Материалы для занятий по устному переводу и разговорной практике

Материалы для занятий по устному переводу и разговорной практике

для студентов 4 курса

Кафедры английской филологии и перевода Часть I

Составители:

Н. В. Воронова, Е. К. Вьюнова, Е. А. Лунченкова, Е. А. Яковлева

Санкт-Петербург 2009

UNIT 1. ECONOMIC SYSTEMS

VOCABULARY

ECONOMIC SYSTEMS

ð    market/free-enterprise economy, freedom of enterprise, entrepreneur

ð    centrally controlled/command/planned economy, economic planning

ð    to set a production target, fixed price

ð    inefficient enterprise

ð    mixed economy

ð    to be privately/publicly owned

ð    public ownership of the means of production

ð    to intervene in the economy, a degree of state intervention/involvement in the economy

ð    to keep a tight control on the use of economic resources

ð    to cut/remove or retain subsidies on basic commodities

ð    public sector, private sector; manufacturing/service sector

ð    economic output

TYPES OF BUSINESS ORGANISATION

ð    Sole owner/ownership, individual proprietor/proprietorship, one-person business

ð    The owner’s liability for debts is unlimited

ð    Partnership

ð    Joint-stock company:  private company (GB=limited, LTD; USA=Close/C- corporation)

ð    public (limited) company (GB=PLC, USA=Inc.),

ð    to offer the shares for sale

ð    S-corporation (USA)

ð    company’s turnover, profits

ð    company’s assets, liabilities

ð    joint stock, capital stock

ð    shares (stock, equities), shareholders, stockholders

ð    ordinary/preference shares; voting/non-voting shares

ð    to hold a stake, minority stake, majority or controlling stake, controlling packet of shares

ð    to buy a stake in a company

ð    a holding company, a holding

ð    to exercise control through the majority/minority ownership

ð    stock market (stock exchange, bourse); equity market

ð    blue chip shares (stocks, blue chips)

ð    Cooperatives: consumer/producer cooperatives

ð    Collective ownership

PRIVATISATION

ð    To privatise, privatisation. To nationalise, nationalisation

ð    To sell-off state-owned companies, a sell-off

ð    To  transfer  state-owned  enterprises  to  private  ownership,  to  bring  into  private ownership

ð    To impede privatisation of land

ð    An incentive to raise output, efficiency of enterprises

ð    To sell by auction, to sell by competitive tender, to auction off

ð    Private outside proprietors

ð    to be controlled by insiders – enterprise managers and employees

ð    management and employee buyout

 

 

Types of sale.

1. The most important was undoubtedly the public share offer, usually at a fixed price per share. This was the method used for sales such as British Petroleum and to the major utility privatisations of electricity and gas. It gave immediate access to the capital markets for the businesses and allowed the general population to participate in the process. But there were other forms of sale.

2. The second was trade sales to strategic investors, without a public offering. Examples include the coal industry, Jaguar, and British Rail Engineering Limited, the manufacturer and maintainer of trains. This technique was mostly used where it was thought of particular importance to introduce new management or provide a strategic investor willing to fund a major investment programme.

3. A variant of the trade sale was the management or management and employeebuyout.

Examples of this occurred particularly in our transport industry, for instance the National Freight Corporation but also the Bus industry. This technique was typically used where the industry did not require very heavy capital investment, and where the workforce was very important. It helped to introduce the concept of employee shareholdings, which played a small role in incentivising reform even in the utility sectors, as part of their initial public offerings. A similar approach was used for institutions like research bodies such as the British Technology Group, where the management sometimes set up non profit making trusts.

4. Finally, some of the sales were of companies based on concession contracts, where the entity being sold is given a concession to operate particular services for a period. This has typically been used where the system is not profitable and the public sector needs to go on supporting it – for example in the rail sector. Government awards the concession contract to the company which bids for the smallest amount of subsidy.

