2019-06-17:每日英语打卡,文章精读(据说这道题很阴险,果然是……)

如题所述

第1个回答  2022-06-19
26. An argument made by supporters of smoking was that ________.

✔[A] there was no scientific evidence of the correlation between smoking and death

[B] the number of early deaths of smokers in the past decades was insignificant

✔[C] people had the freedom to choose their own way of life

[D] antismoking people were usually talking nonsense

Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn’t know for sure? 你还记得这些年来科学家认为吸烟可以杀死我们,但是反对者坚持认为我们还不确定(结果)。

That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain不确定的. 证据是没有得出结论,科学是不确定的。

That the antismoking lobby禁烟大厅 was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way?禁烟大厅摧毁了我们的生活,政府应该废除这种方式。↓

还记得吗?曾几何时,科学家们认为吸烟会致使我们丧命,而那些怀疑者们却坚持认为我们无法就此得出定论。还记得吗?怀疑者们认为证据并不确凿,科学依据并不充分。还记得吗?怀疑者们认为反对吸烟的游说是为了破坏我们的生活方式,政府不应横加干涉。

Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.许多美国人认为那是胡说八道,在过去超过30年,1000万吸烟者早早地进入坟墓。↓

许多美国人相信了这些胡言乱语,在过去三十多年中,差不多有一千万烟民早早地进了坟墓。

第一句

[1] Do you remember all those years [2] when scientists argued [3] that smoking would kill us [4] but the doubters insisted [5] that we didn’t know for sure? [6] That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? [7] That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life [8] and the government should stay out of the way?

句子结构

分句[1]为主句

分句[2]为修饰years的定语从句

分句“[3]+[4]”为argued的宾语从句

分句“[5]”,“[6]”及“[7]+[8]”为insisted的三个并列的宾语从句

[1] 主句(S+V+O)

主:you 你

谓:Do remember 还记得吗

宾:all those years 那些年

译文:还记得吗?曾……

[2] 修饰years的定语从句(S+V+O)

引(状):when = during which 那些年里

主:scientists 科学家

谓:argued 认为

宾:……

译文:那些年科学家认为……

[3] argued的宾语从句(S+O+V)

引:that

主:smoking

谓:would kill

宾:us

译文:吸烟会致我们于死地

[4]与[3]并列,为argued的宾语从句(S+O+V)

连:but

主:the doubters

谓:insisted

宾:…

译文:但质疑者坚持认为

以下内容皆为insisted的宾语部分

第一部分:

[5] insisted的宾语从句(S+V)

引:that

主:we

谓:didn’t know

状:for sure?

译文:我们无法得出定论

第二部分:

[6] insisted的宾语从句(S+LV+P)

引:That

主:the evidence

系:was

表:inconclusive,

状(伴随):the science uncertain

译文:证据并不确凿,没有确定的科学依据

第三部分:

[7] insisted的宾语从句(S+V+O)

引:That

主:the antismoking lobby

谓:was out to destroy

宾:our way of life

译文:反对吸烟的游说是为了破坏我们的生活方式

[8] insisted的宾语从句(S+V)

连:and

主:the government

谓: should stay out of the way

译文:政府 不应横加干涉

本句译文

还记得吗?曾几何时,科学家们认为吸烟会致使我们丧命,而那些怀疑者们却坚持认为我们无法就此得出定论。还记得吗?怀疑者们认为证据并不确凿,科学依据并不充分。还记得吗?怀疑者们认为反对吸烟的游说是为了破坏我们的生活方式,政府不应横加干涉。

第二句

[1] Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, [2] and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.

句子结构

并列句

[1](S+V+O)

主:Lots of Americans 许多美国人

谓:bought 都买了(认同了)

宾:that nonsense 这些胡言乱语

译文:许多美国人相信了这些胡言乱语

[2](S+V)

连:and

状(时间):over three decades 在(过去的)三十年里

主:some 10 million smokers 大约一千万吸烟者

谓:went 去了

状:to early graves 早早的坟墓

译文:在过去三十多年中,差不多有一千万吸烟者早早地进了坟墓

本句译文

许多美国人相信了这些胡言乱语,在过去三十多年中,差不多有一千万烟民早早地进了坟墓。

Do you remember all those years when sociologists argued that littering would destroy our environment and morality, but the doubters insisted that we didn’t know for sure? That its harm was exaggerated? That the antilittering lobby was going too far? Lots of us bought that nonsense, and over three decades, lakes are covered with garbage littered by us.
相似回答