108 年 國立清華大學經濟學系碩士班《英文》

本題考查代名詞的使用。空格處需要一個代名詞來指代「那些東西」中「不尋常」的部分。
(a) "One" 可以用來指代某個單數名詞，在此語境下，"One of those is not like the rest." 意為「其中一個不像其他的」。
(b) "Several" 是數詞，表示「幾個」，通常後面接名詞，不能單獨作為指代。

本題考查介系詞片語的用法，特別是與 "walking distance" (步行距離) 相關的片語。
"within walking distance" 是一個固定片語，表示「在步行可達的距離內」。
(a) "from" 表示「從...」，不適用。
(b) "behind" 表示「在...後面」，不適用。

本題考查與金錢、數字相關的比較和語意。
句意為：截至昨天，這部電影的全球票房為 2.76 億美元。雖然這個數字不錯，但仍比預期的（projection）少了 1500 萬美元。
(a) "more than" 意為「超過」，與句意「少了」相反。

本題考查對過去事實的推論。
題目提到 Anna「本來可以搭公車去學校，但她決定走路去」。這直接說明了她最終的行動。
(a) "By bus." 是她本來可以選擇的方式，但不是她最終的選擇。
(b) "By car." 在題目中沒有提及。

本題考查 "if not" 的語意和邏輯。
"X, if not Y" 的結構通常表示：X 情況下，如果不是 Y 的話。這裡的 "if not" 相當於 "or even"，表示 Y 是比 X 更嚴重或更極端的結果。
所以，"The smell could cause nausea, if not vomiting." 的意思是：這種氣味可能引起噁心，甚至可能引起嘔吐。
這表示嘔吐是可能發生的，且比噁心更嚴重。

我們來分析選項：
(a) "the smell will not cause vomiting"：這與 "if not vomiting" 的意思直接矛盾。

本題考查 "do anything but" 的用法。
"do anything but X" 的意思是指「做任何事，除了 X」。
所以，"Benedict will do anything but reading a book." 意為「Benedict 會做任何事，就是不看書」。
基於這個理解，我們可以推斷 Benedict 並不看書。

本題考查連接詞的用法，特別是與 "Not only... but also..." 結構相關的連接詞。
"Not only... but also..." 是並列結構，表示「不僅...而且...」。
原句的結構是 "Not only did he make it in time, ____ he also brought a surprise guest."
這裡的空格應該填入連接兩個並列分句的詞。由於 "Not only" 已經出現，通常後面的連接詞是 "but" (或者 "but also")。
"Not only... but also..." 是一個固定的片語。

本題考查同義詞或近義詞的辨識。"weirdly fascinating" 的意思是「奇怪地引人入勝」。
"In other words" 表示後面的詞語是前面詞語的同義或近義解釋。
我們需要找到一個詞來形容「奇怪地引人入勝」。

分析選項：
(a) "incomprehensible"：意為「無法理解的」，與 "fascinating" (引人入勝) 相悖。

本題考查片語的用法，用來引出某人觀點或判斷的標準。
句意是：「就 James 而言，冬天是一年中最糟糕的時期。」
我們需要一個片語來表示「就...而言」或「在...的範圍內」。

分析選項：
(a) "When it comes to"：意為「說到...」、「談到...」，後面通常接名詞或動名詞，用來引出一個主題。例如："When it comes to winter, James thinks it's the worst."
(b) "Whether"：用於引導從句，表示「是否」。

本題考查類比 (analogy) 的連接詞。
"A is to B as C is to D" 是標準的類比句型，表示 A 之於 B 的關係，如同 C 之於 D 的關係。
句型為：Bird : sky :: fish : water。
鳥在天上飛，魚在水中游。這是牠們的棲息環境或活動空間的類比。
因此，我們需要連接 "Bird is to sky" 和 "fish is to water" 的類比連接詞。

此題為翻譯題，要求將英文段落翻譯成中文。
【原文】
Officially sanctioned forms of heritage have functioned as integral devices for the
production of origin myths within which to root the histories, laws and traditions of
nationhood, and for establishing a series of norms that explain the rules by which
nation-states and their citizens should behave and interact with one another.

