相信自己吧!堅(jiān)持就是勝利!今天小編給大家?guī)砹?020下半年翻譯資格考試二級筆譯模擬題，希望能夠幫助到大家，下面小編就和大家分享，來欣賞一下吧。

2020下半年翻譯資格考試二級筆譯模擬題

Schumpeter: Team Spirit

Businesses are embracing the idea of working in teams. Managing them is hard

Teams have become the basic building-blocks of organisations. Recruitment ads routinely call for “team players”. Business schools grade their students in part on their performance in group projects. Office managers knock down walls to encourage team-building. Teams are as old as civilisation, of course: even Jesus had 12 co-workers. But a new report by Deloitte, “Global Human Capital Trends”, based on a survey of more than 7,000 executives in over 130 countries, suggests that the fashion for teamwork has reached a new high. Almost half of those surveyed said their companies were either in the middle of restructuring or about to embark on it; and for the most part, restructuring meant putting more emphasis on teams.

Companies are abandoning functional silos and organising employees into cross-disciplinary teams that focus on particular products, problems or customers. These teams are gaining more power to run their own affairs. They are also spending more time working with each other rather than reporting upwards. Deloitte argues that a new organisational form is on the rise: a network of teams is replacing the conventional hierarchy.

The fashion for teams is driven by a sense that the old way of organising people is too rigid for both the modern marketplace and the expectations of employees. Technological innovation puts a premium on agility. John Chambers, chairman of Cisco, an electronics firm, says that “we compete against market transitions, not competitors. Product transitions used to take five or seven years; now they take one or two.” Digital technology also makes it easier for people to co-ordinate their activities without resorting to hierarchy. The “millennials” who will soon make up half the workforce in rich countries were reared from nursery school onwards to work in groups.

The fashion for teams is also spreading from the usual corporate suspects (such as GE and IBM) to some more unusual ones. The Cleveland Clinic, a hospital operator, has reorganised its medical staff into teams to focus on particular treatment areas; consultants, nurses and others collaborate closely instead of being separated by speciality and rank. The US Army has gone the same way. In his book, “Team of Teams”, General Stanley McChrystal describes how the army’s hierarchical structure hindered its operations during the early stages of the Iraq war. His solution was to learn something from the insurgents it was fighting: decentralise authority to self-organising teams.

A good rule of thumb is that as soon as generals and hospital administrators jump on a management bandwagon, it is time to ask questions. Leigh Thompson of Kellogg School of Management in Illinois warns that, “Teams are not always the answer – teams may provide insight, creativity and knowledge in a way that a person working independently cannot; but teamwork may also lead to confusion, delay and poor decision-making.” The late Richard Hackman of Harvard University once argued, “I have no question that when you have a team, the possibility exists that it will generate magic, producing something extraordinary… But don’t count on it.”

Hackman (who died in 2013) noted that teams are hampered by problems of co-ordination and motivation that chip away at the benefits of collaboration. High-flyers forced to work in teams may be undervalued and free-riders empowered. Groupthink may be unavoidable. In a study of 120 teams of senior executives, he discovered that less than 10% of their supposed members agreed on who exactly was on the team. If it is hard enough to define a team’s membership, agreeing on its purpose is harder still.

Profound changes in the workforce are making teams trickier to manage. Teams work best if their members have a strong common culture. This is hard to achieve when, as is now the case in many big firms, a large proportion of staff are temporary contractors. Teamwork improves with time: America’s National Transportation Safety Board found that 73% of the incidents in its civil-aviation database occurred on a crew’s first day of flying together. However, as Amy Edmondson of Harvard points out, organisations increasingly use “team” as a verb rather than a noun: they form teams for specific purposes and then quickly disband them.

