移动端

  • 题王微信公众号

    题王微信公众号

    微信搜“题王网”真题密题、最新资讯、考试攻略、轻松拿下考试

学历语言类 | 上海外语口译证书考试

科目:

英语高级口译岗位资格证书考试

[切换]
题库
练习

问答题 Practice 1   In general, investment in the United States will be in the form of a subsidiary. It is possible for a non-U. S. corporation to operate a branch office in the United States, but there are significant disadvantages to a branch, particularly with respect to its tax treatment.   Branches of non-U. S. corporations are not subject to federal regulation or registration requirements. However, each state will require a “foreign” corporation to “qualify” before “doing business” in that state. A corporation will be considered “foreign” if it is organized under the laws of another country or another state, and so this is not a requirement imposed only on non-U. S. investors. “Doing business” is a technical term that implies a substantial presence in the state. This would include the ownership or leasing of real property, the maintenance of a stock of goods for local sale; employees and the like. Selling products to local customers, either directly or through an independent sales representative or distributor, would not in itself constitute “doing business.”   The states actually exercise little control over the qualification process other than to ensure that the qualifying entity’s name is not confusingly similar to an already registered entity and that all registration fees and taxes are paid (qualification is basically a form of taxation). In most states, qualification for a non-U.S. corporation consists of a relatively easy application, a registration fee, and a notarized or legalized copy of the corporation’s articles of incorporation English or a certified translation).

问答题 Passage 1   Britain is still home to some of the world’s best scientists—but when it comes to giving them the money to turn their ideas into world-beating companies we are third-rate. True?   “That’s gulf,” is the impatient response of Anne Glover, a leading venture capitalist.   She believes this is the best time since the short-lived dot corn bubble for anyone looking to get their idea funded: “It’s never been better, except during the boom for a short nine-month period.”   Not from the perspective of Noah Freedman, who has tried to get venture capital firms interested in Ionscope, a firm using world-leading science from Imperial College and Cambridge University. “I don’t think the situation has improved in the UK over the last decade,” he says.   But Anne Glover, whose venture capital firm Amadeus Capital has backed businesses such as lastminute, corn, Cambridge Silicon Radio and Plastic Logic, points to the figures.   Last year £lbn of venture capital money was invested in young firms in the UK—that’s more than a third of all the money invested across Europe.   “We get beaten up all the time,” says Ms Glover, “but which other sector has as big a share of the European market?”   And just as in other industries there are fashions in venture capital. What’s hot right now? Mobile technology, semi-conductors, and consumer internet firms, according to Amadeus—rather similar to what was getting funded during the last booming 2000.   That ended with a bust which sawn many start-ups disappear and “was followed by several years in which venture capitalists seemed to have gone into hiding. But Anne Glover says they’ve come through the experience stronger.   “The ones who have survived the boom and bust are experienced and well-funded and have similar global aspirations to the best entrepreneurs.”   But Noah Freedman, an entrepreneur who was previously involved in Brainspark, an incubator for technology start-ups, says there is still a funding gap.   Ionscope, which makes very high resolution microscopes, was not able to raise venture capital until it had sold its first products. “The bottom line is that in the UK, it may be easy to get venture capital money to fund growth of an established concept or business, but it is exceptionally difficult to get seed and start-up money for real innovation.”   Anne Glover says the real problem is a lack of ambition, from both investors and entrepreneurs.   “We maybe spread our money too thinly rather than concentrate on the best ideas. When we’ve got a world-leading company that’s the point where we need to finance it properly.”   She says she spends more time trying to raise the ambitions of start-up firms rather than lower them.   So what’s the lesson from those who have made it? Alex van Someren is one entrepreneur who did raise the money to create a successful global business.   His Cambridge-based internet security company Ncipher raised venture capital money between 1996 and 2000, and then floated just in the nick of time before the stock market crash.   He believes we are making progress: “Both investors and the people they invest in have become much more sophisticated.” He says the problem is not a lack of money or ideas. “There is plenty of both—but ideas are not the same as investable businesses.”   But he says young companies are now more likely to turn to business angels—often people who have built their own firms—rather than venture capitalists: “Angels have done it themselves, so they bring more added value—and they’re willing to invest in businesses too small for venture funds to look at.”   What Britain doesn’t have—despite attempts to brand Cambridge as Silicon Fen—is one area that can compete with Silicon Valley as a place which produces innovative businesses and the investors to fund them.   But Anne Glover says we shouldn’t get hung up on the comparison: “You would find the same inferiority complex in Indiana or Wisconsin—Silicon Valley is unique. It’s difficult to raise venture capital anywhere in the world. Entrepreneurship is hard and don’t expect it to be easy.”   The good news is that, when it comes to innovation, Britain has a growing number of entrepreneurs who have been there and done that.   Many are now starting new firms or investing in other start-ups. Their only fear is that the latest boom in technology investment could melt away like the last one.   1. Briefly describe the last boom.   2. What advantages have the companies which survived last boom got?   3. What is the difference on capital choice for young companies between the last boom and this latest one? Why?

