*《经济学人》读书笔记专栏第二辑所选的文章来自The Economist Debates栏目2008年10月29日的The Cost of Higher Education这一专题。作者Alison Wolf是King's College London的Sir Roy Griffiths Professor of Public Sector Management. 她的文章论点是：个人而非国家应为高等教育买单。

该文入选的理由是，它是我读过的最有说服力的一篇议论文。而这辑的读书笔记重点将放在赏析论证效果和地道漂亮的论证语言上。

该读书笔记中用【】括住的内容为论证经典中的经典部分。请大家细细体会。

该文来源：http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/232

原文：

The proposer's opening remarks

Oct 29th 2008 | Professor Alison Wolf

1 Individuals should certainly pay for their higher education. Anything else is deeply unfair to their fellow citizens.

2 For the children of the middle classes, attending university has become a birthright. And a birthright that really pays. The economic returns（收益） to a degree are large and lifelong; graduates, everywhere, earn more than non-graduates. Meanwhile social mobility—indeed, any chance of getting a good job—is ever more dependent on having a degree. Forget making it up from the shop-floor（工厂的生产区）. Without higher education, doors everywhere slam in your face.

3 Universities have expanded rapidly everywhere, but the beneficiaries have been overwhelmingly(=disproportionately, predominantly) middle-class. It is not poor clever children who have been flooding into higher education, but the children of the affluent, whether clever or not. Yet bizarrely, in much of the world, governments seem determined that to those who have it shall be given. How else to explain the enormous proportions of public education spending that are directed into higher education?

4 Huge differences exist in the quality of schools, with the poor as the consistent losers. Developed countries are struggling, with little success, to narrow the income gap between their most and least advantaged citizens. In that situation, should ordinary people also be paying, through their taxes, for the university education of the affluent young? Because that is what is actually involved when we say that the state should pay for higher education.

5 A university education is of enormous and direct benefit to the individual. A major reason for its value is that only some people have it. So the individual, and not the taxpayer, should pay for it. There are important and pressing calls on the resources of the government. Using taxpayers’ money to help a sub-set of(=a few) young people to earn high incomes in the future is not one of them.

6【Full government funding is not even very good for universities. On the contrary, it can be the kiss of death. If students have to pay for their education, they not only work harder, but also demand more from their teachers. And their teachers have to keep them satisfied. If that means taking teaching seriously, and giving less time to their own research interests, that is surely something to celebrate.】

7 Adam Smith worked in a Scottish university whose teachers lived off student fees. He also knew and despised 18th-century Oxford, where the academics lived comfortably off endowment income in an intellectual backwater(=isolation). Guaranteed salaries, Smith argued, were the enemy of diligence; and when the academics were lazy and incompetent, the students were similarly lackadaisical. In Scotland, with its fee-paying students and non-endowed staff, things were quite different. 【“Where the masters really perform their duty, there are no examples, I believe, that the greater part of the students ever neglect theirs,”】 he argued. Scotland then, unlike now, made its students pay; and was also experiencing its greatest academic and intellectual flowering（繁荣、鼎盛时期）.

8 【If you want a Eureka moment, just look at（举例论证的又一标致表达） the differences between America’s public schools and its universities. Huge amounts are spent on the schools, which nonetheless remain relentlessly mediocre. American universities, meanwhile, are the envy of the earth. That is in large part because they are competitive and have to earn their way. They have, in other words, to attract students and student fees. It is not just the private universities either. Public universities, too, charge fees; and students pay them.】

9【Fees also bring universities their independence. There are some universities in the world which are fully, or almost fully, government-funded, and also independent in their views. But not many, and only in countries with a very strong, long-standing commitment to open debate. The general rule in life is that he who pays the piper calls the tune. And the history of government-funded institutions is that they are not only inefficient but timid and cowed. This is no basis for good education or good research, and no way to preserve the core values of the academy: reason, critical thought, open-mindedness.】

10【Many people believe that higher education should be free because it is good for the economy, as proved by the fact that graduates are paid more . Many graduates clearly do contribute to national wealth, but so, even more clearly, do all the businesses that invest and create jobs, whether through a burger franchise or an internet start-up. If you believe that the state should pay for higher education because graduates are economically productive, you should also believe that the state should subsidise businesses. Anyone promising to generate jobs should receive a gift of capital from the government to invest.】

11 The money for business investors would presumably（让步） come from the same place as for students: the taxes of citizens, many of them less well paid. But actually the argument is nonsense. Both businessmen and university students want to make themselves better off. They are entitled to the proceeds（收入） if they do. And so they should pay for the investment.

