英文閱讀理解精選
Fact Sheet: Immigration Fact Check: Responding to Key Myths
May 22, 2007
1. MYTH: Ending the current green card backlog would result in 900,000 new residents per year on top of current numbers.
FACT: The current proposal aims to end the green card backlog in eight years. However, this does not mean that 3.5 to 4 million people over the current number will be admitted into the country. The backlog will be cleared in two ways: 240,000 green cards are being shifted from other priorities within the existing green card pool. This is important – it does not represent an increase in the number of green cards given, it is simply a reallocation of green cards that are authorized for issuance within the current system. Separately, the number of green cards will be temporarily increased by 200,000 for each of the eight years after the enactment of the bill. This is an increase, but it does not mean 200,000 applicants plus their spouses and children. It is 200,000 new people total. FACT: About 15 percent of family-based green card recipients are already residing in the U.S. on temporary visas or illegally. Thus, only about 170,000 additional individuals per year are entering the country.
2. MYTH: The border security and employer enforcement triggers can be waived. It has been asserted that the bill contains the following language: "b) Subsection (a) of this section shall apply only if the President certifies within 180 days of enactment that the border security and other measures described in such subsection can be completed within 18 months of enactment, subject to the necessary appropriations."
FACT: This is false. This language is not in the bill currently, but was in an earlier draft. Instead, the bill contains a sense of Congress that all triggers can be met in 18 months. All triggers must be met before the guest worker program or the Z visa program could begin.
3. MYTH: Z visa applicants (current undocumented) do not have to pay fines.
FACT: Z visa applicants will have to pay a $1,000 fine for heads of households and an additional $500 fine for each dependent (spouses and children). There will also be a processing fee of up to $1,500 and a $500 state impact assistance fee. The $1,000 is not the cost of the visa, but rather a fine for having broken the law. The processing fee will take care of the costs of the visa. The fines and fees are not the only hurdle – applicants must be employed, pass background checks, pay processing fees, and agree to meet accelerated English and civics requirements to get their Z visas. FACT: A Z visa holder wishing to remain in the country under their Z visa indefinitely would still have to renew their visa every four years. Renewing the Z visa means more processing fees (again, up to $1,500 each time). The financial liability for Z visa holders starts to add up very quickly if holders choose to remain in this status instead of pursuing Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) status.
4. MYTH: DHS only has only one day to complete background checks.
FACT: Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) status is a multi-step process that includes thorough background checks with no guarantees. It can be broken down into three parts: probationary period, Z status, and LPR.
1. Probationary Period. The undocumented worker comes out of the shadows to acknowledge they have broken the law. In order to obtain probationary status, they must show they are employed and pass a preliminary background check. There is a provision in the bill that says DHS has one day to find a “disqualifying factor,” but that is not the end of the process. That is a very short term way of ensuring that if someone comes out of the shadows and admits their illegality, they will not be deported while the process is ongoing and can continue working while the full background check is completed. At any time if something pops up, the applicant becomes deportable, and will never have a chance at Z status and certainly not LPR status.
2. Z Status. If they have passed the hurdles above, the undocumented worker is considered for Z status. At this stage they must pay their $1,000 fine ($1,000 is just for a head of household – there is an additional fine of $500 for each dependent) and processing fees; are subject to updated background checks to make sure they have not committed crimes while in probationary status; agree to meet English and civics standards as a condition of renewal; and show employment. There is no one day “Treatment of applications” in this process. One must complete or agree to all of the above before they are able to achieve Z status.
3. LPR Status. Here, there is another $4,000 fine and more processing fees. More background checks are also conducted in order to make sure that the applicant has kept his or her record clean. The applicant will have had to have stayed employed and met the English and civics requirements. They will have to make an application from their home country, go to the back of the line, and demonstrate merit under the new green card points system. Then, and only then, will the undocumented worker obtain a green card.