So how successful was this programme which built up gradually during the 1980s? There is no doubt that the privatisation reforms played a large part in meeting the Government’s first objective of improving quality and efficiency. British Telecom spent over £15 billion on the network between 1985 and 1990, twice as much as in the previous 5 years. This was money that really had to be spent to improve the technology base of the industry and which could not have been afforded in the public sector.

These changes played a significant part in gradually transforming the position of the UK economy. There was a significant improvement in competitiveness. No one would argue that this was solely to do with privatisation. But most people in the UK would agree that the reform and restructuring of the state sector made a large contribution, not just because these industries represented such a large proportion of the economy when the programme started, but because they were in areas of the economy that were critical engines for growth.

Also, the launch of the Privatisation Public Offers led to a massive change in the involvement of the UK population in share ownership. Between 1980 and 2000 the number of private individuals holding shares rose from 3 million to 9.5 million, representing 20% of the adult population.

This introduction of the general population to share ownership has led to improved awareness about economic performance. Many of these shareholders are also employees or former employees of the industries that have been privatised.

Finally, although I have stressed how the Government gave greater weight to these objectives of improving competitiveness and reforming the economy than to the proceedsfrom sales, there were also striking benefits for the public sector finances. The major privatisation sales generated £68 billion of proceeds, about two thirds of which went directly into state revenues, the remainder funding investment in the enterprises which would otherwise have been supported by the state. There was also a significant turnaround in the state’s finances on a continuing basis. One statistic from the Treasury is very striking. In 1980, the public sector corporations as a group required nearly £3 billion a year from the taxpayer. That’s £60 million a week. By 1995 almost none of them were receiving subsidy, and on a net basis they were actually contributing nearly £60 million a week to the state budget through taxes on their profits or value added. So the focus on reform has led pretty directly to substantial financial benefits for the Government and a reduction in taxes on individuals. Again, a virtuous circle.

 

 

Task 1. Answer the following questions:

1. Describe the financial problems that the British government was experiencing in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

2. Briefly explain the three phases of the British government’s economic programme related to industry.

3. Compare and contrast the four types of sales described in this text.

4. Has the economic programme launched by the British government in the 1980s proved to be successful? Why or why not?

 

 

Task 2. This article was written in 2001. It describes the results of the 10-year transition period in the Russian economy. Has much changed since then? Give a free oral translation of the text using the following expressions:

To lose one’s savings, to be in short supply, to be freely available, to fall apart at the seams, shock therapy, freeing prices, to buy up enterprises, shares-for-loans auctions, budget expenditure, default of foreign debt, to collect taxes, to scare away, to reap the fruits

Десятилетие реформ

Когда в России начались экономические реформы, мало кто представлял себе все трудности, ожидающие страну. Для миллионов минувшее десятилетие стало сплошным кошмаром. Россия потеряла статус сверхдержавы; миллионы людей потеряли все сбережения; все, что можно было украсть, было украдено; больницы, школы - вся инфраструктура лежала в руинах; талантливая молодежь уехала на Запад. О былой гордости и достоинстве советской эпохи не было и речи.

Но многим стоит позабыть на время ностальгию и вспомнить, что собой представлял Советский Союз в 1991 году.

25 декабря 1991 года Михаил Горбачев, первый и последний президент СССР, ушел в отставку, Союз официально прекратил свое существование.

Некогда великая держава разваливалась на куски, даже в Москве стало не хватать самых необходимых продуктов питания. Почти два века власти прилагали особые усилия к тому, чтобы накормить жителей столицы. Однако в 1991 году в магазинах Москвы в свободной продаже не было ни мыла, ни яиц.

В отдаленных регионах ситуация была еще хуже - страна стояла на краю голода. Экономика страны, 80% бюджета которой шло на военные нужды, трещала по швам.

Не стоит забывать и о политическом хаосе: российские законы вступали в противоречие с советскими, да и те, которые работали, имели мало отношения к тому, что происходило на улицах.

Еще больше усугубляя ситуацию, бывшие советские республики ввели в обращение свою валюту, но одновременно использовали рубли, которые печатались в Москве. Как сказал один из аналитиков, Россия была похожа на мужчину, 14 бывших жен которого продолжали платить его кредитной карточкой.

