[responsivevoice_button voice="UK English Female" buttontext="Listen to Post"]

年中無休の家庭教師 毎日学習会

慶應義塾大学SFC 総合政策学部 英語 2009年 大問二 本文対訳

1:1 The twin towers of democracy – individual political liberty and self-interested market economics took root in the 18th and 19th centuries.
1:2 The market democracies rise from the works authored by Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith in 1776.
1:3 That year The Declaration of Independence and The Wealth of Nations launched humanity on a journey toward “I’s” and “we’s” who could fulfill the best in our natures.

2:1 That path is now gravely threatened.
2:2 An extreme individualism equating happiness [31] (1. for 2. with 3. as) “value” alone now trumps choices and policies made in markets of all kinds, political and otherwise.
2:3 “Value” and “I” can never migrate back into a sustainable blend with values” and “we must think differently about the real “we’s” of our lives – especially our organizations – and [32] (1. purposefully 2. accidentally 3. incidentally) blend “value” and “values” in those “we’s.”

3:1 It is to be noted here that people use the words “value” and “values” in different ways.
3:2 On the one hand, the singular “value” arises in conversations about economics, finance, business, and markets.
3:2 単数形の「価値」は、経済や財政、事業、市場に関する話題で現れる。
3:3 Value connotes a pointed [33] (1. estimation 2. escalation 3. investment) of current or anticipated worth not distant from monetary equivalence.
3:3 それが意味するのは、現在の価値あるいは予想される価値の的確な評価であって、その金銭的対価から離れることはないのである。
3:4 On the other hand, the plural term ”values” crops up when people talk about beliefs and behaviors regarding how human beings do or do not get along with one another and with gods, spirits, and nature.
3:4 他方、複数形の「価値観」が出現するのは、人間が人間同士、あるいは、神々、精霊、自然といかにうまく折り合えたり、折り合えなかったりするのかに関わる信条や行動について語るときなのである。
3:5 “Values” is a noun, but a noun concerned with attitude and action.
3:5 「価値観」は、名詞であるとはいえ、態度や行動に関わる名詞である。
3:6 Values are sorted into several categories: social values, political values, family and religious values, and environmental values.
3:7 Unlike value, talk of values [34] (1.increases 2. incorporates 3. ignores) money.
3:8 There is a deep, backward­ and forward-looking quality to values.
3:8 価値観には、奥深くて、これまでとこれからを見据える性質がある。
3:9 If value makes us wealthy, values make us human.
4:1 Billions of people on the planet continue to live and to share fates because of places.
4:1 地球上の数十億の人々が暮らし続け、また運命を共有し続けているのは、地域のためである。
4:2 But, not us.
4:3 What we share with others fates, ideas, roles, relationships depends more on the purposes we bring to markets, networks, and organizations than the places in which we [35] (1. reside 2. believe 3. participate.)
4:3 私たちが他者と共有するものつまり運命、思想、役割、関係といったものは、暮らす地域よりも、市場やネットワーク、組織体へと持ち込む目的によって決まる。
4:4 We share fates with other people in the form of friends, family, and organizations, not places.
4:5 The [36] (1. coordination 2. comparison 3. split) between value and values is a corollary of is” who have spun out of orbit from was.”
4:6 Those of us who live in markets, networks, nations, and organizations no longer belong to base traditional was.”
4:7 Therefore, we must learn to think differently about “we” in this age of “me.”