熊彼特：團(tuán)隊(duì)精神(節(jié)選)

各公司都信奉以團(tuán)隊(duì)形式工作的理念。管理團(tuán)隊(duì)實(shí)屬不易

團(tuán)隊(duì)是建立組織的基石。招聘廣告通常都招募“具有團(tuán)隊(duì)精神的人”。商學(xué)院給學(xué)生的評分部分取決于他們在團(tuán)隊(duì)項(xiàng)目中的表現(xiàn)。辦公室經(jīng)理拆除隔墻，鼓勵(lì)團(tuán)隊(duì)合作。當(dāng)然，團(tuán)隊(duì)的歷史同文明一樣悠久：就連耶穌也有十二門徒。然而德勤一份名為《全球人力資本趨勢》的新報(bào)告調(diào)查了130多個(gè)國家中的七千多名管理者，結(jié)果表明團(tuán)隊(duì)合作的風(fēng)潮已經(jīng)到達(dá)了一個(gè)新高度。幾乎一半被訪者稱他們的公司不是正在重組就是打算重組;而大多數(shù)情況下，重組意味著更注重團(tuán)隊(duì)。

各公司正在摒棄功能性“豎井”，轉(zhuǎn)而組織員工構(gòu)建專注于特定產(chǎn)品、問題或客戶的跨職能團(tuán)隊(duì)。這些團(tuán)隊(duì)正獲得越來越大的權(quán)力處理自身事務(wù)。它們也在花費(fèi)更多時(shí)間彼此合作而不是向上級匯報(bào)。德勤認(rèn)為一種新的組織形式正在興起：團(tuán)隊(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)正在取代傳統(tǒng)的等級制度。

舊的組織形式給人的感覺是無論對于現(xiàn)代市場還是員工的期待來說都太過死板，正是這種感覺推動(dòng)了團(tuán)隊(duì)工作的風(fēng)潮?？萍紕?chuàng)新重視敏捷性。電子公司思科的主席約翰·錢伯斯說，“我們是在和市場轉(zhuǎn)型競爭，而不是與對手競爭。產(chǎn)品轉(zhuǎn)型以往需要五到七年;現(xiàn)在只需要一兩年?！睌?shù)字技術(shù)也讓人們更容易協(xié)調(diào)活動(dòng)，無需求助于等級制度。很快將占到富裕國家一半勞動(dòng)力的“千禧一代”從托兒所起就以分組工作被培養(yǎng)長大。

團(tuán)隊(duì)的風(fēng)潮也從一般的典型企業(yè)(如GE和IBM)蔓延至一些更特殊的公司。醫(yī)院運(yùn)營商克利夫蘭診所已經(jīng)按照具體的治療領(lǐng)域，重新將其醫(yī)療員工編制成團(tuán)隊(duì);顧問、護(hù)士和其他人緊密協(xié)作，而不是按專長和職位高低分開。美國陸軍也采用了同樣的方式。在《團(tuán)隊(duì)中的團(tuán)隊(duì)》一書中，作者斯坦利·麥克里斯特爾將軍描述了軍隊(duì)的等級制度在伊拉克戰(zhàn)爭初期如何阻礙了美軍的行動(dòng)。他的解決方法是向與之對抗的叛亂分子學(xué)習(xí)：將權(quán)力下放到自組織的團(tuán)隊(duì)。

一條好的經(jīng)驗(yàn)法則是，一旦將軍們和醫(yī)院管理者加入管理的風(fēng)潮，就該是發(fā)問的時(shí)候了。伊利諾伊州凱洛格商學(xué)院的利·湯普森警告說，“團(tuán)隊(duì)不能解決所有問題——團(tuán)隊(duì)或許可以提供一個(gè)人獨(dú)立工作時(shí)無法提供的洞見、創(chuàng)造力和知識(shí)，但是團(tuán)隊(duì)工作也可能導(dǎo)致混亂、延誤、決策不佳。”哈佛已故的理查德·哈克曼曾經(jīng)表示，“我完全相信，如果你有個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)，它或許能創(chuàng)造奇跡，做出非同尋常的成就……但是別指望這個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)?！?/p>

哈克曼(2013年去世)指出團(tuán)隊(duì)受到協(xié)調(diào)和推動(dòng)力等問題的牽制，損害了協(xié)同合作的優(yōu)勢。被迫在團(tuán)隊(duì)里工作的成功人士可能被低估，而搭順風(fēng)車的人卻被賦予權(quán)力。趨同思維或許無法避免。在對120個(gè)高級管理人員團(tuán)隊(duì)的研究中，他發(fā)現(xiàn)理應(yīng)屬于同一團(tuán)隊(duì)的隊(duì)員中，只有不到10%的人對于誰真正屬于這個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)沒有異議。如果確定一個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)的成員如此困難，達(dá)成團(tuán)隊(duì)目標(biāo)則只會(huì)更難。