Именно в таких условиях к власти пришла группа экономистов, возглавляемая Егором Гайдаром, который был назначен премьер-министром в ноябре 1991 года. Пришла эпоха "шоковой терапии".

В первые недели 1992 года на российском рынке началась либерализация цен. Словно по мановению волшебной палочки, через несколько месяцев полки магазинов были забиты товарами.

Либерализация цен наполнила прилавки магазинов, но опустошила кошельки простых россиян. Большинство населения просто не могло позволить себе ничего купить.

Затем правительство начало претворять в жизнь еще более противоречивый экономический план - приватизацию. Властям было не важно, кто скупал предприятия. Они считали, что рынок рано или поздно расставит все по своим местам.

Но на деле получилось, что ведущие промышленные компании перешли в частное владение бывшим советским аппаратчикам и "новым русским", имевшим высокие связи в Кремле.

В результате "продажа века", как называли российскую приватизацию, была менее открытой и прозрачной, чем, скажем, в Венгрии и Польше.

В 1996 году рейтинг президента Ельцина стремился к нулю, на предстоящих выборах вполне могли победить коммунисты. Команда Ельцина приняла предложение группы могущественных промышленников и банкиров, так называемых олигархов, о помощи взамен на заключение выгодных сделок.

Правительство организовало залоговые аукционы: самые доходные государственные предприятия перешли в частные руки за символическую стоимость, не имевшую никакого отношения к реальной рыночной цене. Одновременно парламент, в котором преобладали коммунисты, вынудил правительство увеличить расходную часть бюджета, заставив тем самым влезть в еще большие долги.

Азиатский экономический кризис 1997 года, совпавший по времени с падением цен на нефть, стал последним ударом.

Крах российской экономики пришелся на август 1998 года. Рубль почти сразу же потерял  75%  своей  стоимости.  Россия  объявила  дефолт  по  внешним  долгам.

Российский фондовый рынок, в период с 1995 по 1997 год выросший в пять раз, за полгода "сдулся" на 93%.

Однако катастрофа оказала оздоровительное действие на российскую экономику. За три года после кризиса ситуация изменилась кардинальным образом. Высокие цены на нефть и дешевый рубль помогли экономике возродиться.

Новый президент Владимир Путин, забирая по частичкам власть, отданную ранее олигархам, заручился беспрецедентной поддержкой парламента. Депутаты приняли ряд важнейших законов - в казну начали поступать налоги, рубль оставался стабильным.

Впрочем, драматичное десятилетие не изменило полностью российскую экономику. Благосостояние страны зависит от цен на нефть и цветные металлы. Бюрократия и коррупция мешают встать на ноги малому и среднему бизнесу. На смену старым олигархам обещают прийти новые. Запутанные законы отпугивают иностранный капитал от инвестиций в Россию. И до сих пор многое в России действует по принципу "неважно, что ты знаешь, важно, кого ты знаешь".

И самое главное - слишком много лежит на плечах одного человека, президента Путина. Когда вся власть сосредоточена в руках одного, никто не может с абсолютной гарантией говорить, что страна не повернет обратно.

Через 10 лет после начала реформ почти 90% экономики находится в частных руках. И в то время как многие россияне продолжают горевать по СССР, большинство вряд ли хочет возвращения советских порядков.

Судя по недавнему опросу общественного мнения, впервые после 1991 года россияне говорят о будущем с оптимизмом. Возможно, именно сейчас Россия начнет пожинать плоды 10 лет сложных преобразований. Но даже оптимисты говорят, что впереди еще много работы.