5:1 In our placeless world, our dominant shared role in relation to government is consumer, not citizen.
5:2 Citizenship becomes [37] (1. no less than 2. no more than 3. as little as) a nostalgically shared idea.
5:3 We experience the self-governance historically linked to the role of citizen in organizations, not places.
5:4 If we find the meaning of community, we do so in organizations and among friends, not places.
5:5 We can vote.
5:6 But voting is a single thread of democracy.
5:6 しかし、投票は民主主義のたった一本の糸なのだ。
5:7 In the [38] (1. event 2. absence 3. institution) of accompanying political and social values, voting is a specialized currency for consumption in political markets.
6:1 In worlds where people share ideas, roles, resources, purposes, and fates because of places, shared paths weave into the larger was” of town and neighborhood, city, and state.
6:2 Place blends religious, ethnic, national, political, and other values to [39] (1. forbid 2. forsake 3.forge) “thick we’s.”
6:3 In a world of purposes, the inescapable shared fates necessary to “thick we’s” occur among friends and families, and in organizations.
6:4 Our cares and animosities arise in them.
6:5 We know that Germany and France were mortal enemies many times in the olden days.
6:6 But we do not [40] (1. allow 2. expect 3. implore) them to go to war ever again.
6:7 In a world of purposes, we do not hate people in the “thick we’s” of other organizations.
7:1 Large societies are unsustainable without organizations or midlevel formations.
7:2 If organizations disappear, societies [41] (1. Destabilize 2. Consolidate 3. Develop) until new ones emerge.
7:3 De Tocqueville, for example, considered towns and associations [42] (1. vital 2. detrimental 3. harmless) to 19th century American democracy.
7:3 たとえば、ド=トクヴィルは、町や連合組織が19世紀アメリカの民主主義に極めて重要であったと考えた。
7:4 The immense Soviet Union was also just that — a union of mid­level social formations called soviets.
7:5 However, mid­level social formations grounded in place have at amazed in the last 30 years.
7:6 Structures that once made sense local government, neighborhood, and community – destabilized.
7:7 This instability will [43] (1. insist 2. resist 3. persist) until we recognize that organizations, not collectivities of is,” are the thick was” in which we share fates with others.
7:8 Organizations are the mid­level social formations in a world of purposes.
8:1 Organizations are “thick we’s” in which individuals must [44] (1. hinder 2. balance 3. inflate) self-interest with the common good.
8:2 It is in organizations, not in places, that we most meaningfully share fates with other people beyond friends and family.
9:1 Organizations compete in markets and networks.
9:2 Organizations must link their common good to the greater good of the planet.
9:3 For example, in organizations, employees and volunteers must [45] (1. be indifferent to 2. make little of 3. take responsibility for) blending value and values in the good things they provide to others.
9:4 To ignore or abuse that [46] (1.value 2. right 3. burden) is to fail to lead a good life in our new world of purposes.
9:4 そうした負担を無視したり、悪用したりすれば、私たちの新たな目的の世界では良い暮らしは送れないのである。
10:1 This ethical imperative is inescapable.
10:2 We understand that the common good of our organizations must incorporate concerns ranging from work/family balance to customer satisfaction to investment returns.
10:3 The common good of organizations [47] (1. demands 2. demonstrates 3. denies) that we weave together hierarchical and democratic social and political values.
10:3 組織体の共通利益が、階級的民主的、また社会的、政治的価値観をまとめ上げるよう私たちに要求してくる。
10:4 This is [48] (1. progressive 2. promising 3. premature) because strong, predictable shared values practiced in organizations are the values shared among friends and families in markets, networks, nations, and the world.
10:4 これに期待がかけられるのは、組織体の中で実践される強力で予測可能な共有価値観が市場やネットワーク、国家、世界の中で友人や家族の間で共有される価値観だからなのである。
11:1 People who experience robust democracy in organizations are more likely to respect dissent, free speech, consent, participation, and responsibility.
11:1 組織体の中で確固とした民主主義を経験した人々は違う意見、自由な言論、意見の一致、参加、責任を尊重する傾向がある。
11:2 They are less likely to violate the liberty and freedoms of others.
11:2 他者の自由を踏みにじるようなことをする傾向は低い。
11:3 Neither value nor values can be [49] (1. promoted 2. ignored 3. achieved) in organizations.
11:3 価値も価値観もどちらも組織体の中でないがしろにされることはありえない。
11:4 Again, organizations must link their common good to the greater good of the planet.
11:4 繰り返すが組織体はその共通の利益を世界のより大きな利益に結びつけなければならないのである。
11:5 In a world of purposes, this is what organizations do – this is what they are for.
11:5 目的の世界で組織体が行うのは、このことである。これこそが組織体の目的なのである。
11:6 Organizations are the solutions to [50] (1. restore 2. regulate 3. monopolize) “thick we’s,” where value and values as well as “I’s” and “we’s” can migrate.
11:6 組織体は「濃密な私たち」を回復する解決策であり「私」と「私たち」ばかりでなく、価値と価値観が行きつく先である。
11:7 Organizations decide the fate of the twin towers of democracy.
11:7 組織体が、民主主義の双壁の命運を決するのである。
World of places : Any world in which the power of place forges strong shared values. In a world of places place-based social formations. Such as towns or villages, are “thick we’s.”
地域の世界 : どんな世界であれ、地域の力が強力な共有される価値観を作り上げていく世界。地域の世界では、地域に根ざした社会的な組織、たとえば町や村が、「濃密な私たち」である。
World of purposes : A world in which place has lost its power to blend and shape strong shared values. A world of purposes has six social formations: markets networks, nations organizations, friends and family.
目的の世界 : 地域が強力な共有される価値観を混ぜ合わせて生み出す力を失ってしまった世界。目的の世界には6つの社会組織がある。市場、ネットワーク、国家、組織体、友人、家族である。
Thick we’s: People who inescapably share fates with one another “Thick we’s” inevitably must balance self-interest with their common good. They must implement their common good together because they share fates.
濃密な私たち : 不可避的に運命を共有する者同士。「濃密な私たち」は必然的に私利私欲とその共通の利益との均衡をとらなければならない。彼らは、運命を共にしているため、共通の利益を共に満たさなければならない。
Thin we’s : People who have similar interests but do not share fates with one another. “Thin we’s” have no need to implement a common good together.
希薄な私たち : 利益は類似しているが、互いに運命を共にしているわけではない人々。「希薄な私たち」は、共に共通の利益を満たす必要はない。
Collectivities of I’s: Groups identified as market or network segments because of similar interests, motivations, demographics , or other criteria. “Collectivities of I’s” are “thin we’s.”
私の集合 : 類似の利益、動機、人口統計、その他の尺度によって、市場あるいはネットワークの断片とみなされる集団。「私の集合」は、「希薄な私たち」である。

copyright 2016/Everyday school