勞動(dòng)力的深刻變化讓團(tuán)隊(duì)更難管理。當(dāng)成員有強(qiáng)大的共同文化時(shí)，團(tuán)隊(duì)表現(xiàn)得最好。不過這一點(diǎn)很難達(dá)到，因?yàn)楝F(xiàn)在很多大公司里，很大一部分員工是臨時(shí)合同工。假以時(shí)日，團(tuán)隊(duì)合作會(huì)有所改善：美國國家運(yùn)輸安全委員會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)，它的民航數(shù)據(jù)庫中有73%的事故發(fā)生在機(jī)組一起飛行的首日。不過，正如哈佛的艾米·埃德蒙森指出的，各組織越來越多地將“團(tuán)隊(duì)”用作動(dòng)詞而非名詞：它們?yōu)榱颂厥獾哪康慕M建團(tuán)隊(duì)，然后又很快解散團(tuán)隊(duì)。

2020下半年翻譯資格考試二級筆譯模擬題

美國將對非洲投資10億美元

美國政府開啟了一個(gè)名為“連接非洲”的項(xiàng)目，這個(gè)項(xiàng)目將投資10億多美元，來改善整個(gè)非洲大陸的交通、運(yùn)輸和產(chǎn)業(yè)鏈。

這個(gè)項(xiàng)目將由政府旗下的海外私人投資公司(OPIC)負(fù)責(zé)。在未來三年，海外私人投資公司將為贊比亞、盧旺達(dá)、南非、肯尼亞、烏干達(dá)這些國家的項(xiàng)目提供資金。

本月早些時(shí)候，OPIC承諾將為一個(gè)電信通訊公司融資一億美元，該公司將升級并擴(kuò)大烏干達(dá)、岡比亞、塞拉利昂和剛果的電訊網(wǎng)絡(luò)。

在烏干達(dá)，OPIC將為項(xiàng)目投資5800萬美元，其中包括一個(gè)水電站。

美國10億美元的資金相較于中國承諾的對非洲600億美元的融資要少得多。

美國將對非洲投資10億美元

The U.S. government has launched Connect Africa, a program that will invest more than $1 billion in projects to improve transportation, communications, and value chains across the continent.

The U.S. government will carry out the initiative through its development finance branch, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. Over the next three years, OPIC plans to finance projects with companies in Zambia, Rwanda, South Africa, Kenya and Uganda.

Early this month, OPIC committed $100 million in financing to a cellular communications company that will upgrade and expand telecommunication networks in Uganda, Gambia, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

In Uganda, OPIC will invest $58 million in projects that include a hydro power plant.

The $1 billion in financing is small compared to $60 billion that China has promised to invest in Africa.

2020下半年翻譯資格考試二級筆譯模擬題

推特有效用戶下降 股價(jià)下跌19%

社交媒體公司推特報(bào)告其有效用戶數(shù)量減少后，公司股票價(jià)格星期五直落將近20%。

推特公司說，2018年第二季度的單月有效用戶是3億3500萬，比第一季度減少了100萬，并低于華爾街預(yù)期的3億3900萬。

推特說，單月有效用戶的數(shù)量下一季度可能還會(huì)繼續(xù)減少，公司在繼續(xù)關(guān)閉違反服務(wù)協(xié)議的賬號，以及降低某些賬號的突出地位。

推特公司說，這個(gè)社交平臺(tái)的穩(wěn)定比用戶增加更重要。不過，這使得投資者更難評估公司的價(jià)值，因?yàn)樗麄兊闹饕獦?biāo)準(zhǔn)是這個(gè)社交平臺(tái)潛在的用戶數(shù)量。

推特股票星期五以34.12美元收盤。推特報(bào)告了高于預(yù)期的營收，但股票仍然下跌。推特上一季度的利潤為1億美元。這是推特連續(xù)三個(gè)季度盈利。

推特有效用戶下降 股價(jià)下跌19%

Shares in Twitter dropped close to 20 percent Friday after the social media giant reported a fall in active users.

