifiable, irreversible dismantlement of the North's nuclear programs. American diplomats no longer even talk of North Korea's highly enriched-uranium program, whose public exposure by State Department officials in 2002 triggered the ongoing proliferation drama. Since North Korean officials now insist they've never had such a program, it would be undiplomatic to suggest otherwise. Instead, the U.S. was reduced last month to promising North Korea an "early harvest" in return for good behavior. This concept called for the U.S. to pledge economic aid (food, oil) and other benefits (including, perhaps, diplomatic recognition) in return for a provisional North Korean freeze of its plutonium facilities and a readmission of nuclear inspectors. In other words, the Bush Administration was proffering a zero-penalty return to the previous nuclear deals Pyongyang had flagrantly broken—but with additional goodies, and a provisional free pass for any nukes produced since 2002. With this overture, the Bush team embraced the very approach it had once mocked as weak-kneed and "Clintonesque."

Q: 試翻 "Gone are U.S. demands ... the North's nuclear programs."

Q: 試翻 "In other words, ... since 2002."

English Quiz 124

(English Quiz 124)

1. The Iraq war has acted like bleach on this year's primary colors: political stripes have faded and dissolved as candidates scramble to explain how they would get America out of Iraq without igniting the Middle East. The most conservative candidate for the G.O.P., Sam Brownback, is closer on Iraq to Democrat Joseph Biden than he is to John McCain. Democrats John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, are worlds apart.

Q: 試翻 "The Iraq war ... the Middle East."

2. The Republican Party has perhaps the deepest identity crisis over the way forward in Iraq. G.O.P. voters are down on Bush but still largely behind the war, and three leading Republicans—John McCain, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani—would like to change policy but refuse to abandon the mission. All three back Bush's troop increase. McCain has, however, attacked the Administration's handling of the war. Brownback—like fellow Republican and potential candidate Chuck Hagel—supports scaling back the U.S. military mission and appears to be betting that by next winter Republican voters will be looking for an exit strategy.

Q: 試翻 "The Republican Party has ... behind the war."

3. Most Democratic voters oppose the war and want it ended. But too dovish a position by candidates now could look weak to independents and centrists in the general election. Hillary Clinton backed the war and the mission through last November's election but has since called for capping troop levels. Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, calls for cautious withdrawal and scores points for his proposed political solutions, including direct talks with Iran and Syria. Always antiwar, Barack Obama has taken the party position of cautious withdrawal: a troop drawdown starting in four to six months. John Edwards has come out hard and early to declare his vote authorizing the war was a mistake and to issue the strongest antisurge message among the major Democratic candidates.

Q: 試翻 "Always antiwar, ... in four to six months."

Q: 試翻 "John Edwards ... Democratic candidates."

4. No position on either side is particularly safe; they are all gambles on a certain outcome in Iraq. If the situation on the ground stabilizes, the leading Republicans and Clinton will appear steady hands; if it deteriorates, Biden, Brownback and Edwards will look wiser.

情人節大禮 - Princeton Admission

雖然我是15號早上看到email,15號半夜收到,不過是在當地時間的14號下午發出來的,所以也算是情人節禮物吧!

獎學金和指導教授等細節都還沒決定,要再過一陣子系上才會再來談,不過能一舉衝進 Top 10 仍然是件讓人興奮的事!

尤其第一個收到的 decision 就是好學校的 admission,真是棒! 目前戰績一勝零敗!

English Quiz 123

(English Quiz 123)

1. Fairy tales can hurt you only if you believe them. That's why the widespread conviction right now that the "Goldilocks economy" will prevail in 2007 is so worrying. Stock markets around the world have been rallying strongly because key global economic fundamentals are said to be not too hot, not too cold, but just right. Growth is solid, inflation is relatively low, energy prices are easing, interest rates are benign, and consumer spending is holding up, most importantly in the U.S. The assumption that investors seem to be relying on to justify the high prices they are paying for stocks is that this situation will last indefinitely.

Q: 試翻 "The assumption that ... will last indefinitely."