5. MYTH: A Rasmussen poll shows Americans support an enforcement-only approach.
FACT: The plan proposed in Rasmussen’s poll does not include many of the components included in the actual plan. Rasmussen asked respondents: “A different proposal has been made that also includes a fence along the Mexican border, more border patrol agents, strict penalties on anyone who hires illegal aliens. This proposal, however, would also offer illegal aliens a path to citizenship if they pay back taxes and other fines. Would you favor or oppose this proposal?” FACT: The process is much more onerous than the text of Rasmussen's question suggests. In order to have an opportunity for citizenship, undocumented workers will have to pay a total of $5,000 in fines, pass multiple background checks, complete accelerated English and civics requirements, go back home to apply in their home country, demonstrate merit in the new merit-based green card system, AND go to the back of the line behind those who applied lawfully. FACT: A recent bi-partisan poll conducted by The Tarrance Group (R) and Lake Research (D) that did include more components of the plan found 75 percent of American voters said they would favor a plan that: provides resources to greatly increase border security; imposes much tougher penalties on employers who hire illegal workers; allows additional foreign workers to come to the U.S. to work for a temporary period; creates a system in which illegal immigrants could come forward and register, pay a fine, and receive a temporary work permit; and provides these temporary workers with a multi-year path to earned citizenship, if they get to the end of the line and meet certain requirements like living crime free, learning English, and paying taxes. Only 17 percent opposed this plan.
6. MYTH: The bill will impose a huge new tax on businesses that follow the law.
FACT: Companies are held liable if their contractors and subcontractors hire undocumented workers. However, the Department of Homeland Security will create systems to help ensure these burdens can be met by employers who want to follow the law through the Employment Eligibility Verification System (EEVS) and other procedures. FACT: This bill seeks to help employers verify the status of workers. Enforcement of the paperwork fines will be targeted against those employers trying to avoid the law and hire illegal workers. The law includes a provision for the Secretary of Homeland Security to send a pre-penalty notice where he believes there may be a violation, and the employer can avoid a penalty by showing mitigating circumstances (e.g., good faith compliance). FACT: This bill does not seek to put the sole responsibility for legal hiring practices on the government OR the private sector. The bill is designed to have participation from the business community so the government can easily determine which employers are knowingly violating the law.
7. MYTH: The bill does not crack down on employers who violate the law.
FACT: In the bill, fines for hiring an illegal worker are $5,000 maximum per illegal worker for the first offense, $10,000 maximum per illegal worker for the second, and $25,000 maximum per illegal worker for the third.
商務英語綜合輔導：Wow factor叫好率
Jo: This is Real English from BBC Learning English. I’m Jo.
Jean: And I’m Jean.
Jo: Today we’re going to look at words and phrases that have recently become part of the English language.
Jean: 在我們的《地道英語》節目當中，我們會帶領大家一起來學習和熟悉一些近代英式英語里新出現的詞匯和新說法。.
Jo: Today’s expression is ‘wow factor’. That’s two words – wow, W.O.W. and factor, F.A.C.T.O.R. Wow factor.
Jean: Wow factor. 這個詞組怎么講？
Jo: The wow factor is something that makes you pleasantly surprised, makes you say ‘wow!’ . You could use it for anything from a car to an advert on television.
Jean: 聽上去wow factor這個說法可以用來形容任何讓人發出驚艷感嘆的東西，那你能給我們舉個例子嗎？
Jo: Of course. You might say ‘His new film wasn’t a big success. It didn’t have the wow factor.’
Jean: 那除了說電影，還可以用它形容別的東西嗎？
Jo: Absolutely. You might use it for a good television advert. You could say ‘Toyota’s latest ad uses the wow factor to attract customers.’
Insert 錄音片斷
A: What did you think of the film Alexander?
B: Well, I preferred Gladiator and Troy. Alexander lacked a bit of the wow factor for me.
Jo: Have you ever been to New York, Jean?
Jean: No Jo, why?
Jo: It really has the wow factor. As soon as you arrive, you have to say ‘Wow!’ .
Jean: Really?
Rival Palestinian Factions Meet in Cairo to Heal Rift
Rival Palestinian Factions Meet in Cairo to Heal Rift
By Edward Yeranian
Cairo
26 February 2009
Download MP3 Audio
Rival Palestinian factions Fatah and Hamas are holding talks aimed at healing their divisions and creating a new unity government. Delegations from the two factions met at the Cairo office of Egypt's intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, who has been leading mediation efforts.
