真题训练

The world is going through the biggest wave of mergers and acquisitions ever witnessed. The process sweeps from hyperactive America to Europe and reaches the emerging countries with unsurpassed might. Many in these countries are looking at this process and worrying: "Won't the wave of business concentration turn into an uncontrollable anti-competitive force?"
There's no question that the big are getting bigger and more powerful. Multinational corporations accounted for less than 20% of international trade in 1982. Today the figure is more than 25% and growing rapidly. International affiliates account for a fast-growing segment of production in economies that open up and welcome foreign investment. In Argentina, for instance, after the reforms of the early 1990s, multinationals went from 43% to almost 70% of the industrial production of the 200 largest firms. This phenomenon has created serious concerns over the role of smaller economic firms, of national businessmen and over the ultimate stability of the world economy.
I believe that the most important forces behind the massive M&A wave are the same that underlie the globalization process: falling transportation and communication costs, lower trade and investment barriers and enlarged markets that require enlarged operations capable of meeting customers' demands. All these are beneficial, not detrimental, to consumers. As productivity grows, the world's wealth increases.
Examples of benefits or costs of the current concentration wave are scanty. Yet it is hard to imagine that the merger of a few oil firms today could re-create the same threats to competition that were feared nearly a century ago in the US, when the Standard Oil trust was broken up. The mergers of telecom companies, such as World Com, hardly seem to bring higher prices for consumers or a reduction in the pace of technical progress. On the contrary, the price of communications is coming down fast. In cars, too, concentration is increasing — witness Daimler and Chrysler, Renault and Nissan — but it does not appear that consumers are being hurt.
Yet the fact remains that the merger movement must be watched. A few weeks ago, Alan Greenspan warned against the megamergers in the banking industry. Who is going to supervise, regulate and operate as lender of last resort with the gigantic banks that are being created? Won't multinationals shift production from one place to another when a nation gets too strict about infringements to fair competition? And should one country take upon itself the role of "defending competition" on issues that affect many other nations, as in the U.S. vs. Microsoft case?

63. What is the typical trend of businesses today?
[A] To take in more foreign funds.
[B] To invest more abroad.
[C] To combine and become bigger.
[D] To trade with more countries.

64. According to the author, one of the driving forces behind M&A wave is ________.
[A] the greater customer demands
[B] a surplus supply for the market
[C] a growing productivity
[D] the increase of the world's wealth

65. From paragraph 4 we can infer that ________.
[A] the increasing concentration is certain to hurt consumers
[B] WorldCom serves as a good example of both benefits and costs
[C] the costs of the globalization process are enormous
[D] the Standard Oil trust might have threatened competition

66. Toward the new business wave, the writer's attitude can be said to be ________.
[A] optimistic
[B] objective
[C] pessimistic
[D] biased

难句解析

难句解析：
①International affiliates account for a fast-growing segment of production in economies that open up and welcome foreign investment.
▲本句的主干是International affiliates account for a fast-growing segment of production in economies，后面的that open up and welcome foreign investment是economies的定语从句。
△注意一些词汇的含义：affiliate名词，意为“分支机构”，此处是指在世界各地都有分支的多国公司，并且是全句的主语；account for是……的原因；economies在此处指经济领域的国家概念，因此用复数。
②This phenomenon has created serious concerns over the role of smaller economic firms, of national businessmen and over the ultimate stability of the world economy.
▲of smaller economic firms与of national businessmen都是the role的补语；而over the role of smaller economic firms，of national businessmen与over the ultimate stability of the world economy都与concern相关连，是其补语。
△本句的重点在于看好concerns后面的结构，注意over the role与over the ultimate stability并列，而the role的后面有两个并列的of结构。
③I believe that the most important forces behind the massive M&A wave are the same that underlie the globalization process: falling transportation and communication costs, lower trade and investment barriers and enlarged markets that require enlarged operations capable of meeting customers' demands.
▲本句主语为I，谓语为believe，that引导了believe的宾语从句，其中的又一个that可替换为as the ones that，是一个定语从句。冒号后面的部分是the most important forces的同位语，其中markets后面的that从句是markets的定语，capable of meeting customers' demands是operations的补语。
△underlie在下面，作基础；barriers障碍物，壁垒；operations经营运作；meet sb's demands满足某人需求。
④And should one country take upon itself the role of "defending competition" on issues that affect many other nations, as in the U.S. vs. Microsoft case?
▲此句的主干是should one country take upon itself the role，而that affect many other nations是issues的定语从句。as in the US vs. Microsoft case是issues的补语。on issues是take upon itself the role的状语。
△注意本句在阅读的时候要抓住它本身是一个文句，另外，vs.的意思对正确理解也很重要，它是指“对垒，对阵”，在法律的情景中就是“起诉，对簿公堂”的意思。
试题解析