2. But Goldilocks types are ignoring some macroeconomic realities that threaten this rosy outlook. We are now entering the sixth year of an unusually broad and long-lived global expansion. Thanks largely to easy monetary conditions in the U.S. and elsewhere, this expansion has resulted in the build-up of huge economic imbalances that are unsustainable over the long term. These include the U.S. trade and current-account deficits, the accumulation of $3 trillion in monetary reserves by Asian central banks, excessive debt growth and leverage around the world, and growing income and wealth disparities. A sudden, sharp reversal of any one of these imbalances could cause stocks to fall precipitously. The sell-off could be triggered by any number of lurking dangers—an adverse geopolitical event such as an act of aggression against Iran, say, or the implosion of a massively leveraged hedge fund, or a loss of enthusiasm for the popular but perilous yen carry trade, whereby speculators borrow money cheaply in Japan's currency and then use it to bet on higher-return assets around the world. If that rich source of global liquidity were to dry up, the impact would be far greater than today's sanguine investors realize.

Q: 試翻 "Thanks largely to ... over the long term."

3. The problem with excessive monetary and debt growth is that it always leads to inflation in one sector of the economy or another. In the 1960s we had wage inflation, in the 1970s consumer price inflation, and now we are in the throes of breakneck asset inflation. But every type of inflation eventually ends. And when assets deflate, economic activity will suffer. Business slows, lenders call in their debts, companies go bankrupt—all of which is bad news for stocks, especially those that are priced as if risk no longer existed. Economic history is littered with periods of asset inflation that ended in tears. Just look at the bursting of the late-'90s tech bubble or the crash in homebuilder stocks that occurred when the U.S. housing market slowed last year.

Q: 試翻 "Economic history is ... that ended in tears."

4. What makes the current investment mania unique is that it's happening in every imaginable investment category. When the crunch comes, emerging markets in general could be hit hard, but those that have gone up the most—places like Latin America, India, Russia and China—are likely to fall the most. At times like these, investors should remember that, while buying during selling panics tends to yield superior returns in years to come, euphoric buying binges often prove a wise time to sell. In today's heady environment, I'd recommend building up cash positions, not least by lowering exposure to assets in overheated emerging markets. And if you must believe in fairy tales, try Little Red Riding Hood. That's the one in which the little girl is devoured by the wolf she failed to recognize before it was too late.

English Quiz 122

(English Quiz 122)

1. These days, U.S. officials routinely acknowledge that the Washington-Beijing relationship is the world's most important. Combined, the U.S. and Chinese economies accounted for more than half of global growth over the past four years, and how these nations interact over everything from Iran to North Korea will do much to determine whether peace and prosperity prevail in Asia and beyond. But high-level U.S. talks with China in recent years have been sporadic, at best. The heaviest hitters in President Bush's Administration have been preoccupied with the war on terror and the deepening fiasco in Iraq. Aside from last April's promise by China's President Hu Jintao to try to expand market access for U.S. goods, there has been scant evidence of constructive dialogue on trade issues.Q: 試翻 "But high-level U.S. talks ..., at best."

Q: 試翻 "Aside from last ... on trade issues."

2. In virtually the same breath, however, Paulson acknowledges that mind melds about the large economic issues confronting the two countries aren't what a lot of folks in Washington are looking for these days. Led by a Congress now controlled by the Democrats, the get-tough-on-China brigade in Washington is growing. Some U.S. lawmakers are demanding tangible action by Beijing on a range of issues, including the massive bilateral-trade imbalance, piracy of intellectual property and the perceived loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to low-cost labor in China. Specifically, the trade hawks want a faster revaluation of the yuan, China's currency, against the dollar, which would help balance trade by making Chinese goods more expensive in the U.S. and American products cheaper on the mainland. Absent significant policy shifts by Beijing, Congress might try to punish China by erecting punitive trade barriers, which could damage both countries, politically and economically. Does Paulson have any sense of what might be deliverable—and when? "None of the issues we're dealing with lend themselves to quick fixes," he says. "But I've never been known as the world's most patient person. I totally recognize that we need to get results."