Fatah's Ahmed Qurei (l) and Hamas' Mussa Abu Marzug speak during their meeting in Cairo, 26 Feb 2009
The rivals are hoping to bury the hatchet, after months of bitter feuding, as Suleiman brings them face-to-face to iron out long-standing differences.
The ultimate goal of reconciliation talks between the main Fatah and Hamas factions is to agree on a national unity government acceptable to the international community. Most international donors are unwilling to help rebuild the war-torn Gaza Strip, so long as Hamas controls the territory.
General Suleiman opened the meeting with tough words, warning the Palestinians that the time has come to end their feud and come together.
He says that success is the only option and a big step has already been taken to end divisions. The issue, he says, is neither difficult nor impossible. Palestinians must use their free will, and act, he argues, to achieve national goals, rather than being pawns in regional power games. You, he warned them, are responsible for a people ... and it is their right to live in peace, security, and prosperity.
At stake are billions of dollars of reconstruction money that are expected to be pledged at a Gaza donors' meeting Sunday in Egypt's Sinai resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh.
Twelve Palestinian factions, including Fatah and Hamas, are attending the reconciliation talks. Fatah and Hamas have been at each others' throats, since Hamas seized power in Gaza in June of 2007.
Gaza's Hamas leader, Mahmoud Zahar, told participants at the talks that both sides had agreed to take steps, including the release of prisoners, to improve the atmosphere between them.
Both sides, he says, have agreed to respect a truce in the media, as they begin a national dialogue, today, and have pledged to stop all arrests and free all prisoners being held, to improve the atmosphere.
Zahar told journalists that Fatah had released 80 Hamas members it was holding on the West Bank, but is still holding 300 others. Hamas reportedly freed an undisclosed number of Fatah members it was holding under house arrest in Gaza.
The top Fatah leader in the Palestinian parliament, Azzam al-Ahmed, told the conference that both sides had a "real desire" to settle their disputes.
He admits that there were excesses on both sides in Gaza and on the West Bank, and he says that the matter should be put to rest so that no outside party can exploit our divisions ... We need to address these problems, once and for all, he insists, to restore unity and cohesion in the Palestinian camp.
Egyptian officials stressed that reconciliation talks are focusing on forming an interim Palestinian government, as well as holding presidential and parliamentary elections, and restructuring of Palestinian security forces to suit both sides.
The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire Trial
It was a warm spring Saturday in New York City， March 25， 1911. On the top three floors of the ten-story Asch Building just off of Washington Square， employees of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory began putting away their work as the 4：45 p.m. quitting time approached. Most of the several hundred Triangle Shirtwaist employees were teenage girls. Most were recent immigrants. Many spoke only a little English.
Just then somebody on the eighth floor shouted， "Fire！" Flames leapt from discarded rags between the first and second rows of cutting tables in the hundred-foot-by-hundred-foot floor. Triangle employee William Bernstein grabbed pails of water and vainly attempted to put the fire out. As a line of hanging patterns began to burn， cries of "fire" erupted from all over the floor. In the thickening smoke， as several men continued to fling water at the fire， the fire spread everywhere——to the tables， the wooden floor trim， the partitions， the ceiling. A shipping clerk dragged a hose in the stairwell into the rapidly heating room， but nothing came——no pressure. Terrified and screaming， girls climbed through streamed down the narrow fire escape and Washington Place stairway or jammed into the single passenger elevator.
Dinah Lifschitz， at her eighth-floor post， telephoned the tenth floor headquarters of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory： "I heard Mary Alter's voice on the other end. I told her there was a fire on the eighth floor， to tell Mr. Blanck." Lifschitz tried next to alert the workers on the ninth floor. She got no answer. "I can't get anyone！ I can't get anyone！"， she yelled. On the eighth floor， only Lifschitz and Samuel Bernstein remained in the gathering smoke and flames. Bernstein told Lifschitz to escape， while he attempted a daring dash through the blaze into the Greene Street staircase. He ran up to the ninth floor， but found the fire so intense he could not enter. He continued up to the tenth floor where he found panicked employees "running around like wildcats." Some employees had fled through the elevator， but now that it had stopped running the only escape route was to the roof on top of the Asch building. Assistant cashier Joseph Flecher looked down from the tenth floor roof to see "my girls， my pretty ones， going down through the air. They hit the sidewalk spread out and still."
