【考研英语】同源文详解202期：破除“福利使人懒惰”迷思

　　点击蓝字关注我们

　　

　　原文期刊：《大西洋月刊》

　　原文标题：Busting the Myth of ‘Welfare Makes People Lazy

　　本文是针对保守经济学理论中一个重要观点“福利使人懒惰”展开的一篇驳论文。【行文脉络】提出驳斥对象及其具体表现（第一、二段）——初步驳斥（第三至五段）——彻底驳斥（第六段）。

　　

　　Part 1

　　原文

　　Ⅰ“Welfare makes people lazy” is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory, which recommends cutting programs like Medicaid and cash assistance, partly out of a fear that self-reliance degenerates in the face of government assistance. Many economists have for decades argued that this orthodoxy is simply wrong. Welfare isn’t just a moral imperative to raise the living standards of the poor. It’s also a critical investment in the health and future careers of low-income kids.

　　ⅡHowever, a core mission of the Republican Party is to reduce government aid to the poor. Many conservative economists argue that some adults might reject certain jobs or longer work hours because doing so would eliminate their eligibility for programs like Medicaid. 

　　ⅢBut this concern has little basis in reality. One of the latest studies on the subject found that Medicaid has “little if any” impact on employment or work hours. In research based in Canada and the U.S., the economist Ioana Marinescu has found that even when basic-income programs do reduce working hours, adults don’t typically stay home to, say, play video games; instead, they often use the extra cash to go back to school or hold out for a more desirable job.

　　ⅣBut the standard conservative critique of Medicaid and other welfare programs is wrong on another plane entirely. It fails to account for the conclusion of a 2015 paper: Anti-poverty programs can work wonders for their youngest recipients. According to the paper, American adults whose families had access to prenatal coverage under Medicaid have lower rates of obesity, higher rates of high-school graduation, and higher incomes as adults than those from similar households in states without Medicaid. 

　　Ⅴ“Welfare helps people work” may sound like a strange and counterintuitive claim to some. But it is perfectly obvious when the word people in that sentence refers to low-income children in poor households. Poverty and lack of access to health care is a physical, psychological, and vocational burden for children. Poverty is a slow-motion trauma, and impoverished children are more likely than their middle-class peers to suffer from chronic physiological stress and exhibit antisocial behavior. It’s self-evident that relieving children of an ambient trauma improves their lives and, indeed, relieved of these burdens, children from poorer households are more likely to follow the path from high-school graduation to college and then full-time employment.

　　ⅥRepublicans have a complicated relationship with the American Dream. Conservative politicians praise the virtues of hard work and opportunity. But when they use these virtues to strongly criticize welfare programs, they ignore the overwhelming evidence that government aid relieves low-income children of the psychological and physiological stresses that get in the way of embracing those very ideals. Welfare is so much more than a substitute for a paycheck. It is a remedy for the myriad burdens of childhood poverty, which gives children the opportunity to become exactly the sort of healthy and striving adults celebrated by both political parties. 

　　Part 2

　　词汇短语

　　1.intellectual [??nt??lekt?u?l] adj. 智力的；理智的

　　2.pillar [?p?l?(r)] n. （信仰或思想）非常重要的部分

　　3.Medicaid [?med?ke?d] n. （美国为穷人设立的）医疗补助制度

　　4.degenerate [d??d?en?re?t] v. 退化

　　5.orthodoxy [??:θ?d?ksi] n. 正统观念

　　6.imperative [?m?per?t?v] adj. 重要紧急的事，必要的事

　　7.critical [?kr?t?kl] adj. 极重要的；关键的

　　8.core [k?:(r)] adj. 核心（信念、原则等）

　　9.mission [?m??n] n. 使命，重要任务

　　10.eliminate [??l?m?ne?t] v. 消除

　　11.eligibility [?el?d??'b?l?t?] n. 合格，资格

　　12.basis [?be?s?s] n. 依据，根据

　　13.typically [?t?p?kli] adv. 通常；一般

　　14.say [se?] v. 比如说；比方说

　　15.hold out for 坚持要求，不肯让步

　　（标*的为超纲词）

　　Part 3

　　翻译点评

　　Ⅰ“Welfare makes people lazy” is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory, which recommends cutting programs like Medicaid and cash assistance, partly out of a fear that self-reliance degenerates in the face of government assistance. Many economists have for decades argued that this orthodoxy is simply wrong. Welfare isn’t just a moral imperative to raise the living standards of the poor. It’s also a critical investment in the health and future careers of low-income kids.

　　【长难句分析】

　　“Welfare makes people lazy” is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory, which recommends cutting programs like Medicaid and cash assistance, partly out of a fear that self-reliance degenerates in the face of government assistance. 