Q: 試翻 "Led by a Congress ... on a range of issues"

3. Paulson says that on the current, headline-grabbing issue between the two countries—the yuan's undervaluation against the dollar—the difference between the two sides is all about timing. "I've been in meetings with my colleagues on the Hill and have explained to them that they are saying the same things as the Chinese," he says, "but [the two sides] are not communicating very well." In 2005, Beijing abandoned its practice of fixing the yuan directly to the dollar and instead linked it to a basket of currencies. But the yuan's value is still managed by the government, which has allowed the currency to rise less than 6% against the dollar since the dollar peg was scrapped. Beijing argues this policy has delivered a strong flow of foreign direct investment that has stabilized the country's weak financial system and helped modernize its economy. While most Chinese officials recognize that the yuan is undervalued, they insist adjustments must come gradually. They fear that an abrupt rise could trigger financial instability, a sharp slowdown in economic growth and rising unemployment. The U.S. is pushing for faster action.

Q: 試翻 "Paulson says that ... all about timing."

English Quiz 121

(English Quiz 121)

1. Many dangers to the world economy are still lurking, of course. Oil prices have dropped back recently from $70 to the low $50s, but they are still far higher than just a few years ago, and other commodity prices have soared, fueling inflation. Business leaders across the world are also watching nervously for signs of a protectionist blast from the new Democratic-majority Congress in Washington. Isolated cases of protectionism abound on both sides of the Atlantic: in December, the U.S. Department of Transportation turned down an application by Virgin America, a start-up airline partly owned by British billionaire Richard Branson, to begin domestic U.S. flights because of the carrier's foreign ownership. In Europe, meanwhile, the French government proudly touts its doctrine of "economic patriotism" and has tried, with mixed success, to engineer domestic mergers in the drugs and energy sectors to ward off foreign takeovers.
Q: 試翻 "In Europe, ... ward off foreign takeovers."

2. What economists are struggling to predict is how extensive the impact of this housing slowdown will be. Many other real estate markets around the globe rose in tandem with the U.S. in recent years, but so far none have come back down to earth with the same force. Perhaps most surprisingly, American consumers are continuing to spend, regardless: automobile purchases are sluggish, but monthly retail sales rose by a higher-than-forecast 0.9% from November to December. "I'm not prepared to bet against the American consumer. That's a highly dangerous proposition," says Jesper Koll, chief Japan economist for Merrill Lynch.
Q: 試翻 "any other real estate markets ... with the same force."

3. There are still big questions about how sustainable Germany's upturn is, and whether it will be able to pull the rest of Europe with it. Growth in the 13 nations that have adopted the euro is expected to be 2.6% in 2006, an unusually strong showing for the continent. The European recovery is uneven, though, with Italy and France faring less well. And Germany has only begun to tackle some of the politically unpopular reforms of its health, pension and labor systems that economists say are needed to boost long-term growth. Still, "Europe is going to have a great year," reckons Harvard's Rogoff.
Q: 試翻 "And Germany has ... long-term growth."

English Quiz 120

English Quiz 120

1. The International Monetary Fund recently increased its prediction for global GDP growth in 2007 to 4.9% from 4.7%. If that turns out to be correct, this year will be the fourth in a row with an economic expansion rate above or close to 5%, the best performance since the early 1970s. China continues to race ahead at the astonishing pace of 10% growth or more, pulling much of Asia with it. Japan's economy, the world's second largest, is again expanding and the deflation that has racked the country for years is coming to an end. And in Europe, where the economy has been sluggish for most of this decade, there's fresh evidence that Germany—after four years of almost no growth—is finally rebounding.
Q: 試翻 "And in Europe, ... is finally rebounding."
[iBT]: sluggish <> rebounding = resilence

2. Such resilience highlights the degree to which the structure of the world's economy has been profoundly reshaped by globalization. The increasingly free flow of goods and capital has brought about greater integration of national economies, while at the same time broadly dispersing economic power. The old industrialized-world triad of the U.S., Japan and Western Europe no longer dominates to the degree it once did. China is close to snatching the No. 3 slot on the list of the world's biggest economies away from Germany, while India and South Korea are set to join the top 10 within a decade. India's GDP has expanded by a total of $350 billion over the past six years, an amount equivalent to the entire economy of the Netherlands in 2000. Once moribund countries such as Argentina and Russia are booming, too. Indeed, developing economies are doing much of the heavy lifting today. According to the World Bank, they collectively grew about 7% last year—more than twice as fast as high-income countries—and developing nations now account for 49% of world economic output, up from 39% in 1990. "For the first time in many decades, the global economy enjoys multiple sources of economic growth, of which the U.S. is not the most important," says Gail Fosler, chief economist at the Conference Board, a business-research outfit in New York.
Q: 試翻 "Once moribund countries ... heavy lifting today."
[iBT]: moribund <> booming

