人大翻硕，怎一个难字得了
2019
一、翻译基础
1.词条翻译
放冷箭
夫子庙
浮夸风
哽咽
灌迷魂汤
木须肉
名不正则言不顺
磨杵成针
拿不出手
纳闷
跑龙套
捏一把汗
task force
night shift
waiting stuff
2. 汉译英：考的是科学与封建迷信之间的关系，里面有占星术、占卜术、迷信、破四旧、炼丹、八卦等等稍有难度的词语，需要认真自信和平日的积累；
3. 英译汉：考的是卫报上的一篇文章（人大喜欢出卫报文章，多关注）。原文链接https://engagedharma.net/2018/11/14/monbiot-oligarchy-causes-climate-breakdown/?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0
Monbiot: Oligarchy Causes Climate Breakdown
The Earth is in a death spiral. It will take radical action to save us | George Monbiot
George MonbiotWed 14 Nov 2018 01.00 EST
Climate breakdown could be rapid and unpredictable. We can no longer tinker around the edges and hope minor changes will avert collapse
A skeleton blocks its ears surrounded by rubbish on arid ground.
‘Tipping points are likely to remain invisible until we have passed them. We could see changes of state so abrupt and profound that no continuity can be safely assumed.’ Illustration: Ben Jennings
It was a moment of the kind that changes lives. At a press conference held by climate activists Extinction Rebellion last week, two of us journalists pressed the organisers on whether their aims were realistic. They have called, for example, for UK carbon emissions to be reduced to net zero by 2025. Wouldn’t it be better, we asked, to pursue some intermediate aims?
A young woman called Lizia Woolf stepped forward. She hadn’t spoken before, but the passion, grief and fury of her response was utterly compelling. “What is it that you are asking me as a 20-year-old to face and to accept about my future and my life? … This is an emergency. We are facing extinction. When you ask questions like that, what is it you want me to feel?” We had no answer.
Softer aims might be politically realistic, but they are physically unrealistic. Only shifts commensurate with the scale of our existential crises have any prospect of averting them. Hopeless realism, tinkering at the edges of the problem, got us into this mess. It will not get us out.
Public figures talk and act as if environmental change will be linear and gradual. But the Earth’s systems are highly complex, and complex systems do not respond to pressure in linear ways. When these systems interact (because the world’s atmosphere, oceans, land surface and lifeforms do not sit placidly within the boxes that make study more convenient), their reactions to change become highly unpredictable. Small perturbations can ramify wildly. Tipping points are likely to remain invisible until we have passed them. We could see changes of state so abrupt and profound that no continuity can be safely assumed.
Only one of the many life support systems on which we depend – soils, aquifers, rainfall, ice, the pattern of winds and currents, pollinators, biological abundance and diversity – need fail for everything to slide. For example, when Arctic sea ice melts beyond a certain point, the positive feedbacks this triggers (such as darker water absorbing more heat, melting permafrost releasing methane, shifts in the polar vortex) could render runaway climate breakdown unstoppable. When the Younger Dryas period ended 11,600 years ago, temperatures rose 10C within a decade.
I don’t believe such a collapse is yet inevitable, or that a commensurate response is either technically or economically impossible. When the US joined the second world war in 1941, it replaced a civilian economy with a military economy within months. As Jack Doyle records in his book Taken for a Ride, “In one year, General Motors developed, tooled and completely built from scratch 1,000 Avenger and 1,000 Wildcat aircraft … Barely a year after Pontiac received a navy contract to build anti-shipping missiles, the company began delivering the completed product to carrier squadrons around the world.” And this was before advanced information technology made everything faster.
The problem is political. A fascinating analysis by the social science professor Kevin MacKay contends that oligarchy has been a more fundamental cause of the collapse of civilisations than social complexity or energy demand. Control by oligarchs, he argues, thwarts rational decision-making, because the short-term interests of the elite are radically different to the long-term interests of society. This explains why past civilisations have collapsed “despite possessing the cultural and technological know-how needed to resolve their crises”. Economic elites, which benefit from social dysfunction, block the necessary solutions.
The oligarchic control of wealth, politics, media and public discourse explains the comprehensive institutional failure now pushing us towards disaster. Think of Donald Trump and his cabinet of multi-millionaires; the influence of the Koch brothers in funding rightwing organisations; the Murdoch empire and its massive contribution to climate science denial; or the oil and motor companies whose lobbying prevents a faster shift to new technologies.
It is not just governments that have failed to respond, though they have failed spectacularly. Public sector broadcasters have systematically shut down environmental coverage, while allowing the opaquely funded lobbyists that masquerade as thinktanks to shape public discourse and deny what we face. Academics, afraid to upset their funders and colleagues, have bitten their lips.
Even the bodies that claim to be addressing our predicament remain locked within destructive frameworks. Last Wednesday I attended a meeting about environmental breakdown at the Institute for Public Policy Research. Many people in the room seemed to understand that continued economic growth is incompatible with sustaining the Earth’s systems.
As the author Jason Hickel points out, a decoupling of rising GDP from global resource use has not happened and will not happen. While 50bn tonnes of resources used per year is roughly the limit the Earth’s systems can tolerate, the world is already consuming 70bn tonnes. At current rates of economic growth, this will rise to 180bn tonnes by 2050. Maximum resource efficiency, coupled with massive carbon taxes, would reduce this at best to 95bn tonnes: still way beyond environmental limits. Green growth, as members of the institute appear to accept, is physically impossible.