Fifteen feet above the Asch building roof， Professor Frank Sommer was teaching his class at the New York University Law School when he saw dozens of hysterical Shirtwaist workers stumbling around on the roof below. Sommer and his students found ladders left by painters and placed them so as to allow the escaping employees to climb to the school roof. The last tenth-floor worker saved was an unconscious girl with smoldering hair who was dragged up the ladder. Of the approximately seventy workers on the tenth floor， all but one survived.
In the hell of the ninth-floor， 145 employees， mostly young women， would die. Those that acted quickly made it through the Greene Street stairs， climbed down a rickety fire escape before it collapsed， or squeezed into the small Washington Place elevators before they stopped running. The last person on the last elevator to leave the ninth floor was Katie Weiner， who grabbed a cable that ran through the elevator and swung in， landing on the heads of other girls. A few other girls survived by jumping into the elevator shaft， and landing on the roof of the elevator compartment as it made its final descent. The weight of the girls caused the car to sink to the bottom of the shaft， leaving it immobile. For those left on the ninth floor， forced to choose between an advancing inferno and jumping to the sidewalks below， many would jump. Others， according to survivor Ethel Monick， became "frozen with fear" and "never moved."
It took only eighteen minutes to bring the fire under control， and in ten minutes more it was practically "all over." Water soaked a pile of thirty or more bodies on the Greene Street sidewalk. Doctors pawed through heaps of humanity looking for signs of life. Police tried desperately to keep crowds of hysterical relatives from overrunning the disaster scene. Officers filled coffins and loaded them into patrol wagons and ambulances. The bodies were taken to a temporary morgue set up on a covered pier at the foot of East Twenty-sixth Street. Firemen searched the burned-out floors of the Asch building， hoping to find survivors. What they mostly found were， according to Chief Edward Croker， "bodies burned to bare bones， skeletons bending over sewing machines." Four hours after the fire， workers discovered a lone survivor trapped in rising water at the bottom of the elevator shaft.
Looking for Blame
Within two days after the fire， city officials began announcing preliminary conclusions concerning the tragic fire. Fire Marshal William Beers stated that the fire probably began when a lighted match was thrown into either waste near oil cans or into clippings under cutting table No. 2 on the Greene Street side of the eighth floor. Despite an announced policy of no smoking in the factory， Beers reported that fire investigators picked up many cigarette cases near the spot of the fires origin， and that many employees reported that smoking on the premises was commonplace. Fire Chief Edward Croker told the press that doors leading into the factory workplace appeared to be locked and that his men had to chop their way through doors to get at the fire.
Many pointed fingers at New York City's Building Department， blaming it for an inadequate inspection of the Triangle Shirtwaist factory. District Attorney Charles Whitman called for "an immediate and rigid" investigation to determine whether the Building Department "had complied with the law." Coroner Holtzhauser， sobbing after his inspection of the Asch Building， declared： "Only one little fire escape！ I shall proceed against the Building Department along with the others. They are as guilty as any." Defending the Department against charges he called "outrageously unfair，" Borough President George McAneny said the building met standards when plans were filed for it eleven years earlier， and that the Department was seriously understaffed and underfunded and rarely had time to look at buildings except those being constructed.
Calls for justice continued to grow. Rev. Charles Slattery， rector of a church a few blocks from the fire scene， told his congregation that "It will perhaps be discovered that someone was too eager to make money out of human energy to provide the proper safeguards." At an emotional protest meeting on Twenty-Second Street four days after the fire， relatives of the dead broke into hysterical cries of despair. People began fainting， and over fifty persons were treated. The editor of a socialist paper told the crowd that "These deaths resulted because capital begrudged the price of another fire escape." At Cooper Union， a banner stretching across the platform said： "Locked doors， overcrowding， inadequate fire escapes……We demand for all women the right to protect themselves." Fire Chief Croker issued a statement urging "girls employed in lofts and factories to refuse to work when they find [potential escape] doors locked."
