passage1 

注解：标题为红色，翻译为蓝色，分析为绿色。

        It's a rough world out there. Step outside and you could break a leg slipping on your doormat. Light up the stove and you could burn down the house. Luckily, if the doormat or stove failed to warn of coming disaster,a successful lawsuit might compensate you for your troubles. Or so the thinking has gone since the early 1980s, when juries began holding more companies liable for their customers' misfortunes.

      Feeling threatened, companies responded by writing ever longer warning labels, trying to anticipate every possible accident. Today, stepladders carry labels several inches long that warn, among other things, that you might——surprise!——fall off. The label on a child's Batman cape cautions that the toy "does not enable user to fly".

      While warnings are often appropriate and necessary-the dangers of drug interactions, for example-and many are required by state or federal regulations, it isn't clear that they actually protect the manufacturers and sellers from liability if a customer is injured. About 50 percent of the companies lose when injured customers take them to court.

      Now the tide appears to be turning. As personal injury claims continue as before, some courts are beginning to side with defendants, especially in cases where a warning label probably wouldn't have changed anything. In May, Julie Nimmons, president of Schut Sports in Illinois, successfully fought a lawsuit involving a football player who was paralyzed in a game while wearing a Schutt helmet."We' re really sorry he has become paralyzed, but helmets aren't designed to prevent those kinds of injuries,"says Nimmons. The jury agreed that the nature of the game, notthe helmet, was the reason for the athlete's injury. At the same time, the American Law Institute-a group of judges, lawyers, and academics whose recommendations carry substantial weight-issued new guidelines for tort law stating that companies need not warn customers of obvious dangers or bombard them with a lengthy list of possible ones."Important information can get buried in a sea of trivialities,"says a law professor at Cornell Law School who helped draft the new guidelines. If the moderate end of the legal community has its way, the information on products might actually be provided for the benefit of customers and not as protection against legal liability.

【

If the moderate end of the legal community has its way,如果法律界的温和派占上风

句首是一个由if引导的条件状语从句。end在口语中意为“部分；方面”。to have one's way意为“得逞，占上风, 为所欲为，不顾反对意见”。比如：I will never allow him to have his way. 我决不会让他得逞。

】

一、文章结构分析

       这是一篇法律题材的文章。它客观叙述了人身伤害索赔的来由、发展和变化，以及索赔案所涉及的消费者（原告）、公司（被告）和法庭三方面的反应，着重指出法庭态度的转变。

       第一段至第三段：介绍过去人身伤害索赔案的特点。由于法庭总是倾向于让公司负责，公司开始写出冗长的警示语来避免承担法律责任。但即使这样也不能保护它们免受制裁。该部分使用了例证法。

       第四段：指出现在情况发生了变化，一些法庭开始站到公司（被告）一边，同时警示语开始真正起到保护消费者利益的作用。该部分使用了例证和引证说明。

11.What were things like in 1980s when accidents happened?

[A] Customers might be relieved of their disasters through lawsuits.

[B] Injured customers could expect protection from the legal system.

[C] Companies would avoid being sued by providing new warnings.

[D] Juries tended to find fault with the compensations companies promised.

11.在20世纪80年代当发生事故时，情况会如何？

[A]顾客可以通过诉讼而免受灾难。

[B]受伤的顾客有望得到法律体制的保护。

[C]公司将通过提供新的警示语避免被起诉。

[D]陪审团倾向于对公司所承诺的赔偿严加挑剔。

【

对于A选项。Luckily, if the doormat or stove failed to warn of coming disaster,a successful lawsuit might compensate you for your troubles.幸运的是，如果门垫或炉子没有警告即将到来的灾难，一场成功的诉讼可能会补偿你的麻烦。文章是会通过诉讼获得补偿，而不是免受灾难。故A选项错误。

对于B选项。Luckily, if the doormat or stove failed to warn of coming disaster,a successful lawsuit might compensate you for your troubles.幸运的是，如果门垫或炉子没有警告即将到来的灾难，一场成功的诉讼可能会补偿你的麻烦。表述的确实是受伤的顾客需要得到法律体制的保护。故B选项正确。