Yet on the same day, the same institute announced a major new economics prize for “ambitious proposals to achieve a step-change improvement in the growth rate”. It wants ideas that will enable economic growth rates in the UK at least to double. The announcement was accompanied by the usual blah about sustainability, but none of the judges of the prize has a discernible record of environmental interest.
Those to whom we look for solutions trundle on as if nothing has changed. As if the accumulating evidence has no purchase on their minds. Decades of institutional failure ensures that only “unrealistic” proposals – the repurposing of economic life, with immediate effect – now have a realistic chance of stopping the planetary death spiral. And only those who stand outside the failed institutions can lead this effort.
Two tasks need to be performed simultaneously: throwing ourselves at the possibility of averting collapse, as Extinction Rebellion is doing, slight though this possibility may appear; and preparing ourselves for the likely failure of these efforts, terrifying as this prospect is. Both tasks require a complete revision of our relationship with the living planet.
Because we cannot save ourselves without contesting oligarchic control, the fight for democracy and justice and the fight against environmental breakdown are one and the same. Do not allow those who have caused this crisis to define the limits of political action. Do not allow those whose magical thinking got us into this mess to tell us what can and cannot be done.
（不可能全篇都让翻译，应该有删节）
二、百科
人大百科是25道选择题，题有些偏，所以要多背。
作文题：撇捺人生
三、基英
人大每年题型不定。今年考了20个单选，四篇阅读（每篇五个单选加一个问答），5个句子paraphrase，一篇图表小作文、一篇大作文。小作文是描述图表，大作文字数只要求250字，难度不大。
2018
1. 翻译硕士英语（总分100）
人大的英语是自主命题，而且题型每年也都在变化。
今年的题型是：
（1） 选择题 10x1’：好多关于介词的搭配，一小部分词义辨析。比如individual tax (bracket)、in/on/under talk、 like that/like such
（2） 阅读题：三篇。篇幅都不是很长，一页左右，第一篇讲的是美国信件由公开到私人的演变，另外两篇记不清楚了，都是选择题，比较基础，不难。
（3） Summary: 10’一篇，100词以内。原文大概有400词左右，感觉难度有点大，不是很能把握重点，讲的是language learner的各种方法，还有各个学家关于此提出的一些理论。
（4） 小作文:20’要求：你人生中的a critical moment,并阐述它对你的影响，不能超过180词。
（5） 大作文：30’ 要求：300词以上，题目是人工翻译能够胜过AI的地方。
2.英语翻译基础（总分150）
题型：（1）词条翻译: 30’ 中译英和英译中各15个，每个一分。记得有balance sheet, Sunday best, cash desk,鼻青脸肿，摆谱儿，事必躬亲，西域
（2） 英译中：一篇，60’，很长，大概一页半左右。讲的是纳博科夫的梦境什么的，难度不是很大，但需要理得清楚关系。
（3） 中译英：一篇，60’, 半页多一些，讲的好像是教育的功利性。
3.百科知识与汉语写作（总分150）
（1） 选择题：50分，25题。都是偏中西方文学作品，我记得的题目有：
咏怀诗，掷铁饼者，拜伦，沉钟社，最初用来形容房屋的成语：波诡云谲，蕾切尔·卡逊写的一本让人类警惕环境恶化的书是：《寂静的春天》、巴金的第一篇什么小说、拜火教 查拉图斯特拉如是说、 世界地球日
（2） 应用文：40分，挑战信：某体育公司北京部的销售额不如上海部，你作为经理写一封挑战信给上海销售部。
（3） 大作文：60分，800字以上：儿童学习英语之我见。
2017
基础英语：20道选择题，10分，多为词义辨析，基本不涉及语法；4篇阅读理解，没有问答题；5个paraphrase，很难，偏理科性，很专业；完形填空，20个空，10分，属于选词填空，不涉及词语变形；图表作文，柱状图，10分，讲的是美国，日本，中国的不同年份的汽车销量好像；大作文，20分，属于情景作文，好像是关于Robot的，让描述机器人的利弊。基英选择，paraphrase和完型，今年都是有难度的，可以重点复习准备一下
翻译基础：英汉词组互译，30分，英译汉，汉译英各15个，没有考热词，有的挺简单，但很少，大部分比较偏，好像有tap water,sale pitch, premium price, 难兄难弟，麻烦精，金融寡头，通知书等；篇章翻译，英译汉讲的是英国脱欧和特朗普的当选让社会公平越行越远，主要讲的是英国的社会公平问题，汉译英讲的是科学，有”科学是第一生产力”这样的句子，偏政治，很多词语“生产力”，”实事求是”，”是非真假”，”根本目标”等，这种类型的网上都有，中国的政治文章基本都是那些特色词汇，这两篇文章总体篇幅都较长，可以多练练，把握时间
百科知识：25道选择题，50分，偏文学，中西方文学都有，高中语文，历史学得好的有优势；应用文是申请书，作为一家翻译公司的经理，给世界汉语桥写申请信，推荐自己公司的翻译；大作文是命题式作文，题目”翻译改变世界”，写一篇800字以上的议论文
复试：上午考了两门，但是在一起考的，两张卷子一起发下来，3个小时，专业课那一门一篇英译汉，一篇汉译英，还有一篇大作文，英译汉讲的是经济类的，汉译英关于道德，大作文好像是关于手机，记不清了，外语笔试那一门就是跟阅读理解差不多，但属于问答类的