 

 

Task 3. Complete the following expressions about time with the words from the list below:

art, date (2), edge, fashioned, forefront, forward, minute, past, times

1. up-to-           

2. a thing of the          

3. at the                 

4. old-           

5. state-of-the-                    

6. the way                 

7. out of                  

8. up to the              

9. at the leading             

10. behind the               

VOCABULARY

UNIT 2. TAXATION SYSTEM

ð  Taxation, tax policy, taxpayer

ð  Tax Code

ð  to raise/ collect taxes, tax collection

ð  tax revenues

ð  to be liable to taxes

ð  to be exempt from taxes

ð  tax exempt, tax-free; exemption from taxes

ð  to levy/ impose taxes on…

ð  to file an individual tax return

ð  to complete/fill in/fill out an individual tax return

ð  Board of Inland Revenue

ð  Internal Revenue Service

ð  taxable income

ð  to reduce the amount of the taxable income

ð  tax burden

ð  to reduce/ mitigate/ lighten tax burden

ð  tax relief, tax benefits

ð  tax evasion

ð  tax dodger, tax evader

ð  tax rate

ð  to  impose progressive rate/ flat rate

ð  to be taxed at a flat rate/ progressive rate

ð  tax bracket

ð  tax deduction

ð  marginal tax rate

ð  Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

 

 

UNIT 3. ECONOMIC CRISES

VOCABULARY

ð    Crisis/crises

ð    Meltdown, recession, slowdown, downturn, credit crunch

ð    sub-prime mortgage bubble

ð    global imbalances in the world economy

ð    excessive lending by bankers and borrowing by consumers

ð    to deal with the recession, to weather the crisis

ð    to be vulnerable to the crunch

ð    to crash down the global financial system

ð    to have a terrible track record

ð    to fall short of expectations

ð    emerging economies, middle income countries

ð    bailout spending, stimulus plans

ð    economic stimulus of unprecedented size

ð    to urge countries to continue their stimulus plans

ð    to curb excessive bank bonuses

ð    to boost investment through low interest rates

ð to support the overhaul of the financial system, to sustain economic growth, to achieve long-term economic growth, to diversify the country's economy, to require a change in strategy.

ð    scale of public debt, dangers of excessive public and private debt

ð    deregulation, adequate banking regulation

 

Mexico 1994-95

 

Latin America had been beset by debt crises in the 1980s but, by the early 1990s, Mexico appeared to be recovering strongly. Inflation and the budgetary deficit had both been drastically cut, and the economy was growing well.

 

So well, in fact, that Mexicans started to spend their savings, while the Mexican peso soared in value. The soaring current account deficit was financed by short-term foreignmoney. In December 1984 the government suddenly devalued the peso, with the honourable motive of boosting exports but with the unfortunate effect of destroying foreigninvestor interest in peso-denominated bonds.

 

The government responded, fatally, by issuing new bonds indexed to the US dollar. With investors still spooked by political unrest and economic turmoil, there was a rush to sell the bonds, which the cash-strapped Mexico could not redeem in the promised dollars.

 

Washington and the IMF cobbled together a rescue package worth an unprecedented

$50.5bn. The aid was made dependent on range of radical - some would say humiliating - financial and structural reforms. Mexico launched its long-promised privatisationprogramme, and introduced strict financial controls. It worked; so much so that by 1997 the US loan was paid off along with a large part of the IMF money.

 

Post-war Britain

 

The UK was, after the USA, the greatest proponent of the post-war economic settlement laid down at the Bretton Woods conference in New Hampshire in 1944. A keystone of the strategy was that exchange rates would be maintained at constant levels, underwritten byAmerica's vast gold reserves held in Fort Knox.

The erosion of that cosy arrangement began almost instantly, though the central concept was not finally dropped until the 1970s. And no major currency came under such sustainedpressure than sterling. In every decade since the second world war, governments have feltobliged to take drastic action to protect the value of the pound. Partly they did so to protect Britain's most vital economic interest as a nation dependent on trade. Also, especially in the early years, they suffered delusions of post imperial grandeur, imagining that sterling was still a "world" currency.

 

There were major crises in the late 1940s, and again in 1956 (linked with the Suez disaster), 1962 and 1967 when Harold Wilson, having just devalued the pound and guaranteed higher prices, infamously promised the British people that "the pound in your pocket" would not be affected.