【翻譯】
官方認可的遺產形式，已作為生產起源神話的內在裝置，這些神話用以紮根國家認同的歷史、法律與傳統，並建立一系列規範，解釋國家及其公民應如何行為及相互互動。（R. Harrison，《遺產：批判性方法》）

【詳解】

1. "Officially sanctioned forms of heritage": 「官方認可的遺產形式」。
   • "officially sanctioned": 官方認可的、官方批准的。
   • "forms of heritage": 遺產的形式。
2. "have functioned as": 已發揮...的功能、已作為...。
3. "integral devices": 內在裝置、重要工具、構成要素。
4. "for the production of origin myths": 用於生產起源神話。
   • "origin myths": 起源神話，指關於某國家、民族或文化起源的神話。

此題為翻譯題，要求將英文段落翻譯成中文。
【原文】
All of this is not to suggest that newspapers embraced all perspectives and
ideologies, accommodated the voices of all their readers (not to mention the minority
who did not or could not read them), or faithfully represented all the conflicts
endemic to life in an economically, socially, and culturally heterogeneous city.

【翻譯】
這一切並非意在暗示報紙涵蓋了所有觀點與意識形態，包容了所有讀者的聲音（更不用說那些不識字或無法閱讀的少數群體），或忠實地呈現了在一個經濟、社會與文化多元的城市生活中所固有的所有衝突。

【詳解】

1. "All of this is not to suggest that...": 這一切並非意在暗示...。
   • "suggest": 暗示、建議。
2. "newspapers embraced all perspectives and ideologies": 報紙涵蓋了所有觀點與意識形態。
   • "embraced": 擁抱、涵蓋、接納。
   • "perspectives": 觀點。
   • "ideologies": 意識形態。
3. "accommodated the voices of all their readers": 包容了所有讀者的聲音。
   • "accommodated": 包容、順應、容納。

本題要求根據 Ingold 的觀點，找出關於手斧最奇特的謎團。
文章提到：「The fundamental enigma of the handaxe, however, lies not in what it might have been used for, but in the stability of its form. To what can we ascribe this stability?」
這段話明確指出，手斧的根本謎團不在於其用途，而在於其形式的穩定性。接著又問，如何解釋這種穩定性。
文章後面也提到：「When we contemplate the form of the Acheulean handaxe, reflecting on its regularity and balance, it is hard not to see it likewise as the realization of deliberate, self-conscious design. But if the form is the expression of a design concept then how can we possibly account for the stability of the concept over three continents and more than a million years?」
這段話進一步闡述了謎團：如果手斧是刻意設計的結果，那麼這種設計概念為何能在三大洲、跨越百萬年的時間裡保持穩定？

現在我們來分析選項：
(a) "They are found in both human fossil records and the animal kingdom."：文章提到手斧與 Homo erectus 的遺骸相關，但沒有提到動物界。此選項不符。

本題詢問手斧的用途。
文章中關於手斧的用途有這樣的描述：「But if they made them for a purpose, we have no idea of what that purpose was. All we know for sure is that the one use to which the thing cannot have been put is as an axe, since to have done so would have caused more injury to the user's hand than to whatever he or she might have been seeking to cut down. For want of any better explanation, the majority of prehistorians have gone for the safe option of describing the artefact as a ‘general purpose tool'.」
這段話指出，我們不知道手斧的確切用途，而且它肯定不是用作斧頭。儘管許多史前學家稱之為「通用工具」，但這並非一個確切的用途說明。

本題詢問為何手斧與阿舍利工業 (Acheulean industry) 相關聯。
文章開頭提到：「That the thing is called a handaxe owes much to the circumstances surrounding the first substantial finds of prehistoric specimens at the site of Saint Acheul in northern France. Their discoverer was Jacques Boucher de Perthes. Believing them to be of great antiquity, de Perthes called them ‘antediluvian axes'. By the late nineteenth century, the site of Saint Acheul had come to stand for an entire epoch of prehistory, associated with the industry of making artefacts of just the kind that de Perthes had first uncovered there. In 1925, this industry was officially labelled ‘the Acheulean', and the label – along with the designation of its iconic artefacts as handaxes – has remained ever since.」
這段話解釋了整個關聯性：