12 Of course we need to make sure that poverty or fear of debt does not stop people from going to university. But there are well-worked out ways of doing that. In the UK, for example, we now have a system of income-contingent（视收入而定，注意学习此表达结构） loans. The government lends all students, whatever their background, the money for their fees. They only start paying them back once they are working and earning above a certain minimum. If things go wrong for someone and they are not able to earn, then they do not pay the loan back either.

13 In many countries, universities also are the main home for research on anything without immediate commercial value. Research is a legitimate（合情合理的） concern of government, but it is not the same thing as higher education. That is something which benefits individuals; and which they undertake because it benefits them. And therefore it is they, not the state, who should pay.

读书笔记：

第一段：

两个短句完美地构成了第一段。写作贵在简。现在应试英语教育死皮赖脸地和自然地道的英语对着干。一句话可以讲得明白，非要交给你用一段没有任何意义的套话。且不说大英四六级，就是专业英语也不少受此害。记得专四之前，我的中国老师交给我们套话的重要性，一次一北外英语博士来我校讲座，也不知廉耻地说如何能用废话凑够字数，但美国老师Justine却对此深恶痛疾。要知道Justine是哈佛英语文学硕士。再翻开The Elements of Style，作者和Justine的观点如出一辙。

在此说一句，不要盲信任何权威。一个标准就是好的文章读来自然、不做作。Ernest Hemingway, George Orwell和E. B. White等无不是明证。推荐大家把The Elements of Style这本小书通读一遍，该书文字本身就是简结干练文字的表率。

第二段：

最后一句" Doors everywhere slam in your face." 表达多么有力。关键是slam这一动词的恰当使用。The Elements of Style中，作者关于动词和名词有如下说法:" In general, however, it is nouns and verbs, not their assistants, that give good writing toughness and color." "Slam"这个字就体现了这种"toughness and color".

第三段：

1第二行的overwhelmingly可译为“主要是”。它的同义词有disproportionately和predominantly。这儿的一个启示是作文时不可在头脑中“机械翻译”。倘若我们要表达“主要是”这个意思，我们多半不会说overwhelmingly和disproportionately，我们可能只会说mainly， 但是不是前两个词更漂亮一些？

2 第四行"whether clever or not"看似简单的一句话，但点名了问题的关键。值得揣摩如何用简单的文字加强表达效果。

3 我们会说surprisingly, 但不一定会用bizarrely。词汇（尤其是积极词汇）的多样性能给我们的文章润色。

【更新补充】4 刘魏的留言：
A brief note for the sentence: "to those who have it shall be given" in paragraph 3 line 5.

Actually, it's a famous sentence from the biblical Gospel of Matthew:
"For to all those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away."
—Matthew 25:29, New Revised Standard Version.

Here, we can see the influence of the Bible.

顺便再借题发挥一下，圣经对英语世界的作家和演讲家影响很大，相当于《论语》等中国古典作品对我们的影响。在历届美国总统和名人的演讲中，不难看到这一点。因此，有时间能读点圣经的话，定会帮助我们了解西方文化。

第四段：

最后一句中的“that is what is actually involved when we say that ”也就是说这就是我们论战的焦点。

第五段：

结尾说"…is not one of them".看似简单，但这种论证方法颇为新鲜。注意体会最后两句的论证表达。

第六段：

1 开头前两句其实也就相当于" It is tempting to believe that… However,…"和 "It seems that… However,…"这两个结构."The kiss of death"意为“表面有利实则有害的事物”。掌握这个表达会让你与99.9%的人不同。

2 结尾"that is surely something to celebrate" 这个表达也很有意思。相当于“这就再好不过了”。如果能学会用这个表达，那就“再好不过了”：）

第七段：

1 第二行"lived comfortably off"正话反说，讽刺意味很强。

2 第三行"the enemy of diligence"用得很形象。“不用发愁的薪金是勤奋的敌人。”我们是否可以学以致用说：

(1) Corruption, bureaucracy, and populism are the enemy of a government for, by and of the people.