　　【分析】：本句主干为“Welfare makes people lazy” is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory，其后which引导非限定性定语从句解释保守经济理论的主张，从句主干为which recommends cutting programs...，partly out of a fear在从句中作原因状语，that引导同位语从句修饰a fear。

　　【翻译】：“福利使人懒惰”是保守经济理论的一大思想基础，该观念提议削减医疗补助等计划和现金资助，部分原因是（保守派）对于政府援助之下自立精神衰退的担忧。数十年来，很多经济学家一直认为这一正统观念完全是错误的。福利不仅是提高穷人生活水平的一种道德义务。它也是对低收入儿童的健康和未来事业的一种重要投入。

　　【点评】：第一段提出驳斥对象：保守经济理论核心观点“福利使人懒惰”。首先开门见山提出保守经济理论的一大观点“福利使人懒惰”。随后指出众多经济学家早已证明其错误，而且福利不仅是道德义务，更是重要投资。

　　主要逻辑衔接：①首句以引号提出一种观点，余下各句指出其错误。②第二句this orthodoxy回指首句“Welfare...”、an intellectual pillar，先以simply wrong断定该观点错误，末两句...isn’t just...、It’s also...递进说明正确认识。

　　核心关键词：①this orthodoxy is simply wrong（这种正统观念完全是错误的）。

　　ⅡHowever, a core mission of the Republican Party is to reduce government aid to the poor. Many conservative economists argue that some adults might reject certain jobs or longer work hours because doing so would eliminate their eligibility for programs like Medicaid. 

　　【翻译】：但是，共和党的一大核心任务却是减少政府对穷人的救助。很多保守经济学家辩称，有些成年人可能拒不接受某些工作或更长的工作时间，因为这样会取消他们利用医疗补助等项目的资格。

　　【点评】：第二段介绍保守派福利改革主张，树靶。首先指出共和党（保守党）以减少政府对穷人的援助为核心任务，随后引出保守经济学家的观点：有人为了享受福利而故意不工作。

　　主要逻辑衔接：①However表示转折，引出共和党人基于首段错误观点提出的核心任务。②两句the Republican Party（保守党）与conservative相呼应，a core mission→argue that...体现由表及里的论述逻辑。

　　核心关键词：①conservative economists argue（保守经济学家辩称）。

　　ⅢBut this concern has little basis in reality. One of the latest studies on the subject found that Medicaid has “little if any” impact on employment or work hours. In research based in Canada and the U.S., the economist Ioana Marinescu has found that even when basic-income programs do reduce working hours, adults don’t typically stay home to, say, play video games; instead, they often use the extra cash to go back to school or hold out for a more desirable job.

　　 【翻译】：但是这种担忧几乎没有现实依据。关于该问题的一项最新研究发现，医疗补助对就业或工作时长“几乎没有”影响。在基于加拿大和美国的研究中，经济学家伊万娜·马里内斯库发现，就算基本收入计划确实缩短了工作时长，人们也通常不会呆坐家中玩电子游戏等；相反，他们往往利用这些额外的资金重返学校或坚持追求一份更好的工作。

　　【点评】：第三段指出问题一：缺乏现实依据。首先概括该主张缺乏事实证据，随后借研究发现具体说明。

　　主要逻辑衔接：①本段以But开头，引出与上文相反且更重要的内容，表明本段切入正题，正式开始驳斥。②本段为“总—分”结构，首句以has little basis in reality概括段落主旨，One of the latest studies、research以及第三句even when表明余下两句并列、递进阐释主旨。

　　核心关键词：①this concern has little basis in reality（这一担忧几乎毫无现实依据）。

　　ⅣBut the standard conservative critique of Medicaid and other welfare programs is wrong on another plane entirely. It fails to account for the conclusion of a 2015 paper: Anti-poverty programs can work wonders for their youngest recipients. According to the paper, American adults whose families had access to prenatal coverage under Medicaid have lower rates of obesity, higher rates of high-school graduation, and higher incomes as adults than those from similar households in states without Medicaid. 

　　【翻译】：然而，在另一层面上，保守派对医疗补助和其他福利项目的标准评论则是完全错误的。它无法解释2015年一篇论文的结论：脱贫计划可对其最年幼的对象产生奇迹般的作用。据该论文所说，与不提供医疗补助的美国各州中类似的家庭相比，在可利用医疗补助所涵盖的产前检查的家庭中，成年人的肥胖率更低，高中毕业率更高，收入也更高。

　　【点评】：第四段概述问题：该主张忽略了社会福利所服务的重要对象——贫困儿童。首先借一项研究结论指出该主张忽视了贫困儿童，随后介绍研究发现“医疗救助计划对美国家庭的积极影响”具体说明。