问答题 Passage 5   This summer sees a significant change to the process of applying to university. It is called “the adjustment period”.   Despite the rather anodyne name, this is intended as a big step towards a system in which students apply to universities after they have received the results of their A-levels or equivalent qualifications.   This aim, eventually, is to replace the current system of applications based on predicted grades.   Three years ago the government said it wanted to introduce “a full post-qualifications application system by 2012”. This is seen as fairer since official figures show that 55% of predicted grades are inaccurate.   Moreover, according to the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS), predicted grades are more likely to be inaccurate for students from the lowest socio-economic groups.   There is also evidence that many bright students from poorer homes are put off applying to top universities like Oxford and Cambridge because they think their grades will not be good enough. By the time they receive their better-than-expected results it is too late.   So, that is why this year there is a significant change. The “adjustment period” will apply to university applicants who, in August, find they have done better than expected in their exams.   If their grades are better than required for the university offers they are holding, they will now get a further opportunity to apply elsewhere to see if they can, in effect, “upgrade”.   They will have five days after the results come out to achieve this upgrade. This change means, in theory, an intense period of “speed dating” between top universities and those students who have exceeded exam expectations.   So far, so good. But here is the rub. Expectations have been raised. A student who, for example, gets three A grades may decide that they could have been more ambitious than the offer they already hold and, buoyed by their success, may then seek a place at a more prestigious university.   They will get on the phone to a top university, explain their improved grades, and will, quite reasonably, expect to be considered for a place.   But the reality is that there will rarely be any places left. And this is the flaw in the system. Popular universities are heavily oversubscribed. They do not keep back spare places for last-minute applicants. Nor have they been required to do so for this new “adjustment period”.   As one senior person at UCAS acknowledged recently, the chance of places remaining available on the most popular courses is “quite remote”. Senior vice-chancellors agree with that assessment.   Indeed, this time round there is even less prospect than in previous years of there being any places spare on popular courses.   That is because universities have been busy making offers since the end of last year, but at the start of this year, the government suddenly announced that the planned expansion of places is to be cut back.   There will now be 5, 000 fewer university places than were envisaged just a few months ago. Since universities face financial penalties if they over-recruit, some will now be wishing to reduce the number of offers they had been planning to make.   They will not be able to retract offers already made, but they will certainly not be offering additional places for the “adjustment period” in August.   The result is that students are being hoodwinked. The “adjustment period” looks like a small oasis for those who have done better than expected in their exams. They will expect a reward for their achievement. But they will find it is a mirage.   So why has this been allowed to happen? The truth is that, despite the government’s enthusiasm for a post-qualifications application system, the universities are reluctant to change the status quo.   It would mean changes to the school examinations timetable or to university term dates, or a combination of the two. The adjustments need not be that great, particularly as technology has speeded up the pace of exam marking.   But, for now, there has not been enough political will to force through the change and caution has won the day.   If, as seems likely, this year’s “adjustment period” results in hardly any applicants managing to upgrade their offers, then the whole issue must be looked at again.   Either the government should set out a clear timetable towards full post qualification applications or it should admit it does not have the stomach for the change.   This halfway house looks like a cruel hoax on students.   1. Who will benefit from the adjustment period and how?   2. Describe the reason why top universities now have fewer places left than previous years on popular courses.   3. What can be done to generate a better result from the adjustment period this year? What will be its future?