Much of the public outrage fell on Triangle Shirtwaist owners Isaac Harris and Max Blanck. Harris and Blanck were called "the shirtwaist kings，" operating the largest firm in the business. They sold their medium-quality popular garment to wholesalers for about $18 a dozen. They ran their factory by hiring machine operators and allocating to each about six sewing machines from among the 240 machines on the ninth floor. The operators hired young girls and women， usually immigrants， who he would then instruct in the art of shirtwaist-making. The girls earned whatever the machine operator chose to pay them.
Overworked and underpaid， garment workers struck Triangle in the fall of 1909. Management responded by hiring prostitutes to "strike women" and thugs and plainclothes detectives "to hustle them off to court on flimsy pretexts，" according to an article in Survey magazine. The strike soon spread to other shirtwaist manufacturers. By Christmas， 723 employees had been arrested， but the public largely sided with labor. After thirteen weeks， the strike ended with new contracts establishing a 52-hour maximum work week and wage increases of 12 to 15%.
Two weeks after the fire， a grand jury indicted Triangle Shirtwaist owners Isaac Harris and Max Blanck on charges of manslaughter.
The Trial
The trial of Harris and Blanck began on December 4， 1911 in the courtroom of Judge Thomas Crain. Harris and Blanck were defended by a giant of the New York legal establishment， forty-one-year-old Max D. Steuer. Heading up the prosecution team was Assistant District Attorney Charles S. Bostwick.
Crowds of angry relatives of victims filled the courtroom building. When Harris and Blanck exited from a courtroom elevator on the second day of the trial they were met by women shrieking， "Murderers！ Murderers！" and "Give us back our children！" Extra police were called in to prevent a reoccurrence of the incident.
In his opening statement， Charles Bostwick told jurors that he would prove through witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses that the ninth floor door that might have been an escape route for victims was locked at the time of the fire. More particularly， he said he would prove that the locked door caused the death of Margaret Schwartz， one of the 146 workers killed on March 25.
Bostwick produced 103 witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses， many of them young Triangle employees dressed in their Sunday best. Through his witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses Bostwick tried to establish that the fire quickly cut off escape through the Greene Street door， causing the panicked workers to turn to the Washington Place door——a door the prosecution contended was locked. More than a dozen prosecution witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses testified that they tried the door and were unable to open it. Katie Weiner told jurors， "I pushed it toward myself and I couldn't open it and then I pushed it outward and it wouldn't go. I was crying， 'Girls， help me！' Other witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses testified that Blanck and Harris kept the door locked to prevent employees from pilfering shirtwaists. （On the stand， Harris admitted to an almost obsessive concern with employee theft even though he conceded that the total value of goods taken over the years was under $25）。
Bostwick used the testimony of Kate Gartman and Kate Alterman to prove that the locked door caused the death of Margaret Schwartz. Both had emerged with Schwartz from a ninth-floor dressing room to find the floor in flames. Alterman offered compelling testimony of concerning Schwartz's death：
I wanted to go up Greene street side， but the whole door was in flames， so I went in hid myself in the toilet rooms and bent my face over the sink， and then ran to the Washington side elevator， but there was， a. big crowd and I couldn't pass through there. I noticed some one， a whole crowd around the door， and I saw the Bernstein， the manager's brother trying to open the door， and there was Margaret near him. Bernstein tried the door， he couldn't open it and then Margaret began to open the door. I take her on one side I pushed her on the side and I said， "Wait， I will open that door." I tried， pulled the handle in and out， all ways——and I couldn't open it. She pushed me on the other side， got hold of the handle and then she tried. And then I saw her bending down on her knees， and her hair was loose， and the trail of her dress was a little far from her， and then a big smoke came and I couldn't see. I just know it was Margaret， and I said， "Margaret，" and she didn't reply. I left Margaret， I turned my head on the side， and I noticed the trail of her dress and the ends of her hair begin to burn.
In his cross-examination of Alterman， Max Steuer settled on an unusual approach. He asked Alterman to repeat he account of Margaret Schwartz's death again and again. Each time， the words Alterman used were very similar， but not identical. Steuer hoped that the repetition of phrases （e.g.， "curtain of fire，" a desperate man running around "like a wildcat"） would suggest to the jury that the witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witness had been coached by the defense. In redirect， Bostwick asked his witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witness why she used similar language each time she was asked to describe Schwartz's death. Alterman replied， "Because he asked me the very same story over and over， and I tried to tell him the same thing， because he asked me the same thing over and over." Yet， to many observers， Steuer had succeeded in damaging Alterman's credibility without ever directly attacking it.