对于C选项。第三段，While warnings are often appropriate and necessary-the dangers of drug interactions, for example-and many are required by state or federal regulations, it isn't clear that they actually protect the manufacturers and sellers from liability if a customer is injured.例如，尽管药物相互作用的危险警告通常是适当和必要的，而且许多警告是州或联邦法规要求的，但尚不清楚它们是否真的能保护制造商和销售商在客户受伤时免于承担责任。文章中表述的是并不清楚它们是否真的能保护免于承担责任。而选项是避免被起诉。故C选项错误。

对于D选项。第一段的最后一句Or so the thinking has gone since the early 1980s, when juries began holding more companies liable for their customers' misfortunes.自20世纪80年代初以来，这种想法就一直存在，当时陪审团开始让更多的公司为客户的不幸承担责任。文章中表述的是陪审团开始让更多的公司为客户的不幸承担责任。并没有对公司所承诺的赔偿严加挑剔。故D选项错误。

】

12.Manufacturers as mentioned in the passage tend to.

[A]satisfy customers by writing long warnings on products

[B]become honest in describing the inadequacies of their products

[C]make the best use of labels to avoid legal liability

[D]feel obliged to view customers' safety as their first concern

12.文中提及生产厂商往往。

[A]通过在产品上写长长的警示语使顾客满意

[B]诚实描述自己产品不足

[C]充分利用标签避免法律责任

[D]不得不视顾客的安全为自己的第一考虑

【

提到Manufacturer的段落只有第三段。While warnings are often appropriate and necessary-the dangers of drug interactions, for example-and many are required by state or federal regulations, it isn't clear that they actually protect the manufacturers and sellers from liability if a customer is injured. About 50 percent of the companies lose when injured customers take them to court.例如，尽管药物相互作用的危险警告通常是适当和必要的，而且许多警告是州或联邦法规要求的，但尚不清楚它们是否真的能保护制造商和销售商在客户受伤时免于承担责任。当受伤的客户将他们告上法庭时，大约50%的公司会败诉。文章中本段描述的是制造商和销售商充分利用标签避免法律责任。故C选项正确。

】

13.The case of Schutt helmet demonstrated that.

[A] some injury claims were no longer supported by law

[B] helmets were not designed to prevent injuries

[C] product labels would eventually be discarded

[D]some sports games might lose popularity with athletes

13.Schutt头盔的案例说明。

[A]某些因为伤害提出的索赔不再受法律的保护

[B]头盔不是被设计用来防止伤害的

[C]产品标签最终将被淘汰

[D]运动员可能不再热衷于某些体育运动项目

【

提到Schutt的段落只有第四段。In May, Julie Nimmons, president of Schut Sports in Illinois, successfully fought a lawsuit involving a football player who was paralyzed in a game while wearing a Schutt helmet.今年5月，伊利诺伊州舒特体育公司总裁Julie Nimmons成功地与一名足球运动员打了官司，该足球运动员在一场比赛中戴着舒特头盔瘫痪。 The jury agreed that the nature of the game, notthe helmet, was the reason for the athlete's injury.陪审团一致认为，造成运动员受伤的原因是比赛的性质，而不是头盔。故陪审团认为这类伤害提出的诉讼，不应该受到法律的保护。运动员受伤的原因是比赛的性质，而不是产生本身。

故A选项正确。

对于B选项。头盔本身就是被设计用来防止伤害的，但是原文表述的不是来用来防止比赛的性质本身就具有很大的危险性而带来的伤害。故B选项错误。

对于C选项。that companies need not warn customers of obvious dangers or bombard them with a lengthy list of possible ones."Important information can get buried in a sea of trivialities,"公司不需要警告客户明显的危险，也不需要用一长串可能的危险来轰炸他们。“重要信息可能会被淹没在琐碎的海洋中，”.原文是说不需要写太长一串标签，应该写的简洁突出重点即可，这样会使重要信息就不会被淹没在琐碎的海洋中。而不是将标签彻底淘汰或者废除。故C选项错误。

对于D选项。文章的表述是这个运动员已经瘫痪了，是身体不行的原因导致不能再接触某些体育运动项目。而不是心理不行的原因导致不能再接触某些体育运动项目。而热衷这个词就是心理原因的层面。故D选项错误。而且选项表述的是所有戴这个头盔的运动员，而没有指这个瘫痪的运动员。

】

14.The authors attitude towards the issue seems to be.