3. Still, even the biggest optimists concede that nobody would escape unscathed if the U.S. economy were to hit a wall. Its immediate neighbors, Mexico and Canada, would probably be hurt the most as they are particularly dependent on trade with the U.S., but the reverberations would be felt worldwide. The key bone of contention is the extent of the suffering. Those who dispute the decoupling theory point to the seemingly insatiable appetite of American consumers for imported goods, which has been a critical driver of the world's economic expansion. There are still relatively few signs that German, Japanese or Chinese consumers are ready to step up to replace them. For example, while China's imports are way up, those gains are due less to a free-spending middle class than to increasing demand for raw materials and components to feed the country's manufacturing sector, which turns the material into a mountain of finished products to ship to the U.S. "If you just look at the numbers, it looks like Asia's exports to China are larger than they are to the U.S.," says Rob Subbaraman, senior Asia economist for Lehman Brothers in Hong Kong. "But people aren't taking into account where the end demand is coming from."
Q: 試翻 "For example, ... ship to the U.S."

I'll Be There For You (Lyrics)

So no one told you life was going to be this way.

Your job's a joke, you're broke, you're love life's DOA.

It's like you're always stuck in second gear,

Well, it hasn't been your day, your week, your month, or even your year.

But, I'll be there for you, when the rain starts to pour.

I'll be there for you, like I've been there before.

I'll be there for you, cause you're there for me too.

You're still in bed at ten, the work began at eight.

You've burned your breakfast, so far, things are going great.

Your mother warned you there'd be days like these,

But she didn't tell you when the world has brought you down to your knees.

That, I'll be there for you, when the rain starts to pour.

I'll be there for you, like I've been there before.

I'll be there for you, cause you're there for me too.

No one could ever know me, no one could ever see me.

Seems like you're the only one who knows what it's like to be me.

Someone to face the day with, make it through all the rest with,

Someone I'll always laugh with, even at my worst, I'm best with you.

It's like you're always stuck in second gear,

Well, it hasn't been your day, your week, your month, or even your year.

But, I'll be there for you, when the rain starts to pour.

I'll be there for you, like I've been there before.

I'll be there for you, cause you're there for me too.

http://www.lyricsondemand.com/tvthemes/friendslyrics.html

Google Translator

李開復拿了錢多少還是有做點事的!
現在google網頁多了翻譯功能(不知道是不是還有別的語言),所以以後English Quiz不會做的話,可以去google找答案喔!
方法是: 把要翻的句子copy起來,丟到google的搜尋欄,再加個關鍵字"time",這樣應該就能找到原文出處的網頁,然後按google的翻譯功能,看看它翻的如何!
ps. 通常都還滿可笑的...不信可以先去試試看cnn首頁

I'll Be There For You - Main Theme from Friends

I'll Be There For You, on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQJsPGD1t0g

ps. The main theme of Friends from official DVD.
ps. It seems this clip is shot around '93, the first season of Friends.

White Cholocate

剛剛在YouTube上看了一些Jason Williams的精彩影片.那時的Kings實在是太令人懷念了,把華麗球風發揮到極點(不像Lakers後期所謂的show time其實就是看那兩個人霸著球自己打).後來再加入Mike Bibby之後,整個Kings的實力已經到頂了,那年爭霸不成,其實就已註定要落魄幾年.聽說今天的Kings可以去搶狀元籤了,真是悲慘.

English Quiz 119

English Quiz 119

Note: Quiz 118 and 119 are excerpted from the same article.

