Book-3-Unit-5-Appendix-2-Understanding-the-Text-答案

Book3—Unit1—Appendix21UnderstandingtheTextUnit5WhenHelpHurtsStep1:FocusonMeaning1.1Skimming:Readthepassagequickly.Payspecialattentiontothefirstseveralsentencesofeachparagraph.Then,dividethepassageintothreepartsandcompletethefollowingchart.PartIMainIdeaPara.1to3Aterribletrafficaccidenthappenedandoneofthefriendswasseriouslyinjured.Para.4to9Thetwofriendswereincourtforthreetimes.Para.10Theimplicationbroughtbythecase.1.2Scanning:Readparagraphs1through3andanswerthefollowingquestionsorallywithoutreferringtothetext.1.WhatwastherelationshipbetweenLisaTortiandAlexandraVanHornin2003?Theywereclosepals.2.WhatdidtheydotocelebrateHalloween,2003?Theywenttoalocalclubtodanceanddrinkbeer.3.Whendidtheyleavetheclubthatnight?Didtheytakethesamecar?Theyleftat1:30am.Theydidn’ttakethesamecar.4.Whathappenedaftertheylefttheclub?TheleadcarknockedalightpoleoverandVanHorncouldn’tgetout.5.HowdidTortitrytohelpVanHorn?Whatwastheresult?TortiyankedopenthedoorandpulledVanHornout.TheresultwasthatVanHornwasparalyzedbelowthemiddleofherchest.1.3Skimming:Readparagraphs4through9anddiscussthefollowingconceptswithyourpartneraccordingtothecuewordsgivenbelow.Book3—Unit1—Appendix22TheOpinionofVanHornandHerAttorneyTheOpinionofTortiandHerAttorneyCourt’sDecisionTheTrialCourt(4-5)1.Acrazysituation2.Tortiwas“outofcontrol”3.Tortishouldn’thavemovedVanHorn1.Tortiwasn’tresponsible2.TortiwasprotectedbyGoodSamaritanstatute.1.Tortiwasn’tliable2.Thecaseshouldbedismissed.TheAppealsCourt(6-8)1.Tortiwasnotsupplyingurgentmedicalcare2.sheactednegligently.1.Tortiwasabravesoul2.It’sunfairthatsuchabravesoulwasnotprotectedbylaw.Torti’shelpingVanHornwasnotemergencymedicalcare;Thecaseshouldn’thavebeendismissed.TheSupremeCourt(9)Theappealscourtwasright;SendingthecasebacktothetrialcourttodecidewhetherTortiactedwith“duecare”.FinalResultTortisettledthecaseoutofcourtfora“significantamount”.1.4Readandthink:Readthelastparagraphandreflectontheentiretext.Discussthefollowingquestionswithyourpartner.1.Whatcanyouinferfromthelastparagraph?2.IfyouwereTorti,wouldyouhavedraggedVanHornoutofthecarthatnight?Whyorwhynot?3.WhydoyouthinkVanHornfiledalawsuitagainstherclosefriend?IfyouwereVanHorn,wouldyoufilealawsuitaswell?Whyorwhynot?4.DoyouthinkTortiwasactingwith“duecare”andprovidingemergencymedicalcarewhenrescuingVanHorn?Wastheresultofthecasefairtobothofthem?Step2:FocusonLanguage2.1Sentencetranslation*Astheleadcarwoundaroundacurve,itsdriverlostcontrol,andthevehicleplowedintoalightpoleat45mph,knockingitover.(para.1)领头的英菲尼迪轿车在拐弯时，司机失控，汽车以时速四十五英里的速度撞到了路边的电灯杆上。*Mostpeoplewon'tsueapersonwhotriedtohelpthemunlessit'sacrazyBook3—Unit1—Appendix23situation,saysRobertHutchinson,VanHorn'sattorney.(para.4)范·霍恩的律师罗伯特·哈钦森说：“大多数人不会起诉想帮助自己的人，除非情况非比寻常。”*Inanyevent,everyoneknowsyoushouldn'tmoveapersonwithapotentialneckorbackinjury,Hutchinsonsays.Theclaim?Negligence.(para.4)不管怎样，“人人都知道不应该移动一个脖子或后背可能已受伤的人”，哈钦森说。起诉的理由是什么呢？过失伤害。*Indeed,theGoodSamaritanstatuteintheCaliforniaHealthandSafetyCodestatesthatanyonewhoprovidescareingoodfaithtoanotherpersoninanemergencycan'tbeliableforcivildamages.(para.5)确实，在加利福尼亚州健康与安全问题相关法律中，见义勇为条例规定，在紧急情况下，凡出于善意对他人施以救护者，不应承担任何民事赔偿责任。*Andinaccordancewiththecommonlaw—orlawbasedonprecedentssetbysimilarcasesinthepast—GoodSamaritandoctrineprotectsonlythosewhodonotactnegligentlyunderthecircumstances.(para.6)根据普通法——即根据以往类似案件的判例所设定的法律——见义勇为法只保护在紧急情况下实施救助且无过失者。*Thecommonwisdomontheissuewasclear:Apersonwhohasnoobligationtohelpanotherandwhogoesaboveandbeyondtoprovideassistancetosomeoneinanemergencymustactwithduecare.(para.7)以往类似案件反映出了清晰的共识：无义务帮助他人、但却在紧急情况下挺身而出施以援手的人，施救时必须做到“合理注意”。*Intheend,theappealscourtdecidedthatremovingVanHornfromthecarwasnotemergencymedicalcare,meaningtheGoodSamaritanstatutedidn'tapplytoTortiandthatthecaseshouldnothavebeendismissed.(para.8)最终，上诉法院认定，被告托蒂将范·霍恩从车内拽出的行为不属于“紧急医疗救护”，即见义勇为法不适用于托蒂，初审法院不应驳回此案。*Surelywewanttoencourageaveragecitizenstohelponeanotherbyprovidingthemprotection,Steinbergexplains,insteadofmakingthemhesitateinanemergencybecausethey'reafraidthey'llgetsued.It'sstillasocialissue:Arewegoingtohelp,orarewenot?(para.10)“我们当然希望为普通公民提供法律保护，借此鼓励他们相互帮助。”斯坦伯格解释说，“而不是使人们由于害怕吃官司而在紧急关头犹豫不决。我们到底该不该见义勇为？这仍是个社会问题。”2.2StructuralAnalysis1.Theyalllefttheclubat1:30a.m.,severalofthempilingintoanInfiniti.(para.1)Book3—Unit1—Appendix24*SeveralofthempilingintoanInfinitiisa(n)independentnominativestructure.*Translate.Theconditionbeingfavorable(条件有利的话),hemaysucceed.Hewaslyingonthegrass,hishandscrossedunderhishead(双手交叉枕在头下).2.…,Mostpeoplewon'tsueapersonwhotriedtohelpthemunlessit'sacrazysituation…(para4)*Thephrasewon’t…unless…means除非......，不会......inChinese.*Createtwomoresentencesusingthesamestructure.Iwon’ttalktoyouunlessyouapologizetomefirst.Mostpeoplewon’thelpastrangerunlessit’sanunusualsituation.3.Theclaim?Negligence.(para.4)*Theabovesentenceisaellipticalsentenceanditsfunctionistoavoidrepetition.*Rewritethefollowingsentencesusingellipses.Deletewordsthatareunnecessaryandavoidrepetition.Let'sdothedishes.I’llwashthedishesandyou’lldrythedishes.Let’sdothedishes.I’llwashthemandyou’lldrythem.