1. 手斧（handaxe）這個名字的由來，與在 Saint Acheul 地點發現的首批重要史前標本有關。
2. 發現者 Jacques Boucher de Perthes 認為這些工具年代久遠，稱之為「大洪水前的斧頭」（antediluvian axes）。

本題詢問 Ingold 對於手斧製造者為何會製造出那樣的手斧所提出的解釋。
文章中關於 Ingold 的觀點，在討論形式穩定性的部分有提到：
「To suggest, as Pelegrin does (1993: 312), that the form remained constant since progress 'at the level of mental images' was retarded by the 'inertia of tradition' merely begs the question of why such inertia should have exerted a stranglehold over innovation so much tighter during the heyday of Homo erectus than at any time since. If the handaxe makers had the intelligence to envisage forms in advance of their realisation, then, in principle, they should have been just as capable of devising alternative forms. Could it be, then, that Homo erectus was not following the dictates of any mental model, traditional or otherwise, in their flaking of stone? Could we go so far as to say that the making of handaxes was no more, and no less, than the expression of an instinct?」

本題詢問根據 Matthews 的觀點，是什麼讓重慶大廈 (Chungking Mansion) 成為低端全球化 (low-end globalization) 的中心。
文章中提到重慶大廈存在的原因有三點：
「Chungking Mansions exists for three reasons. First, there are some 920 owners, but the unified ownership has been remarkably weak. ... The second reason is Hong Kong's visa regulations. Visitors from most developing countries can obtain their visas at the airport in Hong Kong: 14-day visas for most. This enables entrepreneurs from most countries in Africa and Asia to enter Hong Kong without bureaucratic difficulty. ... The third reason for Chungking Mansions' existence is the emergence of China as a world manufacturing center.」
其中第二點直接提到了香港的簽證規定。

本題要求判斷哪個選項是低端全球化 (low-end globalization) 的例子。
文章對「Low end globalization」的定義是：「the transnational flow of people and goods involving relatively small amounts of capital and informal, sometimes quasi-legal or illegal transactions, commonly associated within the developing world.」
關鍵詞是：跨國流動（people and goods）、少量資本、非正式/準非法/非法交易、通常與發展中國家相關。

分析選項：
(a) "A Bollywood studio produces low-budget movies and distribute them globally."：雖然是跨國流通（電影），但「low-budget movies」可能涉及大量資本，且 distribution 過程可能相對正規，不一定符合「informal」或「illegal transactions」的特徵。

本題詢問重慶大廈的例子如何為全球化提供新的見解。
文章最後一段提到：「The anthropological literature typically depicts neoliberalism as a profound evil, representing the forces of rampant global capitalism destroying all possibility of resistance. But in Chungking Mansions, the effects of neoliberalism seem hardly so. What may be the most globalized building in the world is generally non-violent due to the common pursuit of profit by all who sojourn there. Neoliberalism, there, is a creator of global peace.」
這段話是關鍵，它對比了學術界對新自由主義 (neoliberalism) 的普遍負面看法（視其為全球資本主義的邪惡力量），與重慶大廈的實際情況——在這裡，新自由主義似乎促進了和平，因為人們出於共同的逐利動機而聚集在一起。

分析選項：
(a) "Interaction between individuals of different backgrounds will always make them more cosmopolitan by developing new cultural tastes."：文章提到「The heterogeneity in Chungking Mansions does not much change the people who experience it. The ethnic interactions seem not to make people more cosmopolitan. Afr

本題詢問哪個選項最能描述重慶大廈 (Chungking Mansion)。

文章對重慶大廈的描述：
「Chungking Mansions is a dilapidated building of cheap guesthouses, restaurants, and retail and wholesale businesses. It is where people from sub Saharan Africa, South Asia and other areas throughout the world seek their fortunes through temporary employment and low-budget transnational trade, and where tourists and asylum seekers make their temporary or extended visits. ... Chungking Mansions serves as a world center for low-end globalization. ... Chungking Mansions, reflecting its more-or-less decrepit state, remains a draw as a cheap place to stay.」

分析選項：
(a) "It is a multiplex composed of several buildings of different uses."：文章描述重慶大廈為「a dilapidated building of cheap guesthouses, restaurants, and retail and wholesale businesses」。雖然它有多種用途，但描述的是「a building」（一個建築物），而不是「several buildings」。因此，這個描述不夠精確。