(2) Indifference, fear, and inaction are the enemy of democracy and justice.

3 我对这段中框住的部分感受很深。学生考试通不过、平时吊儿郎当是不是老师自己的不尽责所致？

4 "flowering"这个词太美了！意如其形。一个繁荣时期、一个鼎盛时期不就像盛开的花吗？

第八段：

1"If you want a Eureka moment, just look at…" 这个论证举例句型颇有新意。"eureka"在《牛津高阶词典》中的中英文释义分别为“（因发现某物，尤指问题的答案二高兴）我发现了，我找到了“和" exclamation used to show pleasure at having found something, especially the answer to a problem". 我猜测如果阿基米德是英国人，他悟出阿基米德原理的那一刻很可能会喊着这个字从浴池冲向大街：）

【更新补充】严飞和刘魏提示这个词Eureka真是阿基米德在那个场景下说的。有兴趣者请参见维基百科：http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_(word) 再顺便借题发挥一下，从维基百科获知，这个词还是美加等国一些城镇的地名：http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka



2 结尾句"students pay them"三个字意味深长，再现简洁语言的力量、魅力和表现力。Less is more; less is better.英语中有习语" The more the merrier",我可不可说" The less the livelier"呢？：）学生心甘情愿买单，深化了论点。不是该谁买单的问题，只要教育质量好，学生买。这也颇有点“周瑜打黄盖，一个愿打一个愿挨”的意味。

第九段：

"He who pays the piper calls the tune." 意为“花钱的人说了算”亦或“财大者气粗”。

第十段：

1 "economically productive"这种“副词+形容词”结构表达是很地道的表达，也体现了英文中形容词的灵活性。再举两例：上次，我的美国老师的孩子得了一种病，她说自己几乎读遍了网上所有这种病的信息，并请教过她认识的所有医生。最后，她总结说:"This has been an emotionally trying time." 关键是要有意识地在恰当的地方用上这种表达。

2 最后两句运用了反证法。本文运用多种论证方式：第六段运用了对比论证；第七、八段交叉运用了举例论证和对比论证。此外，因果论证也到处可见。

第十一段：

本段运用了驳论。

第十二段：

1 of course在此不仅是简单的“当然”之意，更是个“路标”，提示读者深化论证马上开始。

2 "In the UK, for example,…" 地道的英语一般将"for example"置于句中。以中文为母语这往往更可能写成"For example, in the UK,…"

顺便提一下，"however"这个词一般也不置于句首。The Elements of Style的作者在Words and Expressions Commonly Misused这一部分专门讲到"however"这个词。作者写道" Avoid starting a sentence with however when the meaning is 'nevertheless'. The word usually serves better when not in first place."

作者给了两句话做对比: "The roads were almost impassable. However, we at last succeeded in reaching camp."不如"The roads were almost impassable. At last, however, we succeeded in reaching camp." 我个人暂时还无法真正理解其中之缘由，但猜测可能与英美人善用插入语有关。

3 "well-worked out ways"和"income-contingent loans"体现了英文中形容词的灵活。虽然上篇笔记中也提到这一点，但鉴于这种表达的地道性，就决定再费点笔墨。

第十三段：

"legitimate"意思与"reasonable"相当。但我们用后者要明显多于前者。能灵活驾驭同义词也是上乘写作的一大要害。

回复【2009】阅读更多写于2009年的原创专栏。

分享：点击右上角的三个小圆点，可以分享到微信朋友圈

加关注: justintheeconomist（或点击上面题目下方的蓝字）

关于该微专栏（序言、账号运作模式、历史消息）：回复数字1

阅读此微专栏的另一种方法：回复数字 100

强烈推荐另一微信公众号“英语学习笔记” : ericzenglish.

谢谢~