《考研英语报刊阅读及解析(一).doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《考研英语报刊阅读及解析(一).doc（5页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、TROUSER SUITThe European Court sides with Levi Strauss in its battle with TescoIT WAS a ruling that had consumers seething with anger and many a free trader crying foul. On November 20th the European Court of Justice decided that Tesco, a British supermarket chain, should not be allowed to import je
2、ans made by Americas Levi Strauss from outside the European Union and sell them at cut-rate prices without getting permission first from the jeans maker. Ironically, the ruling is based on an EU trademark directive that was designed to protect local, not American, manufacturers from price dumping. T
3、he idea is that any brand-owning firm should be allowed to position its goods and segment its markets as it sees fit: Levis jeans, just like Gucci handbags, must be allowed to be expensive.Levi Strauss persuaded the court that, by selling its jeans cheaply alongside soap powder and bananas, Tesco wa
4、s destroying the image and so the value of its brandswhich could only lead to less innovation and, in the long run, would reduce consumer choice. Consumer groups and Tesco say that Levis case is specious. The supermarket argues that it was just arbitraging the price differential between Levis jeans
5、sold in America and Europea service performed a million times a day in financial markets, and one that has led to real benefits for consumers. Tesco has been selling some 15,000 pairs of Levis jeans a week, for about half the price they command in specialist stores approved by Levi Strauss. Christin
6、e Cross, Tescos head of global non-food sourcing, says the ruling risks creating a Fortress Europe with a vengeance.The debate will rage on, and has implications well beyond casual clothes (Levi Strauss was joined in its lawsuit by Zino Davidoff, a perfume maker). The question at its heart is not wh
7、ether brands need to control how they are sold to protect their image, but whether it is the job of the courts to help them do this. Gucci, an Italian clothes label whose image was being destroyed by loose licensing and over-exposure in discount stores, saved itself not by resorting to the courts bu
8、t by ending contracts with third-party suppliers, controlling its distribution better and opening its own stores. It is now hard to find cut-price Gucci anywhere.Brand experts argue that Levi Strauss, which has been losing market share to hipper rivals such as Diesel, is no longer strong enough to c
9、ommand premium prices. Left to market forces, so-so brands such as Levis might well fade away and be replaced by fresher labels. With the courts protecting its prices, Levi Strauss may hang on for longer. But no court can help to make it a great brand again.注(1):本文选自Economist; 11/24/2001, Vol. 361 I
10、ssue 8249, p58, 1/2p注(2):本文习题命题模仿对象2001年真题text 5(其中因2001年真题text 5只有4个题目,所以本文第5题模仿参照对象为1999年 Text 1的第4题。)1. Which of the following is not true according to Paragraph 1A Consumers and free traders were very angry.B Only the Levis maker can decide the prices of the jeans.C The ruling has protected Levi
11、s from price dumping.D Levis jeans should be sold at a high price .2. Guccis success shows that _.A Gucci has successfully saved its own image.B It has changed its fate with its own effort.C Opening its own stores is the key to success.D It should be the courts duty to save its image.3. The word spe
12、cious(line 12, paragraph 2) in the context probably means _.A responsible for oneselfB having too many doubtsC not as it seems to beD raising misunderstanding4. According to the passage, the doomed fate of Levis is caused by such factors except that _.A the rivals are competitiveB it fails to comman
13、d premium pricesC market forces have their own rulesD the court fails to give some help5. The authors attitude towards Levis prospect seems to be _.A biasedB indifferentC puzzlingD objective答案:B B C D D篇章剖析本文的结构形式为提出问题分析问题。在第一段首先提出问题,指出欧洲法庭对特易购超市做出的裁决。第二段指出当事方对同一事件的不同看法和解释。第三段指出争论的核心问题在于是否应该借助法庭达到一些
14、商业目的,并以古奇(Gucci)为例说明答案为否定。第四段对利维(Levis)的前景做出了评价和分析。词汇注释seethingadj.沸腾的, 火热的foul adj.下流的,粗俗的:segment v.分割innovation n.改革, 创新specious adj. 似是而非的; 似乎正确的,但实际却是谬误的arbitrage v. 套汇, 套利交易with a vengeance 猛烈地;极度地licensing n.注册登记discount n.折扣resort vi.求助, 诉诸premium n.额外费用, 奖金, 奖赏, 保险费, (货币兑现的)贴水难句突破1.Levi Str
15、auss persuaded the court that, by selling its jeans cheaply alongside soap powder and bananas, Tesco was destroying the image and so the value of its brandswhich could only lead to less innovation and, in the long run, would reduce consumer choice.主体句式:Levi Strauss persuaded that 结构分析:that之后是一个宾语从句;by之后的句子做伴随状语来修饰宾语从句;宾语从句中which又引导了一个非限制性定语从句。句子译文:利维斯特劳斯公司使法庭相信特易购把利维牛仔服与皂粉,香蕉等放在一起廉价销售这一做法使其形象受损,品牌价位也因此受到了影响,这势必会使产品缺乏新意,最终减少消费者的选择。题目分析1.答案为B,属
