Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension
1、 It was only after I started to write a weekly column about the medical journals, and began to read scientific papers from beginning to end, that I realised just how bad much of the medical literature frequently was. I came to recognise various signs of a bad paper: the kind of paper that purports to show that people who eat more than one kilo of broccoli a week were 1.17 times more likely than those who eat less to suffer late in life from pernicious anaemia. (46) 【There is a great deal of this kind of nonsense in the medical journals which, when taken up by broadcasters and the lay press, generates both health scares and short-lived dietary enthusiasms.】 Why is so much bad science published? A recent paper, titled “The Natural Selection of Bad Science”, published on the Royal Society’s open science website, attempts to answer this intriguing and important question. It says that the problem is not merely that people do bad science, but that our current system of career advancement positively encourages it. What is important is not truth, but publication, which has become almost an end in itself. There has been a kind of inflationary process at work: (47)【 nowadays anyone applying for a research post has to have published twice the number of papers that would have been required for the same post only 10 years ago. 】Never mind the quality, then, count the number. (48) 【Attempts have been made to curb this tendency, for example, by trying to incorporate some measure of quality as well as quantity into the assessment of an applicant’s papers.】 This is the famed citation index, that is to say the number of times a paper has been quoted elsewhere in the scientific literature, the assumption being that an important paper will be cited more often than one of small account. (49)【 This would be reasonable if it were not for the fact that scientists can easily arrange to cite themselves in their future publications, or get associates to do so for them in return for similar favours.】 Boiling down an individual’s output to simple metrics, such as number of publications or journal impacts, entails considerable savings in time, energy and ambiguity. Unfortunately, the long-term costs of using simple quantitative metrics to assess researcher merit are likely to be quite great. (50)【 If we are serious about ensuring that our science is both meaningful and reproducible, we must ensure that our institutions encourage that kind of science.】
正确答案：
参考译文
46. 医学杂志上有很多这样的谬论，一旦被广播公司和非专业媒体报道，就会引起健康恐慌和短暂的饮食狂热。
47. 现在，任何申请某一科研岗位的人，所需发表的论文数量必须是十年前的两倍。
48. 人们已经尝试遏制这一趋势，例如，试图将某种既衡量数量又衡量质量的标准纳入申请人的论文评估过程中。
49. 事实上，科学家可以轻易设法在自己未来发表的文章中引用自己的文章，或让同事引用自己的文章以获取类似的好处。如果不是这样的事实，这种评估方法将会是合理的。
50. 如果我们要严格确保我们的科学既有意义又可重复利用，我们必须确保我们的制度鼓励这种科学。
答案解析：
生词本
nonsense n. 胡言乱语；谬论
journal n. 期刊；杂志
broadcaster n. 广播公司
lay adj. 外行的；非专业的
short-lived adj. 短暂的
dietary adj. 饮食的
curb vt. 抑制；控制
incorporate vt. 包含
assessment n. 评估
cite vt. 引用；引证
associate n. 同事；伙伴；v. 联系
reproducible adj. 可再生的；可复制的
institution n. 制度
表达难点
46. ①主句是There be句型，可以翻译为“某处有某物”，即“医学杂志上有很多这样的谬论”。②which引导的定语从句修饰nonsense，而非medical journals。翻译时可以将which翻译为“这些谬论”。③when引导的是省略主语的条件状语从句，taken up by表明这是被动句，因而翻译为“当被……报道时”。
47. ①applying for a research post为后置定语，修饰anyone，翻译为“任何申请某一科研岗位的人”。②twice the number of papers表示“论文数量的两倍”。③that引导的定语从句修饰the number of papers，would have been required为被动语态，结合先行词可翻译为“所需发表的论文数量”。
48. ①句子主干是被动语态，翻译时可处理为主动，即“人们已经努力”。②for example为插入语，翻译时依旧作为插入语即可。④by trying to…为方式状语，翻译为“试图……”。⑤incorporate…into…表示“将……纳入……之中”。
49. ①主句为主系表结构，使用了虚拟语气，This指代前文所说的评估方法，故翻译为“这种评估方法将会是合理的”。②if引导的条件状语从句可翻译为“如果不是因为这样的事实”。③that引导的同位语从句用以解释说明the fact，指出现在的事实，翻译时可将之单独成句，翻译为“事实上……”。④get associates to do so中to do so指引用文章。
50. ①be serious about表示“认真对待……”。②第一个that引导的是ensuring的宾语从句。第二个that引导的是ensure的宾语从句，顺序直译即可。
喵呜刷题：让学习像火箭一样快速，快来微信扫码，体验免费刷题服务，开启你的学习加速器！