问答题 Passage 2   The admission by the chief of the Pakistani Taleban, Baitullah Mehsud, that his group was behind Monday’s attack on a police academy in Lahore comes as little surprise.   Analysts and officials said in the immediate aftermath of the attack that the most likely connection was with Mr. Mehsud’s Tehrik-e-Taleban (TeT) organisation.   What has caught many off guard is how quickly and openly Mr. Mehsud accepted responsibility. Previously he and his organisation would either refrain from accepting responsibility for major attacks, or wait several months before acknowledging their role.   It is another indication of how much the power of the Taleban has grown and how secure they feel in their safe havens along the border with Afghanistan.   In particular, the Waziristan tribal region—part of which is controlled by Mr. Mehsud—stands out as the place which currently harbours some of the most wanted men in the world.   For Pakistani security forces and the US, it has increasingly become centre stage in what was once called “the war on terror”.   Everybody from Osama bin Laden to the trans-Atlantic bombing suspect, Rashid Rauf, has at one time or another said to have been based in this territory.   If there is a place in the world which can continue to provide shelter for al-Qaeda, this is it. It is a land of steep mountains and narrow valleys populated by tribesmen proud of their long history of “dying gloriously” in battle.   During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Waziristan remained the vanguard of the struggle. The first of the Afghan cities to be lost by the Soviets was to a commander from this region, when Khost fell to the now legendary Jalaluddin Haqqani.   It is his son Sirajuddin who now heads the Afghan Taleban’s command in this region and the adjoining provinces of Afghanistan.   He was recently declared wanted by the US with a reward of $ 5m for his capture.   But the most famous and notorious of the Taleban warlords remains Baitullah Mehsud.   He and his TeT organisation are responsible for much of the spread of Taleban ideology across Pakistan.   Intelligence officials confirm that it was the help and training of TeT that enabled the Swat Taleban to demand and achieve a separate legal system in that Pakistani district.   They also say that his support was crucial to the Taleban in nearby Bajaur, enabling them to reach a peace deal with the army despite the military having much of the upper hand.   The TeT is also said to maintain networks as far afield as the southern port city of Karachi.   Increasingly, it has grown as a clear and present danger to the state of Pakistan.   But while the country’s security forces have been able to thwart Mr. Mehsud’s plans outside the tribal areas, it has been almost impossible to curtail his activities—and those of other Taleban leaders—in Waziristan.   In a series of tactical campaigns, starting in 2004, the Taleban have all but pushed the security forces out of Waziristan. The few that remain are confined to their forts.   Over the last year, the only thing that has penetrated the Waziristan tribal region are suspected US drones. These have killed hundreds of people, many of them militants, but also many civilians. That has angered ordinary Pakistanis and raised anti-American sentiments to an all-time high. Pakistan’s security forces say the drone strikes also prevent them from acting more strongly against the militants.   In fact, other than killing a lot of junior and mid-level al-Qaeda and Taleban personnel, the attacks have united all Taleban factions in Pakistan.   In a recent declaration, Pakistan’s other two Taleban factions—led by Maulvi Nazir and Hafiz Gul Bahadur-said they had formed an alliance with Mr. Mehsud.   The two belong to the Ahmedzai Wazir tribe, the Mehsud’s traditional enemy.   The Ahmedzai Wazir is the larger tribe and exists on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. They are believed to harbour most of the senior al-Qaeda leadership, including Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.   The harsh realities on the ground have made some analysts adamant that Pakistani and US authorities have little choice except direct military action in Waziristan.   “This would mean bloody and entrenched fighting with serious losses against a battle-hardened enemy” says an ex-army official familiar with the region.   Whether both sides are willing to take this on, in the face of declining public support for the conflict and its casualties, remains one of the great unanswered questions in this increasingly bloody war.   1. What is the main difference in Mehsud accepting responsibilities between previous attacks and this one?   2. What are the unexpected impacts that the US strikes in Waziristan have?   3. Why does the author take the example of the legendary Jalaluddin Haqqani?

