全面實行機考 網(wǎng)課協(xié)助 通關(guān)拿證

　　Finance and economics: China's economic data, Right on target. Is growth really 7% a year?

　　中國經(jīng)濟數(shù)據(jù)，正中紅心。增長率當(dāng)真是年7%?

　　It all seems a little too perfect to be true. The Chinese government set a growth target of “about 7%” this year; the economy, ever responsive to the Communist Party's needs, has hit exactly that number for two quarters in a row. Cue a chorus of skepticism.

　　一切似乎完美得難以置信。中國政府今年年初制定了“約7%”的增長目標(biāo);像是一向為了回應(yīng)共產(chǎn)黨的需求，中國經(jīng)濟連續(xù)兩個季度準(zhǔn)確命中了7%的目標(biāo)。這暗合了某些懷疑論調(diào)。

　　The first quarter did look suspicious. Growth in industrial production was the weakest since the depths of the financial crisis; the property market, a pillar of the economy, crumbled. China reported real growth (ie, after accounting for inflation) of 7% year on year in the first quarter, but nominal growth of just 5.8%. The only way to arrive at the higher real figure was to put the GDP deflator, a measure of inflation, at -1.1%.

　　第一季度的確看著可疑。工業(yè)產(chǎn)值增長率降至金融危機后的最低點;房地產(chǎn)市場這一經(jīng)濟支柱也嚴(yán)重垮塌。中國發(fā)布的第一季度實際增長率(即考慮通貨膨脹后的增長率)為同比增長7%，但名義增長率僅為5.8%。使得真實增長率達(dá)到更高水平的唯一途徑是GDP平減指數(shù)(通貨膨脹衡量指標(biāo))調(diào)整為-1.1%。

　　That implied the economy suffered broad-based deflation, a bizarre claim given that consumer prices rose by more than 1% at the same time. Had the GDP deflator been more accurate, Chang Liu and Mark Williams of Capital Economics reckon, real growth in the first quarter would have been one or two percentage points lower.

　　這意味著中國經(jīng)濟遭受了大范圍通貨緊縮，但離奇的是與此同時，消費價格增長大于1%。凱投宏觀的劉暢和馬克·威廉姆斯測算，如果GDP平減指數(shù)能更加精確，那么第一季度的實際增長率將會再低一至二個百分點。

　　The data for the second quarter are more credible. In nominal terms, growth rebounded strongly to 7.1%. The corollary is that the GDP deflator is now 0.1%, a reading that is much more consistent with rising consumer prices and falling producer prices.

　　第二季度的數(shù)據(jù)則更為可信。名義增長率強勢反彈至7.1%。其必然結(jié)果是GDP平減指數(shù)現(xiàn)已達(dá)到0.1%，表現(xiàn)得與增長的消費價格和下跌的生產(chǎn)價格更為一致。

　　There were signs of some tampering: without explanation, the national bureau of statistics cut the quarter-on-quarter growth rate in the second quarter of 2014 to 1.9% from 2%. That doubtless flattered the data for the second quarter of this year by lowering the base for comparison. But the impact is small: a few tenths of a percentage point, perhaps.

　　但篡改痕跡仍然存在：國家統(tǒng)計局將2014年第二季度的環(huán)比增長率從2%改為1.9%，且未對此做出任何解釋。這種降低比較基數(shù)的行為無疑是對今年第二季度數(shù)據(jù)的美化。但這影響不大，大概只是零點幾個百分點而已。

　　What is more, the sources of Chinese growth in the second quarter were less mysterious than in the first. Although investment continued to slow, services accelerated.

　　此外，二季度中國增長率的來源比一季度要來的更加明朗。投資雖持續(xù)放緩，服務(wù)業(yè)卻加速上升。

　　Industry grew by 5.9% year on year in the second quarter, down from 6.4% in the first quarter. In contrast, services jumped to 8.9% growth from 7.9% in the first quarter. That matters since services now account for a larger share of Chinese GDP than industry. This acceleration in services is unlikely to last.

　　二季度工業(yè)同比增長了5.9%，低于一季度的6.4%。與之相反，服務(wù)業(yè)的增長率從一季度的7.9%躍至8.9%。自從服務(wù)業(yè)占GDP比重大于工業(yè)之后，這就顯得尤為重要。這種服務(wù)業(yè)的增長不太可能持續(xù)。

　　It derives to a large extent from the soaring stock market, which boosted financial firms. That lift has presumably become a drag in recent weeks as share prices have dived. Transient as it was, however, China's statisticians did not invent the financial boom.

　　它在很大程度上來源于股市飆升時促進的金融機構(gòu)的繁榮。但在股價驟降之后，近幾周，原先的助力恐怕就成了累贅。然而這是暫時的，畢竟這一場金融盛況并不是中國的統(tǒng)計學(xué)家編造出來的。

　　2019翻譯資格考試培訓(xùn)班已開課，內(nèi)含業(yè)內(nèi)導(dǎo)師精編習(xí)題、解密歷年命題規(guī)律，助力實力通關(guān)!進入試聽>>

　　翻譯資格考試復(fù)習(xí)有問題？不知道怎么高效備考？加入考試群732778175 和考生一起交流信息。