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 U.S., when the Standard Oil trust was broken up. The mergers of telecom companies, such as WorldCom, 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?
　　 33. 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
　　 34. 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
　　 35. 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
　　 36. Toward the new business wave, the writer's attitude can be said to be _________。
　　 [A]optimistic
　　 [B]objective
　　 [C]pessimistic
　　 [D]biased

　　 名師解析
　　 33. What is the typical trend of businesses today? 今天的商業(yè)典型的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)是什么?
　　 [A]To take in more foreign funds 吸收更多外資
　　 [B]To invest more abroad 進(jìn)行更多對(duì)外投資
　　 [C]To combine and become bigger 合并做強(qiáng)
　　 [D]To trade with more countries 與更多國(guó)家貿(mào)易
　　 【答案】 C
　　 【考點(diǎn)】 事實(shí)細(xì)節(jié)題。
　　 【分析】 文章第一段中說(shuō)“世界正在經(jīng)歷一場(chǎng)前所未有的比較大的的并購(gòu)浪潮。這個(gè)浪潮從異常活躍的美國(guó)開(kāi)始，橫掃歐洲，并以不可比擬的威力影響到正在崛起的國(guó)家”，因此可以判斷正確答案是[C]。
　　 34. According to the author, one of the driving forces behind M&A wave is _______。
　　 根據(jù)本文作者，在合并浪潮背后的一個(gè)驅(qū)動(dòng)力是______。
　　 [A]the greater customer demands 更大的消費(fèi)需求
　　 [B]a surplus supply for the market 對(duì)市場(chǎng)的剩余供給
　　 [C]a growing productivity 日益增長(zhǎng)的生產(chǎn)率
　　 [D]the increase of the world’s wealth 世界財(cái)富的增長(zhǎng)
　　 【答案】 A
　　 【考點(diǎn)】 事實(shí)細(xì)節(jié)題。
　　 【分析】 根據(jù)“合并浪潮的推動(dòng)力”可以定位到第三段。在作者看來(lái)，“日趨下降的運(yùn)輸與通訊費(fèi)用，較低的貿(mào)易與投資壁壘，以及市場(chǎng)的擴(kuò)大和為滿足市場(chǎng)需求而進(jìn)行的擴(kuò)大生產(chǎn)，是推動(dòng)這股巨大的并購(gòu)浪潮的比較主要的力量，也是推動(dòng)全球化進(jìn)程的力量”。將四個(gè)選項(xiàng)對(duì)比這三個(gè)因素，只有[A]包括了根據(jù)顧客的需要擴(kuò)大市場(chǎng)這個(gè)因素。
　　 35. From paragraph 4 we can infer that _____。
　　 從第四段中我們可以推斷出_____。
　　 [A] the increasing concentration is certain to hurt consumers
　　 日益增長(zhǎng)的集中肯定會(huì)損害消費(fèi)者的利益
　　 [B] WorldCom serves as a good example of both benefits and costs
　　 世通就是一個(gè)合并利與弊的好例子
　　 [C] the costs of the globalization process are enormous
　　 全球化進(jìn)程的成本很高
　　 [D] the Standard Oil trust might have threatened competition
　　 標(biāo)準(zhǔn)石油托拉斯或許已經(jīng)威脅到競(jìng)爭(zhēng)
　　 【答案】 D
　　 【考點(diǎn)】 推斷題。
　　 【分析】 [A]“日益增長(zhǎng)的集中肯定會(huì)損害消費(fèi)者的利益”與原文第四段第一句不符合，因?yàn)樽髡哒f(shuō)“這股合并浪潮是帶來(lái)益處還是弊端的實(shí)例還很少”，因此很難說(shuō)肯定會(huì)帶來(lái)?yè)p害。[B]提到“世通”，說(shuō)是一個(gè)帶來(lái)利益和降低成本的好例子。這句說(shuō)是“價(jià)格沒(méi)有隨著合并而提高”，并沒(méi)有提到價(jià)格降低問(wèn)題，因此，合并雖然沒(méi)有傷害消費(fèi)者，也沒(méi)有給他們帶來(lái)利益。[C]本段沒(méi)有涉及。[D]可以從文中“很難想像當(dāng)今的幾個(gè)石油公司的合并能夠再次造成像100年前美國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)石油托拉斯對(duì)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)形成的威脅”，這說(shuō)明當(dāng)年這個(gè)石油公司肯定曾經(jīng)對(duì)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)造成巨大威脅。