问答题 Passage 5   “I don’t even like the word ‘network’,” says Keith Ferrazzi, the supernetworker who just co-wrote (with Fortune Small Business contributing editor Tahl Raz) a hot book on the subject, called Never Eat Alone. “I don’t think of a network of people as a net, into which you wrangle contacts like a school of struggling cod.” Well, that’s a relief. Ferrazzi, the CEO of a marketing and sales consulting firm called Ferrazzi Greenlight, has picked up so much buzz as a networking expert that he’s now teaching seminars on the subject to about 7,000 MBA students at Stanford, Wharton, and elsewhere, and he knows full well that the whole idea of networking makes many of us cringe.   Still, there’s no doubt it’s a skill worth mastering: The Bureau of Labor Statistics not long ago analyzed how people got their jobs and learned that fewer than 20% of all working Americans found employment through a friend, relative, old school chum, or other personal connection. At the executive level, however—defined as managers earning $100,000 or more annually—72%, or well over three times the average, landed their positions by knowing somebody. Alas, networking has come to be seen as a “cynical tactic for manipulating your way to success,” Ferrazzi says. Instead, he sees it as “a way to add richness to your life. Take those business acquaintances that everyone has and turn them into real friendships.”   But how? Dinner parties work, especially if you create a theme reflecting a personal interest. Ferrazzi loves singing, so “I do piano-bar parties, where I have Lionel Richie and the Yale Baker’s Dozen come and hang out,” he says. “Years ago I was doing essentially the same thing”— presumably sans Richie—“in a one-bedroom apartment. You can throw holiday-themed parties or a gospel brunch or whatever your passion is.” To expand your circle of friends, he suggests, invite one guest whom lots of others will want to meet, sort of on the same principle as having a big-name “anchor tenant” in a shopping mall. Then, when you chat with people, forget old chestnuts about what makes acceptable small talk. “The ‘experts’ will tell you to avoid potentially controversial or emotional topics like politics or religion. I disagree,” Ferrazzi says. “Do bring up a topic that is actually important to you, whether it’s your kids, a personal interest, or U. S. policy in the Middle East.” A willingness to reveal a bit about who you really are—without being tedious—is “the key to intimacy, which is the heart of effective networking.”   What if you’re just shy? Ferrazzi describes himself as “pathologically extroverted,” but “I ask more introverted people, ‘Do you play the violin? No? Well, if you practiced, do you think you could play a couple of notes by next week?’ this is the same idea. Start small. Invite one or two new people into your circle. You’ll enjoy it, and you’ll want to do more of it.” Above all, do whatever you can to help others succeed. Too often, in Ferrazzi’s view, networking devolves into a system of quid pro quo horse-trading. “Don’t keep score,” he says. “If you give, give and give some more, it will come back to you. Generosity is the key to success.” What a wonderful world it would be.   1. What does Keith Ferrazzi mean by saying “I don’t even like the word ‘network’”? (Para. 1)   2. List some of the suggestions offered by Ferrazzi on “networking”.   3. Paraphrase the sentence “networking devolves into a system of quid pro quo horse-trading” in the last paragraph.

