翻閱passage39原文

    Automobile industry has been well developed both in the United States and in Japan, but it is generally agreed that Japanese automobile firms have achieved the highest levels of manufacturing efficiency in the world automobile industry. It is assumed that Japanese automobile firms use the same manufacturing equipment and techniques as the automobile firms in the United States, then, why can Japanese automobile firms achieve higher levels of manufacturing efficiency than United States automobile firms? Some observers attribute it to the unique characteristics of Japanese employees and the Japanese culture.1） However, if this were true, then one would expect Japanese auto plants in the United States to perform no better than the factories run by United States companies; but this does not prove to be the case. Japanese-run automobile plants located in the United States and staffed by local workers have demonstrated higher levels of productivity when they are compared with the automobile plants owned by United States companies.

    Other observers link high Japanese productivity to higher levels of capital investment per worker. But a historical perspective leads to a different conclusion. When the two top Japanese automobile makers matched and then doubled United States productivity levels in the mid-sixties, capital investment per employee was comparable to that of United States firms. Furthermore, by the late seventies, the amount of fixed assets required to produce one vehicle was roughly equivalent in Japan and in the United States. Since capital investment was not higher in Japan, it had to be other factors that led to higher productivity.

    A more fruitful explanation may lie with Japanese production techniques. Japanese automobile producers did not simply implement conventional processes more effectively, they made critical change in United States procedures.2）For instance, the mass-production philosophy of United States automakers encouraged the production of huge lots of cars in order to utilize fully expensive, component-specific equipment and to occupy fully workers who have been trained to execute one operation efficiently. Japanese automakers chose to make small-lot production feasible by introducing several departures from United States practices, including the use of flexible equipment that could be altered easily to do several different production tasks and the training of workers in multiple jobs. 3）Automakers could schedule the production of different components or models on single machines, thereby eliminating the need to store the spare stocks of extra components that result when specialized equipment and workers are kept constantly active.

    翻閱passage39譯文

    美國和日本這兩個國家的汽車(automobile)工業(yè)已經(jīng)非常發(fā)達(developed)了，但是，人們普遍認(rèn)為(agree)，在世界汽車行業(yè)，日本汽車公司(f[FS:PAGE]irm)的生產(chǎn)(manufacturing)效率(efficiency)達到了最高水平(level)。人們認(rèn)為(assume)，日本的汽車公司和美國的汽車公司使用的是相同的生產(chǎn)設(shè)備(equipment)，采用的也是相同的技術(shù)(technique)。那么，日本汽車公司的生產(chǎn)效率為什么比美國汽車公司的高呢?一些觀察人士(observer)把這歸因于(attribute)日本工人的獨特(unique)性格(characteristic)和日本文化(culture)。然而，如果真是這樣的話，那么，人們肯定會認(rèn)為(expect)，在美國開辦的日本汽車(auto)廠(plant)不會比美國人開辦(run)的汽車廠表現(xiàn)(perform)得更出色,但是，事實證明(prove)情況并非如此。與美國人開辦(own)的汽車廠相比，日本人在美國開辦(locate)的、雇傭(staff)當(dāng)?shù)?local)工人的汽車廠仍然被證實(demonstrate)具有更高的生產(chǎn)效率。

    其他一些觀察把日本人的高生產(chǎn)率(productivity)歸因于每名(per)日本人更高的資本(capital)投入(investment)。但是，從歷史的觀點(perspective)來看，你就會得到(lead　to)不同的結(jié)論(conclusion)。(20世紀(jì))60年代中期，當(dāng)兩家大型的(top)日本汽車制造廠趕上(match)并達到美國汽車制造廠生產(chǎn)效率兩倍(double)的水平時，每名工人的資本投入與美國汽車廠雇員的投入差不多。此外，(20世紀(jì))70年代后期，美國和日本生產(chǎn)每輛汽車(vehicle)所需(require)的固定(fixed)資產(chǎn)(asset)投入也差不多。既然日本的資本投入并不比美國高，那么應(yīng)該是其他因素(factor)導(dǎo)致日本的生產(chǎn)率更高。

    有關(guān)日本汽車廠高生產(chǎn)率的另一種更令人信服的(fruitful)解釋(explanation)是，這可能與日本的生產(chǎn)(production)技術(shù)(technique)有關(guān)。日本的汽車制造商(producer)并不只是更有效地(effectively)利用(implement)傳統(tǒng)的(conventional)加工(process)技術(shù);他們對美國的生產(chǎn)工序(procedure)進行了根本(critical)改造。比如，美國汽車制造商的大規(guī)模(mass)生產(chǎn)理念。

    翻閱passage39長難句分析

    1) However, if this were true, then one would expect Japanese auto plants in the United States to perform no better than the factories run by United States companies; but this does not prove to be the case.

    【解析】：主句：“one would expect Japanese auto plants in the United States to perform...”。if引導(dǎo)的從句是插入語，表示與事實相反;“no better than”引導(dǎo)的是比較狀語從句;but引導(dǎo)句子表示轉(zhuǎn)折，其中this指前面句子提到的內(nèi)容。no better than應(yīng)譯為并不比...強;be the case應(yīng)譯為是這么回事。

    【參考譯文】然而，如果真是這樣的話，那么，人們肯定會認(rèn)為，在美國開辦的日本汽車廠不會比美國人開辦的汽車廠表現(xiàn)得更出色，但是，事實證明，情況并非如此。

    2)For instance, the mass-production philosophy of United States automakers encouraged the production of huge lots of cars in order to utilize fully expensive, component-specific equipment and to occupy fully workers who have been trained to execute one operation efficiently.

    【解析】本句主句是“the mass-production philosophy of United States automakers encouraged the production...”?！癷n order to”引導(dǎo)的短語做目的狀語，“and”鏈接的是并列目的狀語，其中的“who”引導(dǎo)的定語從句修飾“workers”?！皃hilosophy”譯文理念;occupy應(yīng)譯為調(diào)動

    【參考譯文】比如，美國汽車制造商的大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)理念鼓勵大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)汽車，并充分利用昂貴、[FS:PAGE]特殊的設(shè)備，以便充分調(diào)動受過培訓(xùn)的工人有小弟完成每項工序。

    3)Automakers could schedule the production of different components or models on single machines, thereby eliminating the need to store the spare stocks of extra components that result when specialized equipment and workers are kept constantly active.

    【解析】本句主句“Automakers could schedule the production or models...”。when引導(dǎo)時間狀語從句。schedule應(yīng)譯文“設(shè)定程序”;component配件;model譯文：模子。buffer stocks應(yīng)譯為緩沖庫存。

    【參考譯文】汽車制造商可以設(shè)定程序，利用同一種設(shè)備生產(chǎn)不同的配件或模子，這樣就可以消除出現(xiàn)專門的設(shè)備或工人不停地工作時所導(dǎo)致的貯存額外配件的緩沖庫存問題。