Twitter said it had 335 million monthly users in the second quarter of the year, which was down a million from the amount of monthly users in the first quarter of the year, and below the 339 million users Wall Street was expecting.

Twitter said that the number of monthly users could continue to fall next quarter as it continues to ban accounts that violate its terms of service and makes other accounts less visible.

The company says it is putting the long-term stability of its platform above user growth. However, the move has made it more difficult for investors to value the company as they rely on data of the platform’s potential user reach.

Shares in Twitter closed at $34.12 Friday. The fall in share prices came despite Twitter reporting higher than expected revenue. During the last quarter, Twitter posted a profit of $100 million, marking the company’s third consecutive quarter in profits.

2020下半年翻譯資格考試二級筆譯模擬題

消費(fèi)者組織：臉書人臉識(shí)別軟件侵犯隱私權(quán)

Facebook violates its user’ privacy rights through the use of its facial recognition software, according to consumer groups led by the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

Their complaint to the federal government focuses on the use of Fa cebook software that identifies people in photographs that are uploaded to its site.

A complaint filed Friday by a coalition of consumer organizations with Federal Trade Commission said the social media giant “routinely scans photos for biometric facial matches without the consent of the image subject.”

The complaint says the company tries to improve its facial recognition prowess by deceptively encouraging users to participate in the process of identifying people in photographs.

“This unwanted, unnecessary, and dangerous identification of individuals undermines user privacy, ignores the explicit preferences of Facebook users, and is contrary to law in several state and many parts of the world.”

The groups maintain there is little users can do to prevent images of their faces from being in a social media system like Facebook’s. They contend facial scanning can be abused by authoritarian governments, a key argument considering Facebook may be required to provide user information to governments.

The complaint is the latest in a string of privacy-related issues the FTC is already investigating, including charges it allowed the personal information of 87 million users to be improperly harvested by Cambridge Analytica, the British consulting firm which was hired by U.S. President Donald Trump during his 2016 presidential campaign.

消費(fèi)者組織：臉書人臉識(shí)別軟件侵犯隱私權(quán)

由電子隱私信息中心(Electronic Privacy Information Center)牽頭的各消費(fèi)者組織說，臉書(Facebook)因使用其人臉識(shí)別軟件而侵犯了用戶隱私權(quán)。

它們向聯(lián)邦政府提出投訴，投訴重點(diǎn)是識(shí)別被上傳到其網(wǎng)站的照片中人物的臉書軟件。

這一消費(fèi)者組織聯(lián)盟星期五向聯(lián)邦貿(mào)易委員會(huì)(FTC)提出投訴說，這家社交媒體巨頭“經(jīng)常性地未經(jīng)圖像主體同意而掃描照片以獲取人臉匹配的生物識(shí)別數(shù)據(jù)”。

投訴書說，臉書公司試圖通過欺騙性地鼓勵(lì)用戶參與識(shí)別照片人物的過程而改進(jìn)其人臉識(shí)別能力。

“這種個(gè)人識(shí)別是人們不想要的、非必要的，也是危險(xiǎn)的，破壞了用戶隱私，無視臉書用戶的明確偏好，而且違反了幾個(gè)州和世界很多地區(qū)的法律?！?/p>

這些團(tuán)體堅(jiān)稱，用戶幾乎無能為力，難以防止他們的面孔被上傳到臉書這樣的社交媒體系統(tǒng)。他們說，人臉掃描可能會(huì)被威權(quán)政府濫用。臉書可能會(huì)被要求向政府提供用戶信息。這是這些組織的一個(gè)關(guān)鍵論證。

這是聯(lián)邦貿(mào)易委員會(huì)已經(jīng)在調(diào)查的與隱私有關(guān)的一系列事件的最新一起。臉書被指控允許劍橋分析(Cambridge Analytica)獲取8700萬臉書用戶的個(gè)人信息。這家英國咨詢公司在2016年美國總統(tǒng)競選期間受雇于特朗普團(tuán)隊(duì)。