问答题 Passage 3   “Clearly there is here a problem of the division of knowledge, which is quite analogous to, and at least as important as, the problem of the division of labour,” Friedrich Hayek told the London Economic Club in 1936. What Mr. Hayek could not have known about knowledge was that 70 years later weblogs, or blogs, would be pooling it into a vast, virtual conversation. That economists are typing as prolifically as anyone speaks both to the value of the medium and to the worth they put on their time.   Like millions of others, economists from circles of academia and public policy spend hours each day writing for nothing. The concept seems at odds with the notion of economists as intellectual instruments trained in the maximisation of utility or profit. Yet the demand is there: some of their blogs get thousands of visitors daily, often from people at influential institutions like the IMF and the Federal Reserve. One of the most active “econobloggers” is Brad DeLong, of the University of California, Berkeley, whose site, delong.typepad.com,, features a morning-coffee videocast and an afternoon-tea audiocast in which he holds forth on a spread of topics from the Treasury to Trotsky.   So why do it? “It’s a place in the intellectual influence game,” Mr. DeLong replies (by e-mail, naturally). For prominent economists, that place can come with a price. Time spent on the internet could otherwise be spent on traditional publishing or collecting consulting fees. Mr. DeLong caps his blogging at 90 minutes a day. His only blog revenue comes from selling advertising links to help cover the cost of his servers, which handle more than 20,000 visitors daily.   Gary Becker, a Nobel-prize winning economist, and Richard Posner, a federal circuit judge and law professor, began a joint blog in 2004. The pair, colleagues at the University-of Chicago, believed that their site, becker-posner-blog.com, would permit “instantaneous pooling (and hence correction, refinement, and amplification) of the ideas and opinions, facts and images, reportage and scholarship, generated by bloggers.” The practice began as an educational tool for Greg Mankiw, a professor of economics at Harvard and a former chairman of George Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers. His site, gregmankiw.blogspot.com, started as a group e-mail sent to students, with commentary on articles and new ideas. But the market for his musings grew beyond the classroom, and a blog was the solution. “It’s a natural extension of my day job—to engage in intellectual discourse about economics,” Mr. Mankiw says.   With professors spending so much time blogging for no payment, universities might wonder whether this detracts from their value. Although there is no evidence of a direct link between blogging and publishing productivity, a new study by E. Han Kim and Adair Morse, of the University of Michigan, and Luigi Zingales, of the University of Chicago, shows that the internet’s ability to spread knowledge beyond university classrooms has diminished the competitive edge that elite schools once held.   Top universities once benefited from having clusters of star professors. The study showed that during the 1970s, an economics professor from a random university, outside the top 25 programmes, would double his research productivity by moving to Harvard. The strong relationship between individual output and that of one’s colleagues weakened in the 1980s, and vanished by the end of the 1990s.   The faster flow of information and the waning importance of location—which blogs exemplify—have made it easier for economists from any university to have access to the best brains in their field. That anyone with an internet connection can sit in on a virtual lecture from Mr. DeLong means that his ideas move freely beyond the boundaries of Berkeley, creating a welfare gain for professors and the public.   Universities can also benefit in this part of the equation. Although communications technology may have made a dent in the productivity edge of elite schools, productivity is hardly the only measure of success for a university. Prominent professors with popular blogs are good publicity, and distance in academia is not dead: the best students will still seek proximity to the best minds. When a top university hires academics, it enhances the reputations of the professors, too. That is likely to make their blogs more popular.   Self-interest lives on, as well. Not all economics bloggers toil entirely for nothing. Mr. Mankiw frequently plugs his textbook. Brad Setser, of Roubini Global Economics, an economic- analysis website, is paid to spend two to three hours or so each day blogging as a part of his job. His blog, rgemonitor.com/blog/setser, often concentrates on macroeconomic topics, notably China. Each week, 3,000 people read it—more than bought his last book. “I certainly have not found a comparable way to get my ideas out. It allows me to have a voice I would not otherwise get,” Mr. Setser says. Blogs have enabled economists to turn their microphones into megaphones. In this model, the value of influence is priceless.   1. Why does the author mention Friedrich Hayek and his famous quotation in the first paragraph?   2. Who are “econobloggers”? What kind of influence do they have?   3. According to E. Han Kim and Adair Morse, why has the internet “diminished the competitive edge that elite schools once held”? (Para. 5)   4. Paraphrase the sentence: “Blogs have enabled economists to turn their microphones into megaphones”. (Para. 9)

问答题 Passage 3   The message in London’s singles flat market is clear if you can find anything you like then buy now, Dixie Nichols writes.   London is seeing “a vibrant and wealthy singles flat market” according to David Salvi of the Clerkenwell agents Hurford, Salvi and Carr. The middle market flat agents Douglas & Gordon and Chestertons both say prices in the sector are up 20 per cent on a year ago, both say this sector has improved by 20 per cent in the past 12 months, and both have a backlog of buyers.   Melissa Carter, of Douglas & Gordon’s Battersea office, says: “What was a good offer two months ago looks about right now the deals are holding and valuers (who had been acting as a brake) are now prepared to follow.”   Buyers in the singles market come wielding big deposits (up to a third of the price is not unusual), and frequently leapfrog the studio and one-bed flats starting in at two beds. Often the second bed is let to a friend to take the sting out of the mortgage.   Although agents complain of there not being enough stock, there is a steady influx from the commercial block conversions. The new wave of developments is hitting the market now.   The market is hungry and snaps up anything well priced. The Ziggurat Building in Clerkenwell, north London, sold all 34 units in its first phase within an hour of opening its doors, but the price was exceptional—£140 a sq ft when most schemes hover at 2200 to 2250.   The developers’ headline price may not have shot up in the past year but the amount of space you get for your money has been shaved. When Sapcote’s Beauchamp Building in Hatton Garden, central London was introduced last September, the shell sizes of 1, 200 to 1, 400 sq ft were said to be far too small. When launched in January the market was impressed by their size.   London fiat agents have no problem in forecasting a 10 per cent rise over the next 12 months despite election wobbles.It may be better than that. . Simon Agace of Winkworth says: “The top of the flat market has already followed the house market’s summer spring and the middle range will follow.”   1. What is implied in the message “If you can find anything you like then buy now”?   2. Why do buyers often choose the two-bed flats?   3. What does the example of “Sapcote’s Beauchamp Building in Hatton Gardon, central London” tell us?

首页 上一页 1 2 3 4 5 尾页 /

到第