[A]biased

[B]indifferent

[C]puzzling

[D]objective

14.作者对所讨论的问题的态度似乎是。

[A]有偏见的

[B]冷漠的

[C]迷惑不解的

[D]客观的

【

根据原文，作者是客观的阐述索赔案的原由，发展和结果，并未掺杂个人情绪和个人主观判断的观点。也并未偏向与消费者或者公司的一方，也并没表示结果的漠不关心。故D选项正确。

】

二、核心词汇与超纲词汇

核心词汇

①anticipate 

vt.

*1.预期，预料例：anticipated the hard winter ahead 预见料到前面的严冬

2.期盼，期待（尤指好事）例：Ianticipated the interview with pleasure.我愉快地期待着这次会见。

3.早于（别人）采取行动，抢先一步，先于……之前（做）例：When I arrived，I found that he had anticipated me.当我到达时我发现他已先到过那里。

②cape 

n.[C]

*1.斗篷，披风，披肩

2.（常用于地理名称）海角；例：the Cape of Good Hope好望角

③have/get/follow one’s（own）way一意孤行，为所欲为，随心所欲例：Since he insists，I let him have his way.既然他坚持，我就由着他。

④liable adj.

*1.（法律上）有赔偿责任的（后跟介词for）例：Manufacturers are liable for any defects in the equipment.制造商对设备的任何缺陷都负有赔偿责任。

2.易于（可能，倾向于）做某事（尤指不幸的事情）例：In a depression banks are liable to fail.萧条时期银行往往倒闭。

3.易出问题的，易得病的；可能受（尤指结果不好的事情）影响（后跟介词to）

例：liable to diabetes 易患糖尿病的；liability n.（法律上对某事物的赔偿等）责任，义务；负债，债务；受某物影响的倾向（尤指不好的事物）

⑤moderate a.

1.中等的，适度的例：a moderate sized garden中型花园

2.（尤指政治观点、信仰等）不极端的，温和的，不偏激的*

3.有节制的，不过分的，合理的例：moderate wage demands合理的工资要求

vi.&vt.

（使）缓和，（使）减轻，节制，克制

例：The students moderated their demands.学生们降低了他们的要求。

⑥side with sb（against sb/sth）支持某人（反对…），和某人站在一起（反对…）

例：The kids always sided with their mother against me.孩子们总是和妈妈站在一边，跟我唱对台戏。

⑦slip vi.

*1.滑；滑倒，失足

2.to move quickly，smoothly，or secretly 迅速移动；悄悄溜走（常跟介词或副词使用）

例：Nobody saw her slip silently out.没有人看到她悄悄地溜了出去。

vt.把……悄悄放在或递给……

例：I slipped a note into his hand under the table.我偷偷从桌子底下塞给他一张条子。

n.[C]

1.滑动；滑倒

2.小纸片，纸条

3.a small mistake小错误

例：a slip of the tongue/pen 口误/笔误

⑧weight n.

