2019年考研英语一翻译解析

2019年考研英语一翻译

Part C

Directions:

Read the following text carefully and then translate the underlined segments into Chinese.Your translation should be written neatly on the ANSWER SHEET.(10 points)

It was only after I started to write a weekly column about the medical journals,and began to read scientific papers from beginning to end,that I realised just how bad much of the medical literature frequently was.I came to recognise various signs of a bad paper:the kind of paper that purports to show that people who eat more than one kilo of broccoli a week were1.17times more likely than those who eat less to suffer late in life from pernicious anaemia.(46)There is a great deal of this kind of nonsense in the medical journals which,when taken up by broadcasters and the lay press,generates both health scares and short-lived dietary enthusiasms.

我是在开始撰写有关医学期刊的每周专栏评论文章，并因此而从头到尾阅读相关科学论文之后，才意识到医学文献常常是多么糟糕。我逐渐摸索出了识别拙劣论文的种种方法：这类文章宣称，一周吃一公斤花椰菜的人晚年患恶性贫血的概率要增加1.17倍。（46）这种无稽之谈充斥各类医学期刊，某些广播公司和非专业出版物一宣传，便制造出健康恐慌，掀起短暂的所谓健康饮食狂澜。

Why is so much bad science published?A recent paper,titled“The Natural Selection of Bad Science”,published on the Royal Society’s open science website,attempts to answer this intriguing and important question.It says that the problem is not merely that people do bad science,but that our current system of career advancement positively encourages it.What is important is not truth,but publication,which has become almost an end in itself.There has been a kind of inflationary process at work: (47)nowadays anyone applying for a research post has to have published twice the number of papers that would have been required for the same post only10years ago.Never mind the quality,then,count the number.

为何如此多的劣质文章能得以发表呢？英国皇家学会的官方网站最近刊载了一篇题为《劣质科研论文的自然选择》的文章，试图回答这一让人百思不得其解的重要问题。文章称，问题不在于人们要写这种质量低下的文章，而是我们现今的职称晋升评价体系鼓励人们这样做。重要的不是文章是否探讨真理，而是文章能否发表，发表文章本身成了写文章的目的。一股文章高产之风业已形成：（47）现如今，要想申请一个研究岗位，就必须发表两倍于十年前申请同一岗位的文章。文章质量就不用操心了，数量才是重要的。

(48)Attempts have been made to curb this tendency,for example,by trying to incorporate some measure of quality as well as quantity into the assessment of an applicant’s papers.This is the famed citation index,that is to say,the number of

times a paper has been quoted elsewhere in the scientific literature,the assumption being that an important paper will be cited more often than one of small account.

(49)This would be reasonable if it were not for the fact that scientists can easily arrange to cite themselves in their future publications,or get associates to do so for them in return for similar favours.

（48）为了抑制这种风气，也进行了种种尝试，例如，将质量和数量双重标准纳入论文考核体系。这就是著名的论文引用率系数，即论文在其他科学文献中被引用的次数，该系数的设定依据是文章被引用率越高，质量就越高。（49）如果科学家们不会在其以后发表的文章中刻意地自我引用，或者和其他同事“互利互惠”相互引用，那倒也算合情合理。

Boiling down an individual’s output to simple metrics,such as number of publications or journal impacts,entails considerable savings in time,energy and ambiguity.Unfortunately,the long-term costs of using simple quantitative metrics to assess researcher merit are likely to be quite great.(50)If we are serious about ensuring that our science is both meaningful and reproducible,we must ensure that our institutions encourage that kind of science.

用论文数量和刊物影响力这种简单指标去衡量一个人的论文，的确省时省力，也不至于模棱两可。但不幸的是，从长远来看，这种唯数量论的简单标准代价将是巨大的。（50）如果真的想让我们的科研论文既有意义，又能持续发表，就必须确保我们的科研机构能鼓励此类科研创作。