1. She [Hillary Clinton] will spend the next year trying to navigate between the twin dangers of being too moderate on the war for an antiwar primary electorate and going so far in mollifying that electorate as to weaken her chances in the general election. Like Muskie, a Humphrey backer in 1968, and Kerry, an Iraq-war authorizer in 2002, she's saddled with the original sin of being an original war supporter. Like Muskie, she's been moving gradually away from that position. Like Kerry, she'll soon have to cast votes on various legislative proposals related to the war. Team Hillary may already be feeling the pressure. Consider the testy response of her adviser, Howard Wolfson, to Edwards' remarks recently. "If you're in Congress and you know that this war is going in the wrong direction, it is no longer enough to study your options and keep your own counsel," Edwards asserted.
Q: 試翻 "She will spend ... in the general election."
Q: 試翻 "Like Muskie, ... an original war supporter."

2. Clinton's "fighting" has been pretty muted so far. Her response to the President's speech was a low-key press release: "I cannot support his proposed escalation of the war in Iraq." She then set off on a trip to Iraq and upon returning went a step further than she had before: "I support putting a cap on the number of American troops as of January 1st." In the end, she may be able to triangulate successfully between the dangers of Muskie-esque centrism and Kerry-esque accommodation to the left. I'd bet on her if her competitors remain limited to candidates like Senators Edwards, Barack Obama, Joseph Biden and Christopher Dodd. But what if she faces a rival who spoke eloquently against the Iraq war from the first--yet also has a hawkish national security record? What if that man has substantial experience at the highest levels of government--and can also raise plenty of money as a candidate? What if he ran for President once before--and won the popular vote? Clinton undoubtedly dreams occasionally about the fates of Ed Muskie and John Kerry. But if she stays awake at night, it's because she's worrying about Al Gore.
Q: 試翻 "In the end, ... to the left."

English Quiz 118

English Quiz 118

1. Twice before in Hillary Clinton's adult lifetime, a Northeastern Senator has been the front runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. Both times, the nation was at war. In both cases, the war, presided over by a Republican President, was unpopular--especially with Democratic activists.

2. In 1971, Richard Nixon was managing a fighting retreat from Vietnam. Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine was favored to be his 1972 opponent. Centrist enough to be a favorite of the Democratic establishment, liberal enough to be respected by many on the left, Muskie had impressive credentials: first Governor, then Senator for a dozen years, as well as having been the 1968 Democratic vice-presidential nominee. Muskie delivered the well-received Democratic response to Nixon on election eve 1970, and, as TIME noted, "Some politicians thought his congressional election eve TV speech last November gave him a virtual lock on the nomination." The magazine also wrote that some Democrats worried about Muskie's political caution and lack of emotional connection with voters. But the nomination was his to lose. And lose it he did. Even though Muskie wiggled belatedly left to try to accommodate the ever rising antiwar sentiment among Democrats, it was too little, and he remained basically a centrist to them. The more unequivocal antiwar candidate, George McGovern, won the nomination and got clobbered in the general election.
Q: 試翻 "Centrist enough ... vice-presidential nominee."
Q: 試翻 "Even though Muskie wiggled ... in the general election."

3. At the beginning of 2003, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts led the Democratic field. But the story of that year was the rise of Howard Dean, riding a wave of anti--Iraq war sentiment to lead in the polls. By October, the establishment candidates had to react. Kerry and Senator John Edwards tried to make up for their votes in favor of the war by joining nine other Democrats in opposing one version of an $87 billion supplemental war appropriation. Senator Joe Lieberman and Representative Richard Gephardt stayed the course and voted yes. Gephardt didn't survive Iowa, and Lieberman didn't survive New Hampshire. Kerry and Edwards were able to blunt Dean's charge, and emerged as the ticket. But Kerry's flip-flop on the $87 billion hurt him in the general election.
Q: 試翻 "Kerry and Edwards ... in the general election."

English Quiz 117

English Quiz 117

1. Two months ago, Tony Blair unveiled Nicholas Stern's next opus, which he called "the most important report on the future published by the government in our time in office." It argues that humanity will find it much cheaper to make slight shifts in energy use now (equivalent, Stern estimates, to a 1% tax on current consumption) than risk the potentially huge costs from unchecked climate change decades from now. The report was a major hit, gaining cross-party support and media attention across Europe. Stern is now on a global road show selling his climate proposals, after which he'll return to the London School of Economics. The advice he is giving politicians worldwide is unambiguous. "We must act together," he says, "and we have to act quickly."
Q: 試翻 "It argues that ... decades from now."

