Part A: Reading Comprehension
Text 1
In her new book Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be, Diane Coyle, an economist at Cambridge University, argues that the digital economy requires new ways of thinking about progress. “Whatever we mean by the economy growing, by things getting better, the gains will have to be more evenly shared than in the recent past,” she writes. “An economy of tech millionaires or billionaires and gig workers, with middle-income jobs undercut by automation, will not be politically sustainable.”
Improving living standards and increasing prosperity for more people will require greater use of digital technologies to boost productivity in various sectors, including health care and construction, says Coyle. But people can’t be expected to embrace the changes if they’re not seeing the benefits—if they’re just seeing good jobs being destroyed.
In a recent interview, Coyle said she fears that tech’s inequality problem could be a roadblock to deploying AI. “We’re talking about disruption,” she says. “These are transformative technologies that change the ways we spend our time every day, that change business models that succeed.” To make such “tremendous changes,” she adds, you need social buy-in.
Instead, says Coyle, resentment is simmering among many as the benefits are perceived to go to elites in a handful of prosperous cities.
According to the Brookings Institution, a short list of eight American cities that included San Francisco, San Jose, Boston, and Seattle had roughly 38% of all tech jobs by 2019. New AI technologies are particularly concentrated: Brookings’s Mark Muro and Sifan Liu estimate that just 15 cities account for two-thirds of the AI assets and capabilities in the United States.
The dominance of a few cities in the invention and commercialization of AI means that geographical disparities in wealth will continue to soar. Not only will this foster political and social unrest, but it could, as Coyle suggests, hold back the sorts of AI technologies needed for regional economies to grow.
Part of the solution could lie in somehow loosening the stranglehold that Big Tech has on defining the AI agenda. That will likely take increased federal funding for research independent of the tech giants.
A more immediate response is to broaden our digital imaginations to conceive of AI technologies that don’t simply replace jobs but expand opportunities in the sectors that different parts of the country care most about, like health care, education, and manufacturing.
21. Coyle argues in her new book that economic growth should
22. According to Paragraph 2, digital technologies should be used to
23. What does Coyle fear about transformative technologies?
24. Several American cities are mentioned to show
25. With regard to Coyle’s concern, the author suggests
答案解析 (Answers & Explanations)
21. [C] benefit people equally.
解析：细节题。定位到第一段，Coyle 在新书中指出：“无论经济增长还是情况好转意味着什么，其收益必须比过去更平均地分享（the gains will have to be more evenly shared）”。“evenly shared（平均分享）”完美对应选项 [C] 中的“benefit people equally（平等地使人们受益）”。
22. [C] raise overall work efficiency.
解析：细节题。定位到第二段首句：“为更多人改善生活水平和增加繁荣，将需要更多地使用数字技术以提升各行各业的生产力（boost productivity in various sectors）”。“boost productivity（提升生产力）”即对应选项 [C] 中的“raise overall work efficiency（提高整体工作效率）”。
23. [D] They may be unwelcome to the public.
解析：推理题。定位到第三段。Coyle 担心“科技的不平等问题可能成为应用 AI 的路障（roadblock）”。她指出这些“变革性技术（transformative technologies）”会带来剧变，要实现这些改变，“你需要社会的认可/支持（you need social buy-in）”。结合第四段的“人们怨恨沸腾（resentment is simmering）”，这暗示如果不解决不平等问题，这些技术可能无法获得社会认可，即“可能不受公众欢迎（unwelcome to the public）”，选 [D]。
24. [A] the uneven distribution of AI technologies in the US.
解析：例证题。定位到第五段。该段列举了旧金山、圣何塞、波士顿和西雅图等几个少数的美国城市，指出仅8个城市就占据了约38%的科技工作岗位，而仅仅15个城市占据了美国三分之二的AI资产和能力。这些数据都是为了证明上一段末尾提到的“收益流向了少数繁荣城市的精英”以及后一段首句提到的“少数城市在AI发明和商业化中的主导地位”。因此，列举这些城市是为了展示“美国 AI 技术分布的不均衡（uneven distribution）”，选 [A]。
25. [D] redefining the role of AI technologies.
