Section 1 Translation
Part 1 English-Chinese Translation (英译汉)
Translate the following passage into Chinese.
The Travels of Marco Polo was conceived in a prison cell in Genoa, Italy, in 1298.
A few years earlier Polo had returned to the West after an epic journey that lasted
some 24 years. He then saw action in a naval battle between the Venetian and
Genoese fleets, and was captured. It was in jail that he met and befriended Rustichello
of Pisa, a well-known writer and collector of Arthurian romances. Their collaboration
yielded a book that would give Europe its first authoritative account of the Middle and
Far East, in particular China, and reveal the presence of a vast empire and advanced
civilization far greater than anything Europeans could achieve or even imagine.
More than 100 copies of that long-lost original exist, many dating from the 14th
and 15th centuries. There is no definitive manuscript, however, and all existing
versions have been embellished, doctored or censored by the Christian establishment
over the years. Modern editions are thus collations and translations of imperfect
copies. This murky history helps explain why the book describes what the Venetian
could not possibly have seen, and overlooks sights that any traveler to China must
have witnessed — like the Great Wall, foot-binding and chopsticks. Skeptics say that
Polo never ventured to China and that he and Rustichello used second-hand
information from other travelers, especially Arab traders. Certainly, there is no hard
historical evidence that Polo actually visited all the places he describes. But most of
the detail has since been corroborated by historians and geographers, confounding
critics and confirming the importance of the book as the fullest and most accurate
account of Asia in its time.
Originally called Description of the World, Travels aims for geographical
completeness, not the immediacy and excitement of personal encounter. It’s not a
travelogue. Consistent with the possibility that Polo was not an eyewitness, his book
is not “on-the-spot” reporting, and only loosely follows an itinerary. To modern
audiences, the book may seem dull and repetitive, to be dipped into, not read cover to
cover. Yet Travels was a revolutionary piece of writing. It radically altered European
understanding of Asia by forcing the West to recognize a superior culture in the East,
and, by describing with such verve the luxuries and sensuousness of Chinese cities, it
impressed the idea of an exotic East on the European psyche.
The Venetian literally changed the Western view of the world. European maps in
his time were based on Biblical interpretations and classical mythology. Jerusalem
was at the center. Then came Polo’s book, describing great civilizations in the East,
and a world not centered on Jerusalem, politically or geographically. This recasting of
the world into a more dynamic and multi-centered geographical space was the first
step toward what we now call globalization.
Travels is a book of liberal and enlightened humanism. No one can fail to
appreciate its celebration of the heterogeneity of nature, geography and, above all,
people. His work expresses wonder and joy in what is unfamiliar. Races are
differentiated but not denigrated, and the customs of different cultures are met with
enthusiastic curiosity, not the conformism and prejudice prevalent in Europe at the
time. Travels had a moral for medieval Europe: let diversity and tolerance replace
division and xenophobia — a moral no less relevant today than in Marco Polo’s time.
Part 2 Chinese-English Translation (汉译英)
Translate the following passage into English.
Convention Against Corruption)。该公约是第一个全球性反腐败法律文件，资产追
Section 2 Finalizing Translated Texts
Part 1 English-Chinese Translation (英译汉审定稿)
Read the following original English text. There are 10 mistakes in the Chinese translated text. Underline and number them and give your corrections in the numbered spaces on the ANSWER SHEET.
“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
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
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
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
Part 2 Chinese-English Translation (汉译英审定稿)
Read the following original Chinese text. There are 10 mistakes in the English translated text. Underline and number them and give your corrections in the numbered spaces on the ANSWER SHEET.
Since the end of 2002, driven by growing domestic demand, China kept increasing investment in industries featured high input, high energy consumption and heavy pollution.Given the country’s current industrial structure, a 1.3-percentage-point drop of energy consumption per 10,000 yuan of the GDP can be
realized provided that the proportion of added value of hi-tech industries grow by 1
percentage point and that of high energy-consuming sectors like metallurgical and
chemical industries falls by 1 percentage point.
Some experts predicted that China would see more distinct results in energy conservation with the strengthening of technological renovation of high
energy-consuming enterprises and the quickened pace of industrial restructuring.
However, some people warned that the acceleration of China’s industrialization and
urbanization would further increase the pressure on energy supply in urban areas.
Per-capita housing in China’s urban areas is expected to surge nearly 30 percent
to 26 square meters in the next five years and that in rural areas will grow 20 percent
to 30 square meters. Air-conditioners owned by every 100 urban households will
increase 1.6 times to 81 sets and cars owned by every 100 urban households will rise
6.7 times to 3.4 units. This will lead to a robust jump of high energy-consuming
products, such as cement, steel, glass and others.
Moreover, China’s coal consumption may approach to 1 billion tons during the
next five years, according to China’s current demand for energy, even if the
government closes down or eliminates backward productivity and intensifies energy
saving of high energy-consuming enterprises. All posing a great challenge to China in
its effort to meet the goal of cutting its energy consumption by 20 percent.