For over a decade the most common policy advice given to developing countries by international development institutions has been to copy the export-oriented path of the newly industrializing countries, the celebrated NICs. These economies-Brazil, Hong Kong, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan-burst into the world manufacturing market in the late 1960s and the 1970s; by 1978 these six economies, along with India, enjoyed unequaled growth rates for gross national product and for exports, with exports accounting for 70 percent of the developing world's manufactured exports. It was, therefore, not surprising that dozens of other countries attempted to follow their model, yet no countries-with the possible exceptions of Malaysia and Thailand-have even approached their success. In "No More NICs," Robin Broad and John Cavanagh search for the reasons behind these failures, identifying far-reaching changes in the global economy-from synthetic substitutes for commodity exports to unsustainable levels of foreign debt-as responsible for a glut economy offering little room for new entrants. Despite these changes, the authors maintain, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund-the foremost international development institutions-have continued to promote the NIC path as the way for heavily indebted developing countries to proceed. And yet the futility of this approach should, according to the authors, be all too apparent so many years into a period of reduced growth in world markets.
Given the information in the passage, which of the following is a true statement about the NIC's?
Their economic success among developing countries has been exceeded only by the successes of Malaysia and Thailand.
By 1978 they produced 70 percent of the world's manufactured exports.
In the late 1970's, their growth rates for gross national product were among the highest in the world.
In recent years their development has been heavily subsidized by major international development institutions.
They received conflicting policy advice from international development institutions in the late 1960's and the 1970's.
此讲解的内容由AI生成,还未经人工审阅,仅供参考。
正确答案是 C。因为文章中指出,这六个经济体在 1960 年代末和 1970 年代的 GND(国民生产总值)增长率“无与伦比”,而 B 仅仅指出它们 1978 年占 70% 的世界制造业出口,而 A 混淆了 Malaysia 和 Thailand 和 NICs 之间的关系,D 说的是近年来的发展,而 E 则说的是 1960 年代末和 1970 年代得到的政策建议,而文中并没有提到这一点。
unequaled 无与伦比的
①unequaled adj无敌的 无比的
②注意:这种题很容易的错误:文章中压根就没有提到的内容+偷换概念(world 、developing world)
a什么问题 啊
同义改写unequaled无敌的=highest
unequaled 无与伦比的
by 1978 these six economies, along with India, enjoyed unequaled growth rates for gross national product and for exports,
B错在不是world's manufactured exports.而是 the developing world's manufactured exports.
approached their success不是A中的exceed the success
enjoyed unequaled(无敌的=highest) growth rates for gross national product and for exports
错选D, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund-the foremost international development institutions-have continued to promote the NIC path as the way for heavily indebted developing countries to proceed.这句话没理解好,promote是推销的意思,并没有subsidize资助的意思
B by 1978 these six economies, along with India, enjoyed unequaled growth rates for gross national product and for exports, with exports accounting for 70 percent of the developing world's manufactured exports. 应是developing world
C burst into the world manufacturing market in the late 1960s and the 1970s; by 1978 these six economies, along with India, enjoyed unequaled growth rates for gross national product. unequaled 无与伦比的
enjoyed unequaled growth rates for gross national product unequaled 无与伦比的 所以选c
burst into 可以等同于“世界最高水平”这个描述了???????
B应该改成developing word所以不正确