The defense presented witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses designed to show that the ninth floor deaths resulted from fire blocking the Washington Place stairwell， even though the door was actually open. Various salesmen， shipping clerks， watchmen， painters， and other building engineers told of their passage through the disputed ninth floor door——though， of course， none had attempted to exit through the door at the time of the fire. Louis Brown said a key was "all the time in the lock." Ida Mittleman said a key was attached to the door by tape "or something." Defense witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witness May Levantini testified that a key to the lock hung from a piece of string. Levantini was the prosecution's key witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witness， telling jurors that she turned the key in the door and opened it only to find "flames and smoke" that made her "turn in and run to the elevators."
Bostwick contended Levantini "lied on the stand." He said numerous witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses described going down the stairwell that Levantini said she saw in flames， and all that went down made it out untouched.
After presenting 52 witness target=_blank class=infotextkey>witnesses， the defense rested.
On December 27， Judge Crain read to the jury the text of Article 6， Section 80， of New York's Labor Law： "All doors leading in or to any such factory shall be so constructed as to open outwardly where practicable， and shall not be locked， bolted， or fastened during working hours." Crain told the jury that in order to return a verdict of guilty they must first find that door was locked during the fire——and that the defendants knew or should have known it was locked. The judge also told the jury that they must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the locked door caused the death of Margaret Schwartz.
After deliberating for just under two hours， the jury returned a verdict of not guilty. After the verdict， one juror， Victor Steinman declared， "I believed that the door was locked at the time of the fire， but we couldn't find them guilty unless we believed they knew the door was locked."
Surrounded by five policemen， Blanck and Harris hurried through the judge's private exit to Leonard Street. Those in the crowd that saw the men yelled， "Justice！ Where is justice！" The defendants ran to the nearest subway station， the crowd in pursuit.
In March 1912， Bostwick attempted to prosecute Blanck and Harris again， this time for the manslaughter death of another fire victim， Jake Kline. However， Judge Samuel Seabury instructed the jury that the men were being "tried for the same offense， and under our Constitution and laws， this cannot be done." He told the jury to "find a verdict for the defendants."
Three years after the fire， on March 11， 1914， twenty-three individual civil suits against the owner of the Asch Building were settled. The average recovery was $75 per life lost.
The public outrage over the horrific loss of life at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory led to the creation of a nine-member Factory Investigating Commission. The Commission undertook a thorough examination of safety and working conditions in New York factories. The Commission's recommendations led to what is called "the golden era in remedial factory legislation." During the period 1911 to 1914， thirty-six new laws reforming the state labor code were enacted. One member of the Commission was Frances Perkins， who later would become Secretary of Labor in the Roosevelt Administration. Recalling the impact of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire years later， Perkins said：
Out of that terrible episode came a self-examination of stricken conscience in which the people of this state saw for the first time the individual worth and value of each of those 146 people who fell or were burned in that great fire……We all felt that we had been wrong， that something was wrong with that building which we had accepted or the tragedy never would have happened. Moved by this sense of stricken guilt， we banded ourselves together to find a way by law to prevent this kind of disaster……It was the beginning of a new and important drive to bring the humanities to the life of the brothers and sisters we all had in the working groups of these United States.
de facto corporation
de facto corporation：地下工廠，又稱「事實上公司」（corporation de facto），de facto系拉丁文，意謂〞雖法律上站不住，但事實上卻為人所承認〞。corporation de facto或factory de facto即指未領有政府發給的合法執照，便開始營業或開工生產的公司或工廠。該公司或工廠。該公司或工廠雖未合法登記成立，但其法律行為并非無效，例如其負責人與他人簽訂契約后，不得以該公司或工廠未經政府許可成立而拒絕履約。
de facto corporation
n. a company which operates as if it were a corporation although it has not completed the legal steps to become incorporated （has not filed its articles， for example） or has been dissolved or suspended but continues to function. The court temporarily treats the corporation as if it were legal in order to avoid unfairness to people who thought the corporation was legal.
