广东财经大学2024考研真题：804-英语写作与翻译

　　真题是非常重要的学习资料，它能更好地帮助我们巩固所学的知识,大家在备考时候要多做一些真题，这样对真题高频考点有所了解，更有目的做好备战，新东方在线考研小编整理了“广东财经大学2024考研真题：804-英语写作与翻译”，希望对考生能有帮助。

　　Part I Writing (100分)

　　1.Summary Writing (40分)

　　Directions: Read the following passage, and write a summary of about 300 words for it in your own words. Directly copying sentences from the passage will result in deduction of grades. Write down your summary on the Answer Sheet.

　　Universal Principles of Communicative Interaction

　　Linguistic interaction displays a formidable diversity of means that its speakers use to communicate information or display attitudes, feelings, and emotions. This variation exists within each natural language as well as across languages. When speakers from two different cultures communicate, both types of variation are involved. In order to understand the principles that govern this interaction, one must search for generalizations. Some of them pertain to universal characteristics of human rational communicative behavior; others are conventions that interlocutors bring to the situation of discourse from their own cultures, where culture is understood as anthropological culture, that is, social organization and practices specific to a group of people. We will be interested here in the first kind of regularities captured by principles that are the domain of philosophical pragmatics.

　　A typical novice to language study begins by observing the differences between the ways speakers of different languages communicate. After all, it can appear intriguing to speakers of English that there are languages without grammatical tenses or, say, languages without words for sentential connectives such as conjunction, disjunction, or conditionality. Yukatek Maya,Mandarin Chinese, Paraguayan Guarani, Burmese, Dyirbal, Kalaallisut(West-Greenlandic), or Hopi, among others, have no grammatical tenses. Maricopa, a Yuman language spoken by the Native American Maricopa people in Arizona, has no word for and; Wari’, a Chapacura-Wanham language of the Amazon, and Tzeltal, a Mayan language spoken in Mexico, have no words for or; Guugu Yimithirr, an Australian aboriginal language, has no word for if. And yet, the expressive power of these languages is not diminished. One can communicate conjunction by a simple juxtaposition of

　　phrases, disjunction by conditional or modal markers, and conditionality by irrealis mood markers. Likewise, temporal reference can be communicated by aspect and mood markers, or even left entirely to pragmatic inference: what a language may “lack” in lexical means, it may leave to grammar or pragmatics; likewise, what it “lacks” in grammatical distinctions, it may leave to the lexicon or pragmatics. While it is indeed true that what is grammaticalized or lexicalized in a language may emphasize certain aspects of reality, and as such may affect the way the speakers of the language view the world, lexicon and grammar do not impose limits on communication or cognition: sociocultural conventions and pragmatic inference complete the pool of resources. This ability of languages to utilize the combination of resources indicates that in pursuing a theory of meaning in discourse, we ought to search for universals of communication that is, not lexical or grammatical universals but, more importantly, pragmatic and, as such, cognitive universals. So, our first assumed universal will be that although languages give rise to problems with translatability, they all have the same expressive power.

　　For our current purposes, crosslinguistic variation in the lexicon and grammar can, therefore, be put aside and we can move one level up, so to speak, to the level where lexical, grammatical, and pragmatic resources (such as inferences from context or conventional, default interpretations) interact that is, to the level of universals of communication, or pragmatic (in the broad sense) universals. In other words, a pragmatic universal in the broad sense will pertain to principles of

　　1

　　human communication that are aimed at normativity and as such predictive power, as well as delimiting universal units of such conversational contribution that can be subjected to a theoretical analysis. These are, needless to say, of great utility for more sociopragmatics-oriented projects such as those on intercultural communication. To compare, a pragmatic universal in the narrow sense will pertain to a phenomenon that is proposed as having universal status. Von Fintel and Matthewson (2008), for example, point out that all languages have presuppositions, that is, meanings that are taken for granted, so to speak, and as such need not be explicitly expressed. But while languages can employ different conventions concerning what is assumed to be already known and what is only to be accommodated, the very fact of leaving things out to be assumed as communicated appears to be a universal of human linguistic interaction. This universal status of presuppositions and, likewise, arguably Gricean implicatures, is intimately related to our universals in the broad sense in that they are subsumed, as contributors, under the universal model of human communication.

　　All in all, the term “pragmatic universal” can mean different things. It can mean the kinds of concepts that pragmatics is universally capable of expressing, such as presupposition or the structure of information. It can also mean the power of pragmatics to fill in the gaps, so to speak, in the grammar and lexicon to guarantee the language’s unimpeded expressive power. More generally still, it can mean the principles that interlocutors use in the process of linguistic interaction in conveying intended meaning on the one hand and recovering it on the other. Since speakers can “leave things out” to be assumed as communicated or even as already shared in the common ground, then there must be a mechanism that accounts for this tacit agreement. Grice’s (1975) Cooperative Principle provides this mechanism and the relevant universal that lays the foundation for the search for the actual universal descriptors of communicative interaction that I attend to in what follows. The principle of rational behavior that governs our formulation of utterances on one end and the recovery of their meaning on the other amounts to making one’s “conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which [one is] engaged.” The principle has been widely accepted as the foundation stone for most of modern pragmatics in that it allows for modeling meaning on the assumption that what is communicated (Grice’s meaningNN, nonnatural meaning) can be recovered from the uttered proposition not only by decoding the meaning of the sentence as dictated by the lexicon and grammar of the particular language system but also by filling in what is said with pragmatically conveyed aspects such as lexical and structural disambiguation or reference assignment to indexical terms (see Grice 1978), as well as meanings communicated implicitly (implicata, or more commonly these days, “implicatures”).