　　 36. Toward the new business wave, the writer’s attitude can be said to be _____。
　　 作者看待新的商業(yè)浪潮的態(tài)度可以說(shuō)是_______。
　　 [A]optimistic 樂(lè)觀的
　　 [B]objective 客觀的
　　 [C]pessimistic 悲觀的
　　 [D]biased 歧視的
　　 【答案】 B
　　 【考點(diǎn)】 作者態(tài)度題。
　　 【分析】 本題考查考生是否了解作者的態(tài)度。文中作者提到了“合并”的益處，但是同時(shí)也在第四段中提到“我們必須警惕這樣的合并浪潮”。作者是從兩個(gè)方面來(lái)談?wù)撨@個(gè)問(wèn)題的，因此我們可以判斷作者的態(tài)度應(yīng)該是客觀的。

　　難句解析：
　　1. 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。
　　【結(jié)構(gòu)分析】 本題的主干是“This phenomenon has created serious concerns”，兩個(gè)“over”引導(dǎo)介賓短語(yǔ)，是并列的成分，做“concern”的定語(yǔ)。而“of smaller economic firms”與“of national businessmen”都是第一個(gè)“role”的定語(yǔ)。
　　2. 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。
　　【結(jié)構(gòu)分析】 本句主句是“I believe ”，“that”引導(dǎo)一個(gè)賓語(yǔ)從句，在這個(gè)賓語(yǔ)從句中，后面的“that”前面省略了“forces”，這個(gè)“that”引導(dǎo)一個(gè)定語(yǔ)從句，修飾這個(gè)省略的“forces”。冒號(hào)后面的部分是“the most important forces”的同位語(yǔ)，其中“markets”后面的“that”引導(dǎo)定語(yǔ)從句修飾“markets”，“capable of meeting customers' demands”是“operations”的定語(yǔ)。
　　全文翻譯：
　　世界正在經(jīng)歷一場(chǎng)前所未有的比較大的的并購(gòu)浪潮。這個(gè)浪潮從異�；钴S的美國(guó)開(kāi)始，橫掃歐洲，并以不可比擬的威力影響到正在崛起的國(guó)家。這些國(guó)家的許多人面對(duì)這個(gè)浪潮，倍感憂慮：“商業(yè)集中的浪潮會(huì)不會(huì)演變成一股無(wú)法控制的反競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的力量?”
　　無(wú)疑，大企業(yè)正在變得更大、更強(qiáng)。1982年，跨國(guó)公司占國(guó)際貿(mào)易不到20%的份額。而如今，這個(gè)數(shù)字已經(jīng)超過(guò)25%，并且還在迅速上升。在那些對(duì)外開(kāi)放并鼓勵(lì)外資的經(jīng)濟(jì)體中，國(guó)際分公司在生產(chǎn)中也正占據(jù)一個(gè)越來(lái)越大的份額。比如，在阿根廷，經(jīng)過(guò)90年代初的改革之后，跨國(guó)公司在200家大型企業(yè)的工業(yè)生產(chǎn)中從43%增加到幾乎70%。這個(gè)現(xiàn)象使人們開(kāi)始重視小型企業(yè)和民族資本的作用以及世界經(jīng)濟(jì)的比較終穩(wěn)定。
　　我認(rèn)為，日趨下降的運(yùn)輸與通訊費(fèi)用，較低的貿(mào)易與投資壁壘，以及市場(chǎng)的擴(kuò)大和為滿足市場(chǎng)需求而進(jìn)行的擴(kuò)大生產(chǎn)，是推動(dòng)這股巨大的并購(gòu)浪潮的比較主要的力量，也是推動(dòng)全球化進(jìn)程的力量。所有這些對(duì)消費(fèi)者來(lái)說(shuō)都是有益而無(wú)害的。隨著生產(chǎn)力的提高，世界的財(cái)富也在增長(zhǎng)。
　　這股合并浪潮是帶來(lái)益處還是弊端的實(shí)例還很少。但是很難想像當(dāng)今的幾個(gè)石油公司的合并能夠再次造成像100年前美國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)石油托拉斯對(duì)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)形成的威脅，人們當(dāng)時(shí)很害怕這家公司，結(jié)果導(dǎo)致了它比較終的解散。像世通這樣的通訊公司的合并似乎不會(huì)抬高消費(fèi)價(jià)格，或者減緩技術(shù)進(jìn)步的速度，與之相反的是通信的價(jià)格的快速下降。汽車(chē)行業(yè)的合并也同樣在增加——瞧瞧戴姆勒與克萊斯勒，雷諾與尼桑的合并——但看起來(lái)消費(fèi)者并未受到傷害。
　　但是有一個(gè)事實(shí)，那就是合并必須受到密切關(guān)注。就在幾星期以前，格林斯潘對(duì)銀行業(yè)的大規(guī)模合并發(fā)出了警告。正在創(chuàng)建的這樣的巨大的銀行一旦出現(xiàn)，誰(shuí)來(lái)充當(dāng)比較終的借貸者，誰(shuí)來(lái)發(fā)揮監(jiān)督、規(guī)范和運(yùn)作的作用呢?當(dāng)一個(gè)國(guó)家對(duì)破壞公平競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的行為的處理過(guò)于嚴(yán)厲時(shí)，跨國(guó)公司會(huì)不會(huì)把它們的生產(chǎn)從一地轉(zhuǎn)到另一地呢?在那些將會(huì)影響許多其他國(guó)家的問(wèn)題上，一個(gè)國(guó)家是否應(yīng)該發(fā)揮“保護(hù)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)”的作用，就如同美國(guó)政府對(duì)微軟公司案例那樣?