The humanities’ supposed lack of obvious vocational pathways is in fact a strength in an economy where flexibility and entrepreneurship are prized, while the perception of lower employability is not borne out by facts – 88% of Shape (social sciences, humanities and the arts for people and the economy) graduates were employed in 2017 (compared with 89% for Stem).

思考题：

It can be learned from the passage that _____

(A) humanities’ supposed low employability lacks factual support.

(B) Shape graduates enjoy the higher employability than Stem students.

(C) lack of obvious vocational pathways underlies humanities’ inferiority.

(D) humanities’ students are dearth of the flexibility and entrepreneurship

词汇突破：

The humanities’人文社会科学

vocational pathways 职业路径

in fact 实际上

a strength 优势

flexibility 灵活性

entrepreneurship 创业精神

prized 重视

perception 看法和认知

employability 就业潜力

borne out by facts 得到事实支持

STEM是科学(Science)，技术(Technology)，工程(Engineering)，数学(Mathematics)四门学科英文首字母的缩写

句子解析：

The humanities’ supposed lack of obvious vocational pathways is in fact a strength in an economy where flexibility and entrepreneurship are prized, while(然而) the perception of lower employability is not borne out by facts –88% of Shape (social sciences, humanities and the arts for people and the economy) graduates were employed in 2017 (compared with 89% for Stem).(同位语解释事实)

参考译文：人文学科的所谓短板——缺少明晰的职业前途——实际上在这个青睐灵活性和创业精神的经济中是优势，而且认为人文学科就业潜力较低的看法并未得到事实佐证——2017年，人文社科(社会科学、人文、艺术和经济)毕业生的就业率为88%(而理工科为89%)。

思考题解析：

It can be learned from the passage that _____

从文章中我们可以了解到：

(A) humanities’ supposed low employment rate lacks factual support

(A)人文学科假设的低就业率缺乏事实支持

对应原文：

the perception of lower employability is not borne out by facts

明确说了缺乏事实依据。

即使后面一个88%一个89%

人文社科的确实低一个点，但是原文说了不具备事实依据，也就意味着作者认定这个一个点的差别反而说了人文社科学生的就业率不算低。所以正确!

即使你再不爽，这个也是最 佳的了!

咱错了就认错就好。

(B) Shape graduates enjoy the higher employability than Stem students.

Shape毕业生享有比stem学生更高的就业能力。

说了shape的不低，但是没有说比stem 高啊!

错!而且数据也不支持啊!

(C) lack of obvious vocational pathways underlies humanities’ inferiority.

(C)缺乏明显的职业道路是人文学科劣势的根源。

The humanities’ supposed lack of obvious vocational pathways is in fact a strength

所谓的缺乏明显的职业道路实际是一个优势(strength)!

所以错!而且错的很明显!

(D) humanities’ students are dearth of the flexibility and entrepreneurship

人文学科学生缺乏灵活性和创业精神

这就是拼多多了!

错!没有的事，你就是没有好好切分句子!

文章来源背景和来源：

The Guardian view on the humanities: the importance of being rounded

卫报观点：关于人文学科：全面发展的重要性

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/26/the-guardian-view-on-the-humanities-the-importance-of-being-rounded

背景：近年来人文社科类专业越来越不受教育行政部门机构的待见，日趋处于下风。在一个经济前景堪忧的时代，人们更是大肆鼓吹“学好数理化，走遍天下都不怕”，强调理工类专业稳定而光明的职业前景。从2007年到2017年，英国大学中学习语言的学生人数下降了35%，而学习生物、数学和医学的人数分虽上涨了47%，26%和11%。但英国社会科学院强烈反对这种立场，并指出，虽然理工科能提供必要的技能，但从心理学到经济学的文科专业能帮助我们管理自己，管理经济，管理政府，把科学技术导向真正让人类幸福的方向。