1.[U，C]重量，分量

2.a great responsibility or worry重任，重担，重压

例：The news was certainly a weight off my mind.这个消息真是去掉了我心里的重担。

*3.[U]importance，influence or strength重要性，影响力，实力

例：The many letter of support added weight to the campaign.许多声援信增加了这场运动的影响力。

超纲词汇：

tort n.民事侵权行为；tort law侵权法；

bombard v.轰炸，轰击；大量提问，大肆抨击，提供过多信息

三、阅读答案：B C A D

四、全文翻译：

      外面是一个危险的世界。迈出家门时，你可能会滑倒在门垫上，而摔伤一条腿。点燃炉灶时，你可能会把房子烧掉。不过还算幸运的是，如果门垫或炉灶上没有警示语提醒你可能发生的危险，那么一场成功的诉讼或许可以补偿你所受的伤害。这种想法大约自20世纪80年代初开始传播，那时陪审团开始认为更多的公司应对其客户所遭受的不幸负责。

       由于感到了威胁，公司方面做出了反应：写出越来越长的警示语，力图预先标明种种可能发生的事故。如今，活梯上贴着几英寸长的警告标签，除了其他警告事项外，还警告你可能会摔下来，简直是莫名其妙！贴在儿童的蝙蝠侠披风上的标签也告诫说，本玩具“无法让用户飞行”。

        虽然警示语常常是合理而必要的（如警告药物有相互作用的危险），并且很多是州或联邦法规所要求的，但是当消费者受伤时，这些警示语能否真正保护制造商和销售商使之免于承担责任，却还很难说。被受伤的消费者告上法庭的公司中，大约一半会败诉。

         现在这种趋势似乎正在转变。尽管个人伤害索赔案件如以往一样不断发生，但有些法庭已开始站到被告一方，特别是在处理那些有警告标签也可能无法避免伤害的案件时。五月份，伊利诺斯州的Schutt体育公司总裁朱利·尼蒙斯就成功地打赢了这样一场官司。一名橄榄球队员戴着该公司的头盔在一场比赛中受伤瘫痪，遂将该公司告上法庭。尼蒙斯说：“他成了瘫痪，我们非常难过，但我们设计头盔不是为了预防这类伤害的。”陪审团也认为造成该运动员受伤的是这项运动本身的危险性，而不是头盔。与此同时，美国法学会一—一群说话举足轻重的法官、律师、学者——发布了新的侵权法指导原则，宣布公司不必警示顾客那些显而易见的危险，或者给顾客列出一份冗长的可能遇到的危险的清单。康奈尔大学法学院一位参与起草新指导原则的教授说，“重要的信息会淹没在细枝末节的汪洋之中”。如果该法律团体的这一适中的目标能够实现，产品上提供的警示信息就不再是为回避法律责任而设，而是为保护消费者利益而提供了。

五.地毯式总结

It's a rough world out there.  外面的世界很艰难。

Step outside and you could break a leg slipping on your doormat. 走到外面，你可能会在门垫上摔断一条腿。

Light up the stove and you could burn down the house. 点燃炉子，你就可以把房子烧了。

if the doormat or stove failed to warn of coming disaster ,a successful lawsuit might compensate you for your troubles 如果门垫或火炉没有警告即将到来的灾难，一场成功的诉讼可能会补偿你遇到的这些麻烦

hold 认为,持有...观点

stepladder 阶梯

several inche 几英寸

a child's Batman cape caution 儿童蝙蝠侠斗篷警告语

the toy 玩具

appropriate and necessary 适当和必要

the dangers of drug interaction 药物相互作用的危险

state or federal regulation 州或联邦法规

take them to court 把他们告上法庭

side with defendants 站在被告一边

Schutt helmet 舒特头盔

The jury agreed that the nature of the game 陪审团认为游戏的本身(的原因)

the American Law Institute-a group of judges, lawyers, and academics whose recommendations carry substantial weight-issued new guidelines for tort law stating that companies need not warn customers of obvious dangers or bombard them with a lengthy list of possible ones."由法官、律师和学者组成的美国法律研究所发布了新的侵权法指南，指出公司不必警告客户明显的危险，也不必用一长串可能的危险轰炸他们。"

Important information can get buried in a sea of trivialities 重要信息可能被淹没在琐碎的海洋中

draft the new guidelines 起草新的指导方针

If the moderate end of the legal community has its way 如果法律界的温和派占上风

has its way 得逞，占上风, 为所欲为，不顾反对意见