 

The IMF bailed out sterling again in the mid-1970s. In the 1980s the pound sank almost to parity with the dollar, before rebounding to an equally silly height of almost two dollars. In the early 1990s, sterling was unceremoniously bundled out of the European exchange rate mechanism by the machinations of just one man, George Soros.

 

UNIT 4. COMPANY PERFORMANCE

VOCABULARY

ð    Corporation, a multinational company, big business

ð    small and medium-size companies

ð    small business, small firm

ð    To set up /build up a company, a start-up company

ð    Company profile, to diversify one’s activity To collapse, to go bankrupt, to go bust, to go under

ð    To go into liquidation, to close down, to pull out of business

ð    Entrepreneur, tycoon, magnate, mogul

ð    Oil/tobacco/steel magnate

ð    Holding /parent company, subsidiary /affiliate

ð    to operate companies around the world

ð    Board of directors, chairman, to chair board meetings

ð    Executive /non-executive directors, chief executive officer (CEO)

ð    Senior executives /managers, top executives /managers

ð    Managing/financial/marketing/technical director

ð    Production /sales /purchases /personnel /research and development /operation and maintenance /public relations /client services manager

ð    Middle managers, front-line /line managers

ð    Workforce /employees /staff /personnel /human resources

ð    to be employed by a company to be on the payroll

ð    while-collar /blue-collar employees, shopfloor workers

ð    To recruit /hire /take staff on; headhunting

ð    To  be  employed  by  a  company  to  quit,  to  be  fired,  to  dismiss,  make  people redundant, lay people off

ð    To eliminate tiers of middle managers, delayering /downsizing

ð    to expand, prospects for expansion

ð    to compete, to be competitive

ð    to enter the market, to dominate the market, market share

ð    to lock out competitors/rivals

ð    to take over another company, to launch a bid against another company

ð    a hostile bid, raiders

ð    to make an acquisition of a company, a takeover target

ð    to merge, a merger

ð    to launch a new product, to invest in new equipment

ð    to increase sales of…

ð    turnover, annual sales

 

How do mergers happen?

Corporate mergers occur when two companies combine. In some cases both companies want to merge. This is called an agreed merger.

Another situation is where one company seeks to control another without its agreement. This is called a hostile takeover. To avoid a hostile takeover the target company may seek a 'white knight', another company with which it would prefer to merge.

It is up to the shareholders of the target company to approve a merger. They will usually do so if it is recommended by the board, or if they stand to make a substantial profit from the shares in the new company. A company can offer either shares in its own company or cash to shareholders in order to persuade them to sell out.

Why do mergers happen?

There are many motivations for mergers. One reason is expansion: a larger, growing company may try to take over its smaller rivals in order to grow bigger.

In some cases it is the smaller company that wants to expand, but is hampered by lack ofcapital. It seeks a larger partner who will put in the necessary investment. Other mergers seek to make cost-savings by integrating operations, sometimes on a world scale. And some mergers are defensive, responding to other mergers which threaten the competitive position of a company.

 

 

When do mergers happen?

Mergers tend to happen in waves. A stock market boom makes mergers much more attractive because it is relatively cheap to acquire other companies by paying for them in high valued shares.

But falling share prices can also lead to a company being undervalued and hence an attractive acquisition. Some industries are forced into mergers by specific troubles facing that industry. Globalisation and the regulatory environment also have a big impact on the likelihood of consolidation.

 

 

And the problems?

Mergers can fail because the two partners cannot agree terms - for example, who will run the new company. Mergers can also run into regulatory problems. Governments may be concerned that the merger might create a monopoly, and either block it or require the merged companies to sell some of the firms which are part of their business empire.

Some  academic  studies  have  suggested  that  whatever  the  immediate  benefit  to shareholders may be, mergers rarely give much added value to the economy as a whole.

 

 

Video class

Материалы для занятий по устному переводу и разговорной практике

для студентов 4 курса