　　主要逻辑衔接：①on another plane提示段群与第三段并列，段首But以及wrong...entirely则语带递进，引出该主张更严重的一个问题。②wrong→It fails to...体现本段先概述、后阐释的论述逻辑。

　　核心关键词：①wrong on another plane entirely（在另一层面上完全错误）。

　　Ⅴ“Welfare helps people work” may sound like a strange and counterintuitive claim to some. But it is perfectly obvious when the word people in that sentence refers to low-income children in poor households. Poverty and lack of access to health care is a physical, psychological, and vocational burden for children. Poverty is a slow-motion trauma, and impoverished children are more likely than their middle-class peers to suffer from chronic physiological stress and exhibit antisocial behavior. It’s self-evident that relieving children of an ambient trauma improves their lives and, indeed, relieved of these burdens, children from poorer households are more likely to follow the path from high-school graduation to college and then full-time employment.

　　 【翻译】：“福利帮助人们工作”在某些人听来可能是一个反直觉的奇怪观点。但当这句话中的“人们”一词指的是贫困家庭中的低收入儿童时，它绝对就是显而易见的事实。贫穷和缺乏医疗保障对于儿童来说是生理、心理和职业的三重负担。贫穷是一种慢动作式的创伤，贫困儿童比中产阶级儿童更有可能遭受长期的生理压力，从而表现出反社会行为。解除儿童面临的来自外界环境的创伤可以改善他们的生活，这是不言自明的。而且，解除这些负担后，寒门子女确实更有可能走上一条“高中毕业后上大学，然后找到全职工作”的道路。【点评】：第五段具体说明问题：以福利对儿童长远发展的重要意义反衬该主张的问题。首先介绍大众对于社会福利影响的误解，随后引出对其真正影响的说明，贫穷和缺乏医疗保障对贫穷儿童而言是严重创伤，社会福利有利于他们走出创伤、获得长远发展。主要逻辑衔接：①本段先借may sound like...抛出一种错误看法，随后以But引出对这种看法的纠正，介绍社会福利对儿童的重大意义。②(low-income) children/impoverished childrenildren from poorer households同义复现，串联起全段对贫困儿童的关注，perfectly obvious与self-evident强调社会福利对儿童的意义不言自明。③第三至末句burden/traumaronic physiological stress/antisocial behavior VS improves their lives/follow the path...employment负面表达与正面表达形成鲜明对比，凸显贫穷的毁灭性影响，并反衬社会福利的重要意义。核心关键词：①“Welfare helps people work”（“福利助人工作”）。ⅥRepublicans have a complicated relationship with the American Dream. Conservative politicians praise the virtues of hard work and opportunity. But when they use these virtues to strongly criticize welfare programs, they ignore the overwhelming evidence that government aid relieves low-income children of the psychological and physiological stresses that get in the way of embracing those very ideals. Welfare is so much more than a substitute for a paycheck. It is a remedy for the myriad burdens of childhood poverty, which gives children the opportunity to become exactly the sort of healthy and striving adults celebrated by both political parties. 

　　【长难句分析】

　　But when they use these virtues to strongly criticize welfare programs, they ignore the overwhelming evidence that government aid relieves low-income children of the psychological and physiological stresses that get in the way of embracing those very ideals.

　　分析：本句主干为But..., they ignore the overwhelming evidence，when引导时间状语从句，两个that从句中，前者为同位语从句说明evidence的具体内容，后者为定语从句修饰the psychological and physiological stresses。

　　【翻译】：共和党人与美国梦的关系复杂。保守派政客颂扬努力和机会的美德。但当他们利用这些美德猛烈批判福利项目时，他们忽略了有大量证据显示政府补助可以解除低收入儿童的心理和生理压力，而正是这些压力阻碍着他们拥抱那些美德理想。福利绝非仅仅是一张支票的替代品。它是针对儿童贫困带来的诸多重担的补救措施，它们恰恰能为儿童提供机会成为两党都宣扬的那种健康、努力的成年人。

　　【点评】：第六段彻底驳斥主张：保守派自相矛盾。首先将矛头指向共和党人（保守派），直指其一面大肆宣扬“美国梦”、一面批判社会福利，实在是自相矛盾，最后重申社会福利的积极作用并明确支持社会福利。

　　主要逻辑衔接：①Republicans/Conservative politicians/they同义、回指衔接前三句为一句群，该句群为“总—分”结构，a complicated relationship with the American Dream概括句群主旨“共和党人自相矛盾”，随后以praise VS strongly criticize对比具体说明主旨。②末两句Welfare/It转移论述焦点，总结作者观点。

　　核心关键词：①Welfare...a remedy for...childhood poverty（福利是消除儿童贫困的良策）。

　　

　　右下角的每一枚“在看”

　　都是小编找更多资料的动力

　　

　　我知道你在看哟