试题解析：
63. [C] 意为：合并并变得庞大。
第一段就指出，世界正在经历有史以来最大的合并和兼并热潮，这一热潮以前所未有的态势席卷了异常活跃的美国和欧洲，并延伸到新兴经济国家。
A意为：吸收更多的外资。
B意为：更多地向海外投资。
D意为：与更多的国家做买卖。
64. [A] 意为：顾客更大的需要。
第三段剖析了造成合并和兼并热潮(M&A wave)的重要原因。在作者看来，这些因素和导致（经济）日趋全球化的过程是一样的，如：交通运输成本的日趋下降，贸易和投资障碍的减少，以及扩大的市场：扩大的市场需要市场业务的扩大，以满足顾客的需要。作者又总结说，所有这些因素都对顾客有益，而不会有害。在以上提到的三个因素中，包括了根据顾客的需要扩大市场这个因素。
B意为：对市场的额外供给。
C意为：日益增长的生产率。
D意为：世界财富的增长。
以上提到的三个原因不包括B、C、D提到的内容。
65. [D] 意为：标准石油联合公司可能曾对竞争形成过威胁。
第四段第一、二句提到，要找出目前合并热潮带来的利益和降低成本的例子还很困难，但是，如果现在有几个石油公司合并，很难想像会再次产生近乎100年前所引起人们恐慌的对（公平）竞争的威胁，这一情况当时是由于美国的标准石油联合公司解体而造成的。
A意为：日益增长的合并热潮肯定会损害顾客的利益。第四段第三、四、五句提到，像WorldCom这样的电信公司合并几乎没有给消费者带来更高的价格，或减缓技术进步的步伐，相反，通信业务的价格迅速降低；汽车工业也在合并，但也没有迹象表明消费者的利益受到伤害。
B意为：WorldCom是一个（合并）带来利益和降低成本的好例子。参阅第四段第三句，这句强调的是价格没有随着合并而提高，并没有提到价格降低问题，因此，合并虽然没有伤害消费者，也没有给他们带来利益。
C意为：全球化过程成本巨大。本段没有涉及这方面的问题。
66. [B] 意为：客观的。
本文描述了目前的合并热潮，第二段用数据证明了目前这种情况的现实存在，第三段解释了造成这一现象的原因，第四段具体分析了合并热潮的影响，认为人们没有必要担心，但是在最后一段，作者也提醒人们注意合并活动的动向。可见，作者没有对合并热潮过于悲观或乐观，而是提到了它可能产生的正反两方面的影响，对这一现象的产生采取了审慎理智的客观态度。
A意为：乐观的。
C意为：悲观的。
D意为：有偏见的。
全文翻译
全文翻译：
世界正在经历一场前所未有的巨大的并购浪潮。这个浪潮从异常活跃的美国席卷到欧洲，并以不可比拟的威力影响到正在崛起的国家。这些国家的许多人面对这个浪潮开始忧虑：“企业合并的浪潮会不会变成一股不可控制的反竞争的力量？”
无疑，大企业正在变得更大、更强。跨国公司在1982年只占有国际贸易不到20％的份额。而现在，这个数字上升到25％强，并且还在迅速上升。在那些对外开放并鼓励外资的国家的经济中国际分公司在国民生产中成为一个快速增长的部门。比如，在阿根廷，经过90年代初的改革之后，跨国公司在200家大型企业的工业生产中从43％增加到几乎70％。这个现象造成了人们对小型企业和民族资本的作用以及世界经济的最终稳定的严重忧虑。
我认为，推动这股巨大的并购浪潮的最主要的力量，也是推动全球化进程的力量，包括日趋下降的运输与通讯费用，较低的贸易与投资壁垒，以及市场的扩大和为满足市场需求而进行的扩大生产。所有这些对消费者来说都有益而无害的。随着生产力的提高，世界的财富也在增长。
目前证明这股合并浪潮是带来利还是弊的实例并不多。但是很难想像当今的几个石油公司的合并是否会重新造成约100年前美国标准石油公司对竞争造成的同样的威胁，那时由于人们对该公司的这种担心而导致了它最终的解散。像世界通讯这样的通讯公司合并似乎没有给消费者带来更高的价格，或者降低技术进步的速度。相反，通信的价格在迅速下降。在汽车行业，合并也同样在增加——比如戴姆勒与克莱斯勒，雷诺与尼桑的合并——但消费者看起来并未受到伤害。
但是合并运动必须受到严密监视这个事实仍然存在。就在几星期以前，格林斯潘对银行业的巨大合并发出了警告。如果合并后如此巨大的银行出现，谁来充当最终的借贷者，发挥监督、规范和运作的作用呢？当一个国家对破坏公平竞争的行为的处理过于严厉时，跨国公司会不会把它们的生产从一地转到另一地呢？在那些将会影响许多其他国家的事情中，如美国政府与微软公司的诉讼案，一个国家是否应该担负起“保护竞争”的责任呢？