Translation skills

Exercise № 23

Modal verbs:

Модальные глаголы отражают отношение содержания к действительности, характеризуя действия как возможные (причем в разной степени вероятности от самой высокой- ‘must’; меньшей – ‘can’, ‘could’; еще меньшей – ‘may’, и маловероятной – ‘might’), желательные (should – (не) следует; ought to – как велит моральный долг; «по зову сердца и души») или необходимые (need), вынужденные внешними обстоятельствами (to have to). Модальность определяет действие с точки зрения реальности или нереальности.

При переводе используются модальные глаголы, модальные слова (вероятно, возможно), модальные частицы (бы), фразы и выражения, содержащие оценочный компонент.

1. And the new Manager has yet to prove he is any better than his discredited predecessor at bringing the Company to the top.

2. But if the idea proves popular, health savings account, which Meridian hopes will give it more control over its medical tab, could become the company's only insurance option in two or three years.

3. Orders for long-lasting U.S. factory goods rose in June. The increase suggests companies are more confident in the economy and could boost economic growth and demand for crude in the second half of the year.

4. The rise of non-western economies is a deeply rooted historic shift that can survive any number of shocks.

5. If the full-time, full-year male workers aren’t benefiting from economic growth, why should we expect the poor to be?”

6. Porsche's 911 Targa and sexy concepts from Volkswagen and Subaru demonstrate that buyers still love performance cars, no matter what their budget. And new mainstream cars like the Honda Fit and Chrysler 200 will have to work hard to compete in a market that's not growing as fast as it once did.

7. Some industries – electric utilities and energy-intensive activities – will complain. But such complaints have to be kept in context. The loss of jobs in the politically powerful US coal industry might be 40,000 over a decade. Against what has happened to the US jobs market since 2008, this would be quite a small potato.

8. When the 7,500 employees of Meridian Health opened their 2005 medical-insurance enrollment packages in early October, they found something new. Now they could opt to sock away as much as $2,000 of their own money tax-free next year in a health savings account. What's more, they could invest the money in stocks, bonds, or mutual funds and tap into the tax-free account to pay medical costs. They would also keep anything they didn't spend, which means money would continue to grow and be available to buy health care in future years. Workers would pay less in biweekly premiums with the HSA, too: $15, vs. $44 if they stuck with the traditional preferred provider organization plan.

9. But it might be possible for a country to demonstrate proof of concept: that it is indeed possible for economies to grow fast while reducing carbon emissions. In the process, such a country might even, as some argue, gain an important lead in some relevant new industries.

10. The simplest solution would be for every country to agree on a price. Each country would then levy a tax: Prof Nordhaus suggests this should be $25 per tonne of carbon. The revenue would then stay at home. Negotiations would be only over that price.

11. Meanwhile, high-income countries would focus on investing in research and development of relevant new technologies and in ensuring that the best technologies were available cheaply to emerging and developing countries. Why should they do this? The answer is: because a low-carbon atmosphere is a global public good.

12. It is by now impossible to be optimistic that anything like this will happen. This is partly because the needed agreement must be long-term and global. That, in turn, raises difficult questions of intragenerational and intergenerational equity.

13. Some industries – electric utilities and energy-intensive activities – will complain. But such complaints have to be kept in context. The loss of jobs in the politically powerful US coal industry might be 40,000 over a decade. Against what has happened to the US jobs market since 2008, this would be quite a small potato.

14. Beyond that, there are the understandable concerns of ordinary people that they would be far worse off if they could not treat the atmosphere as a free sink. It is also clear that low-carbon sources of energy are still expensive and some technologies are not proved at relevant scales. Moreover, a big effort requires acceleration in the rate of decarbonisation. That will not happen by itself. It needs a push.

15. The combination of higher prices and support for fundamental research should deliver just such a push. Happily, the evidence suggests that, either because of ignorance or inertia, households and businesses are not currently optimising their energy use. The combination of higher prices for carbon and firm regulation might even deliver some tasty free lunches: lower carbon emissions without any loss in output.

16. Indeed, even if the countries were China and the US, it would not be enough, since they account together for only a little over two-fifths of global emissions. But it might be possible for a country to demonstrate proof of concept: that it is indeed possible for economies to grow fast while reducing emissions. In the process, such a country might even, as some argue, gain an important lead in some relevant new industries.

17. In any case, some countries have to try. Otherwise, as everybody hangs back, efforts at effective agreement must fail. We would then end up taking a gamble on the absence of any bad and irreversible outcome. We may be lucky. What will our progeny feel if we are not?

Exercise № 24