　　Additionally, human ability to function with incompletely understood representations appears to be a cognitive, and as such, in the context of communication, also a pragmatic universal. Beliefs whose object is a partially understood proposition have been discussed by Sperber (1985, 1996, 1997), who calls them semi-propositional representational beliefs. When they are taken out of their cultural context, they may appear irrational. And yet their rationality is restored when we follow the distinctions between factual and representational, and on the other hand, propositional and semi-propositional beliefs. For example, “Red giants become white dwarfs” may be such a semi-propositional belief when held by a layman who trusts a textbook in astrophysics in spite of not fully understanding the terms, and so believing the statement while “putting it in quotes,” so to speak, storing it for future understanding. This belief is then reflective, as contrasted with intuitive or spontaneous, in the sense that the person is aware of holding it, and he/she holds it in virtue of holding some second-order belief about this belief. Such beliefs tend to be popular representations of scientific representations of reality and are a kind of metarepresentation (Sperber 2000). Sperber claims that metarepresenting is an important evolutionary achievement; it fosters understanding, cooperation, and communication. Used in communication, it becomes a strong candidate for a pragmatic universal.

　　Essay Writing (60分)

　　Directions: Write no less than 800 words on the following topic on the Answer Sheet.

　　2

　　Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba Group Holding Ltd, said technologies such as ChatGPT have brought challenges to education and ChatGPT is only the beginning of the AI era.

　　In what ways can ChatGPT change the English study in college, in your opinion?

　　Part II Translation (50分)

　　English-Chinese Translation (25分)

　　Directions: Translate the following passage into Chinese.

　　Globalization is very much in the news today. Numerous companies have engaged aggressively in internationalization, propelled by the conviction that this is an irreversible market trend.

　　Globalization normally means a decoupling of space and time, emphasizing that with instantaneous communication, knowledge and culture can be shared around the world simultaneously.

　　But, from the perspective of international business, globalization refers to a primarily economic phenomenon, involving the increasing interaction or integration of national economic systems through the growth in international trade, investment and capital flows.

　　Without doubt, globalization is a capitalist process and the rapid increase in cross-border economic, social, technological exchange under conditions of capitalism.

　　Globalization is, however, not a speedy process, despite the rapid increases in global capital and trade flows. Nevertheless, globalization has given rise to permanent changes in the markets affected. Besides, globalization brings lots of opportunities for economic expansion. It is a trend of development of international business. Realizing this is helpful for us to conduct international trade. Today, the corporations in the world trade market are competing with other corporations from across the world. So they are seeking global profits.

　　Globalization is often cited as a factor accelerating competitive pressure. It has also been studied at length from the intercultural relations and organizational angle. Strangely enough, however, few authors have focused upon its strategic implications. The way to recognize the stakes of globalization can lead companies to completely rethink their strategy. They also explain how managers can help the company find the most promising path.

　　Globalization refers to the shift toward a more integrated and interdependent world economy. Globalization has two main components: the globalization of markets and the globalization of production.

　　The globalization of markets refers to the extent to which a market is characterized by broadly similar customer need, global customers and global market segments. In other words, the globalization of markets refers to the fact that in many industries historically distinct and separate national markets are merging into one huge global marketplace.

　　Chinese-English Translation (25分)

　　Directions: Translate the following passage into English.

　　也许，在所有对我们今天的知识做出贡献的古代文明中，没有一个比古中国贡献更大。起源于中国的发明不仅数量惊人，其多样性也是不可思议的。这些发明范围广泛，从墨镜(由烟晶(smoky quartz)制成，法官们戴着它来隐藏他们在法庭上宣读证据时的反应，而不是为了防止强烈阳光的照射)到火药(其发现纯属偶然，一个炼金术士(alchemist)寻找长生之术，结果却炸毁了房子!)。中国军方很快就意识到这种能炸毁炼金术士房屋的物质的潜力，大约公元900年他们发明了火焰喷射器和炸弹，可以通过弹射器(catapult)向敌人发射。到了12世纪，他们已经将这些早期的武器改进成类似真枪的东西。这些武器的早期图片可以在四川省的洞穴壁画中找到，根据洞穴墙壁上的铭文，图片绘制于公元1128年。

　　以上就是新东方在线小编为各位考研的同学整理的“广东财经大学2024考研真题：804-英语写作与翻译”，希望对各位同学有所帮助，希望大家都可以考出好的成绩。