1.Is it not tyrannical，in Pascal s sense，to insist that those whoexcel in sensitivity or the ability to express compassion meritequal wealth with those who excel in qualities essential in producing wealth?
如果坚持认为，那些擅长于 敏感 和 善于表达怜悯之心 的人，应获取与那些擅长于在物质财富创造过程中所不可或缺的品质的人同等的物质财富，这按帕斯卡尔的意思，难道就不也是专制暴政吗?
2.Yet Waizer s argument，however deficient，does point to one ofthe most serious weak-nesses of capitalism-namely，that it brings topredominant positions in a society people who，no matter howlegitimately they have earned their material rewards，often lackthose other qualities that evoke affection or admiration.
然则，沃尔泽的论点，无论它不充分到何种地步，确实揭示了资本主义体制中最严重的一个弱点，即它将某一类人置于社会中的显赫地位置，这类人无论以怎样合法的方式获得了其物质报偿，却常常缺乏其它那些能唤起他人受戴和钦佩的品质。
3. The appreciation of traditional oral American Indian literature hasbeen limited，hampered by poor translations and by the difficulty，evenin the rare culturally sensitive and aesthetically satisfyingtranslation，of completely conveying the original s versestructure，tone，andsyntax.对美国印第安人传统口头文学的欣赏，一直被质量低劣的翻译所限制和妨碍，并且即使是那种不可多得的既体现着文化敏感性，又在美学上令人满意的译作，也难以完全传递出原作的诗体结构、语调和句法。
https://www.shhhjz.cn/yuedu/328764/
推荐访问:gre考试时间长