解析：细节题。定位到文章最后一段：“一个更直接的回应是拓宽我们的数字想象力，来构想这样一种AI技术：它们不再仅仅是替代工作，而是在全国各地最关心的领域中扩展机会（conceive of AI technologies that don’t simply replace jobs but expand opportunities...）”。将 AI 从“替代工作者”转变为“扩展机会者”，这正是建议“重新定义 AI 技术的角色（redefining the role of AI technologies）”，选 [D]。
全文翻译
剑桥大学经济学家戴安·科伊尔在她的新书《齿轮与怪物：经济学是什么，以及它应该是什么》中提出，数字经济需要我们以新的方式思考进步。"无论我们所说的经济增长、事物变得更好意味着什么，收益都必须比最近过去更加均衡地分享，"她写道。"一个由科技百万富翁或亿万富翁与零工工人组成、中等收入岗位被自动化侵蚀的经济，在政治上将是不可持续的。"
科伊尔表示，提高更多人的生活水平和增加繁荣，需要在医疗保健和建筑等各个领域更多地使用数字技术来提升生产力。但如果人们看不到好处——如果他们只看到好的工作岗位被摧毁——就不能指望他们拥抱变化。
在最近的一次采访中，科伊尔表示她担心科技的不平等问题可能会成为部署AI的障碍。"我们谈论的是颠覆，"她说。"这些是改变我们每天花费时间的方式、改变成功商业模式的变革性技术。"她补充说，要实现如此"巨大的变革"，你需要社会的认可。
然而科伊尔说，随着利益被认为流向了少数繁荣城市的精英，许多人心中正酝酿着怨恨。
根据布鲁金斯学会的数据，截至2019年，包括旧金山、圣何塞、波士顿和西雅图在内的八个美国城市占据了大约38%的科技岗位。新的AI技术尤为集中：布鲁金斯学会的马克·穆罗和刘思凡估计，仅15个城市就占据了美国AI资产和能力的三分之二。
少数城市在AI发明和商业化方面的主导地位意味着财富的地理差距将继续飙升。这不仅会滋生政治和社会动荡，而且如科伊尔所暗示的那样，可能会阻碍区域经济增长所需的那类AI技术的发展。
解决方案的一部分可能在于以某种方式松开大型科技公司对定义AI议程的垄断。这可能需要增加独立于科技巨头的联邦研究资金。
更直接的应对措施是拓宽我们的数字想象力，构想出那些不是简单地取代工作岗位、而是在全国各地最关心的领域——如医疗保健、教育和制造业——中扩大机会的AI技术。
核心长难句精解 (High-Light)
1. Whatever 引导让步状语从句：
"Whatever we mean by the economy growing, by things getting better, the gains will have to be more evenly shared than in the recent past," she writes.
【解析】`Whatever` 引导让步状语从句，意为“无论……意味着什么”。`by the economy growing` 和 `by things getting better` 是两个并列的介词短语，作 `mean` 的方式状语。主句的核心是 `the gains will have to be more evenly shared`（收益必须被更加平均地分享），直击“共同富裕”的主题。
"Whatever we mean by the economy growing, by things getting better, the gains will have to be more evenly shared than in the recent past," she writes.
【解析】`Whatever` 引导让步状语从句，意为“无论……意味着什么”。`by the economy growing` 和 `by things getting better` 是两个并列的介词短语，作 `mean` 的方式状语。主句的核心是 `the gains will have to be more evenly shared`（收益必须被更加平均地分享），直击“共同富裕”的主题。
2. with 复合结构作伴随状语：
"An economy of tech millionaires or billionaires and gig workers, with middle-income jobs undercut by automation, will not be politically sustainable."
【解析】句子的主干是 `An economy... will not be politically sustainable`。主语后跟了由 `of` 引导的长定语（由科技亿万富翁和零工组成的经济）。`with` 引导复合结构作伴随状语，其中 `middle-income jobs` 是宾语，`undercut by automation` 是过去分词作宾补，形象地描绘了中产阶级被自动化“掏空/削弱”的社会现状。
"An economy of tech millionaires or billionaires and gig workers, with middle-income jobs undercut by automation, will not be politically sustainable."
【解析】句子的主干是 `An economy... will not be politically sustainable`。主语后跟了由 `of` 引导的长定语（由科技亿万富翁和零工组成的经济）。`with` 引导复合结构作伴随状语，其中 `middle-income jobs` 是宾语，`undercut by automation` 是过去分词作宾补，形象地描绘了中产阶级被自动化“掏空/削弱”的社会现状。
3. 不定式作表语及 not... but... 结构：
"A more immediate response is to broaden our digital imaginations to conceive of AI technologies that don’t simply replace jobs but expand opportunities in the sectors that different parts of the country care most about..."
【解析】主语是 `response`，系动词是 `is`，其后由不定式短语 `to broaden...` 充当表语。在不定式结构中，又嵌套了一个不定式短语 `to conceive of AI technologies...` 充当目的状语。紧接着，`that` 引导定语从句修饰 `AI technologies`，该从句内部使用了强烈的对比结构 `not simply replace jobs but expand opportunities`（不只是替代工作而是扩展机会），点明了AI技术发展应有的正确方向。
"A more immediate response is to broaden our digital imaginations to conceive of AI technologies that don’t simply replace jobs but expand opportunities in the sectors that different parts of the country care most about..."
【解析】主语是 `response`，系动词是 `is`，其后由不定式短语 `to broaden...` 充当表语。在不定式结构中，又嵌套了一个不定式短语 `to conceive of AI technologies...` 充当目的状语。紧接着，`that` 引导定语从句修饰 `AI technologies`，该从句内部使用了强烈的对比结构 `not simply replace jobs but expand opportunities`（不只是替代工作而是扩展机会），点明了AI技术发展应有的正确方向。