See also： de facto de jure ultra vires
Place this dictionary on your site
商務英語綜合輔導：Visiting A Factory(4)
Substitution Drills
1 A: Let us know when you’re free. We’ll arrange the tour for you.
Would you please tell me your schedule so that we could arrange the visit for you?
Please tell us the time that suits you for us to set up the visit. B: Thank you. I’ll give you a call this afternoon to set the time.
Let me see. I’m quite free Friday afternoon. Does that suit you?
Tuesday next week would be best for me, if that’s possible.
告訴我們您什么時候有空，我們好安排參觀。
請告訴我您的行程，以便我們為您安排參觀。
請告訴我們什么時候適合您來參觀。
謝謝，我今天下午會給您打電話來定時間的。
讓我想想，周五下午我有空。那個時間方便嗎？
如果可能的話，下周二對我最合適。
2 A:I’ll show you around and explain the operations as we go along.
guide you through the factory and ask our people to give you a demonstration of our latest models.
take you around the factory and show you our machines in operation.
B: That’ll be most helpful.
That’ll be very interesting.(www．com)
We’d like that very much.
我會帶您 到處看看，給您解釋我們的操作。
參觀工廠，叫我們的人給您演示我們的最新型號。
去工廠參觀，帶您去看我們運行中的機器。
那太有幫助了。
那會很有意思。
我們非常樂意。
3 A: How large is the plant?
is the machine shop
an area does this warehouse cover
B: It covers an area of 75,000 square meters.
Its total area is 4,000
It covers a total area of 5,000
工廠有多大？
車間
4 A: When was the plant set up?
When did you start the factory?
How long has your factory been established?
B: In the early 70s.
Some twenty years ago by merging two small-sized ones.
We’ve been operating for about ten years.
工廠 是什么時候建立的？
是什么時候開辦的？
建立多長時間了？
在70年代早期。
大約20年前由兩個小規模的工廠合并而成的。
我們已經運作大約10年了。
5 A: Do we need to put on the jackets?
Do we have to wear the helmets?
Must we wear the masks?
B: You’d better protect your clothes.
You should heads.
I’m afraid you must lungs.
我們 需要穿上上衣嗎？
一定要戴上頭盔嗎？
一定要戴上面具嗎？考試大
你 最好穿上，保護你的 衣服。
最好戴上，頭部。
恐怕必須戴上，肺部。
6 A: Is the production line fully automated?
computer-controlled?
mechanized?
B: Well, not fully automated.
Well, not fully computer-controlled.
Yes, fully mechanized.
生產線是全自動嗎？
全電腦控制嗎？
全部機械化嗎？
商務英語綜合輔導：Visiting A Factory(3)
Words and Expressions
administrative 行政的，管理的
gross 總的，毛的
warehouse 倉庫
square meter 平方米
anniversary 周年紀念
shift 輪班
raw material 原料
accessory 零件，配件
assembly line 裝配線
helmet 安全帽
monthly 每月的.(www．com)
output 產量，出產
reject 等外品，廢品
impressive / impression 給人印象深刻的/印象
performance (機器等)工作性能
edge 優勢，優越之處
automated 機械化的，自動的
concerned 有關的
literature 商品說明書之類的印刷宣傳品
merge (企業、團體等)合并
inspection 檢驗
comment 意見，評論
facility 設備考試大
section 部門，處，科，組
annual 每年的，年度的
capacity 生產量，生產力
A Specimen Letter
Dear Mr. / Ms.(www．com)
Mr. William Taylor, President of our Corporation, and Mr. James Rogers, Marketing Manager, would like to visit Beijing to continue our discussions on a joint venture. They plan to leave in the second half of April and stay in China about a week. Please let us know if the planned visit is convenient for you and what itinerary you would suggest.
If the time of their visit is agreeable, will you kindly request your Embassy here to issue the necessary visas?
Yours faithfully,
【英文閱讀理解】相關文章：
英文閱讀理解例題08-28
小升初英文閱讀理解題08-23
英文閱讀理解解題技巧07-23
英文閱讀理解文章六篇09-03
關于咖啡和茶的英文閱讀理解08-03
閱讀理解10-29
經典散文閱讀理解05-29
英語閱讀理解10-12
英語閱讀理解04-02