2. One of the most inspired political acts of 2006 occurred on Oct. 8, when newly elected Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stepped off a plane in Beijing. Relations between China and Japan were at their lowest ebb in decades, largely because Abe's predecessor Junichiro Koizumi had repeatedly visited the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors Japan's war dead, including 14 Class-A war criminals. Abe's momentous trip to China broke a political stalemate between Asia's two leading powers and portended closer economic and diplomatic ties between these historical rivals. Yet Abe's boldness abroad hasn't been matched at home, where doubts over his zeal for reform are wrecking his approval ratings. Conceivably, Abe may try to energize his conservative base by visiting Yasukuni himself—a move that would anger China and South Korea, making it even harder to forge a unified strategy for dealing with North Korea and its nuclear weapons. Will he resist the allure of nationalism? "Abe likes to say: 'There is a strong point that I have,'" says Hiroshige Seko, the cabinet's top spokesperson. "'I tend to be perceived as softer than I am.'" In 2007, Japan—and the world—will discover just how strong Abe is.
Q: 試翻 "Relations between China and Japan ... Class-A war criminals."
Q: 試翻 "Abe's momentous trip ... these historical rivals."

English Quiz 116

English Quiz 116

1. But voters — and not just Democrats but independents and even many Republicans — were looking for something else. The result: some of the lowest sustained job-approval ratings for the President in the history of polling and a G.O.P. wipeout in the November elections. Exit polls suggested corruption mattered most to voters, but professionals from both parties agree that deep discontent over the Iraq war — and a loss of faith in those leading it — powered the Democrats to victory.
Q: 試翻 "Exit polls suggested ... powered the Democrats to victory."

2. The dream team, meanwhile, disbanded. Cheney disappeared for a few weeks, and Rumsfeld was fired. Republicans who lost the majority in the Senate were miffed that Bush waited to pull the trigger, particularly because Rumsfeld had long since shed his other allies within the White House when the President finally pushed him from the Pentagon after the midterms. The delay may have had something to do with Rumsfeld's key ally: Bush had chosen Rumsfeld on Cheney's advice over the objections of his dad, the 41st President. So when the younger Bush nominated Robert Gates, his father's CIA chief, to replace Rumsfeld, the move was seen as a repudiation of the Vice President as well.
Q: 試翻 "So when the younger Bush ... as well."

3. If there was any doubt of that, Gates ended it during his confirmation hearing in early December. With astonishing candor, Gates testified that the U.S. had failed to send enough troops to stabilize Iraq — contradicting years of assertions by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. Asked if the U.S. was winning the war, Gates replied, "No, sir." For the White House, it was the beginning of wisdom. But only just. Bush and Cheney are a long, long way from either a turnaround in their political fortunes or, far more important, a solution to the Iraq fiasco.
Q: 試翻 "With astonishing candor, ... by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld."

English Quiz 115

English Quiz 115

1. It's hard to imagine now, but there was a time when George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were regarded as a national-security dream team, three men perfectly suited to perilous times: the President, instinctive and decisive; the Vice President, a sage and tested Washington veteran; and the Defense Secretary, whose brio and charm were rare and reassuring. Or so it was thought.
Q: 試翻 "three men perfectly suited to ... were rare and reassuring."

2. But in 2006, the dream team died, and its members instead became objects of scorn and emblems of failure. Their signature venture — the Iraq war — spiraled relentlessly downward into civil war. As it did, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld sealed their fate by diving deeper into denial about the realities on the battlefield. "We're making progress in Iraq," Bush said on numerous occasions during the year. "Absolutely, we're winning," he said in late October, calling Iraq a crucial battle in the broader war on terrorism. The old Navy pilot Rumsfeld, who in early 2003 said the war might last "six days, six weeks, I doubt six months," was still wearing his rose-colored goggles last February when he was asked if Iraq would be a long war. "No," said Rumsfeld, "I don't believe it is." Ten months later, the U.S. had been fighting in Iraq longer than it took to defeat the Nazis in World War II. On a mid-October morning when 15 U.S. troops had died in the previous 48 hours in Iraq, Cheney told TIME, "We're not looking for an exit strategy. We're looking for victory."
Q: 試翻 "As it did, ... on the battlefield."

The First Post on This New Blog

Say hello to blogger; goodbye to wretch!