19年翻译资格一级笔译模拟试题5

翻译考试难度很大，报考翻译资格考试一级笔译的同学们，学习压力可想而知，但是有压力就有动力，只要辛苦付出，总会有回报的，不管是学习还是生活，都是这个道理。既然大家有提升自己能力的想法，就应该付诸行动，证明自己，坦途网翻译资格考试频道小编也会为大家加油的。

“Whisky is for drinking, water is for fighting over,” Mark Twain once said. At the start of the 21st century, his gloomy view on the water side of the equation has been getting endorsements from an impressive — if unlikely — cast of characters. The Central Intelligence Agency, the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers and, most recently, Britain’s Ministry of Defense have all raised the specter of future “water wars.” With water availability shrinking across the Middle East, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, so the argument runs, violent conflict between states is increasingly likely.

The specter is also on the agenda for the experts from 140 countries gathered this week at the annual World Water Week forum in Stockholm. Meetings of water experts are not obvious forums for debating issues of global peace and security. But the ghost of Mark Twain is in Stockholm this week as we reflect on the links between water scarcity and violent conflict between states. So, here’s the question. Are we heading for an era of “hydrological warfare” in which rivers, lakes and aquifers become national security assets to be fought over? Or can water act as a force for peace and cooperation?

Water conflicts are invariably shaped by local factors. But the sheer scale of these conflicts makes it impossible to dismiss them as isolated events. What we are dealing with is a global crisis generated by decades of gross mismanagement of water resources. The facts behind the crisis tell their own story. By 2025, more than two billion people are expected to live in countries that find it difficult or impossible to mobilize the water resources needed to meet the needs of agriculture, industry and households. Population growth, urbanization and the rapid development of manufacturing industries are relentlessly increasing demand for finite water resources. The threats posed by competition for water are real enough — but for every threat there is an opportunity. Cooperation tends to attract less news than violent conflict. Perhaps that is why “water wars” get such exaggerated coverage. Yet cooperation over water is far more widespread than conflict.

How can the world move toward a future of cooperation rather than conflict on water? We believe that there are three broad rules. First, governments have to stop treating water as an infinitely available resource to be exploited without reference to ecological sustainability. Yes, water is scarce in many countries. But the scarcity is the product of poor economic policies. Improving the efficiency of water use and encouraging conservation through pricing and more efficient technologies in agriculture and industry would help reduce scarcity. Second, countries must avoid unilateralism. Any major upstream alteration to a river system, or increase in use of shared groundwater, should be negotiated, not imposed. Governments should look beyond national borders to basin-wide cooperation. Building strong river-basin institutions could provide a framework for identifying and exploiting opportunities for cooperation. Third, political leaders need to get involved. Too often, dialogue on transboundary water management is dominated by technical experts. Whatever their level of expertise, dedication and professionalism, the absence of political leadership tends to limit the scope for far-reaching cooperation.

The most obvious reason for greater political and financial investment in transboundary water cooperation is spelled out in an unlikely source. “By means of water,” says the Koran, “we give life to everything.” As a single human community sharing a single planet, we need to look beyond our national borders to work out ways of sustaining the ecological systems on which human progress depends. By means of water, perhaps we can display a capacity for resolving problems and sustaining through cooperation.

马克·吐温说过，“威士忌是供饮用的，水是用来抢夺的。”他对水所持的悲观看法，到了 21 世纪初，却受到一批如不可能却引人注目的人物的赞同。美国中央情报局、普华永道会计师事务所，以及最近英国国防部，都谈到将来“为水而战”的可怕景象。根据他们的说法，由于中东、亚洲以及非洲小撒哈拉地区可用水量日渐减少，国家间发生暴力冲突的可能性日益增大。

本周有 140 个国家的专家云集斯德哥尔摩，举行世界水周论坛年会。上述可怕景象也反映在年会的议程上。水专家的会议显然不是讨论世界和平与安全问题的论坛。然而，马克·吐温的幽灵本周来到了斯德哥尔摩，因为我们要反映水荒和国家间的暴力冲突的关系。这样问题就来了。难道说我们正走向“为水而战”的时代，河流、湖泊和地下蓄水层都成为需要争夺的国家安全资产?还是说水可以成为一支和平与合作的力量?

关于水的冲突总是由局部地区的多种因素引发的。但看一看这些冲突的纯粹规模，让人不能把它们看作是孤立的事件，而不予重视。我们当前面对的是一场全球性危机，这种危机是几十年来对水资源管理不当而造成的。危机背后的事实最能说明问题。预计到 2025 年，在两亿多人生活的那些国家将无法或难以开发足够的水资源，以满足农业、工业和生活用水的需求。人口增长、城市化、制造业的迅猛发展都对有限的水资源毫不留情地提出越来越大的需求。争水的威胁确实存在，但每个威胁都会带来一个机遇。合作往往比暴力冲突吸引更少的新闻报导。也许正是因为这个原因，“为水而战”才受到那样言过其实的报道。然而，在水的问题上进行的合作要比它引起的冲突更为广泛。

世界怎样才能在将来为水而合作，而不是走向冲突呢?我们认为，总的说来有三项规则。第1、各国政府不可继续把水看作是一种可供无限使用的资源，而不考虑生态的可持续发展。的确，许多国家都在闹水荒。但水荒是贫穷的经济政策产品。提高水的利用率，通过调整价格和改进工农业技术鼓励节水，都有助于缓解水荒。第二、各国必须避免单边主义。某一水系的上游的任何重大变化，或者共用的地下水开采量的增加，应经过谈判，而不能强加于人。各国政府应放眼跨国界全流域的合作。建立强有力的涵盖全流域的机构将会提供一个框架，以利于寻求和利用合作机会。第三、政治领导者需要参与。跨边界水管理的对话，往往由技术专家把持。不论他们的技术水平有多高，不论他们多么敬业与在行，如果缺少政治领导，都会限制具有深远意义的合作。

为水而进行跨边界合作，需要增加政治的和财政的投入，其最明显的一条理由，竟来自一个意想不到的出处。《古兰经》云：“借助于水，我们赋万物以生命。”我们同属一个人类社会，共享一个星球，我们的眼光需要超越自己的国度，去寻求维护生态系统的途径。也许我们能借助于水来展示一种能力——通过合作解决问题并实现可持续发展的能力。

考试不仅考察的是同学们的知识水平，更多的是考验大家的耐心，从初期备考到后期冲刺，大家经历了漫长的复习过程，其中的辛苦肯定是常人不能理解的，但学习注定是孤独的，只有自己不断向前进步，才会有提升的可能。所以加油奋斗吧，争取实现自己的目标，通过翻译资格考试。