诺奖评选大揭秘: “近朱者赤” | 经济学人

每天一篇经济学人 2021-10-14 21:21
01 选文来源 文末分享长难句解析
The Economist-20211009期「Graphic detail」Nobel prizes: Noblesse oblige


02 段落梳理 

【para1】直驱主题👉令人梦寐以求的诺奖总能激起人们对于新旧得主的比较与讨论。

【Para2】保密规则👉诺奖提名具有“保密50年”的规则:提名人及被提名人50年后方才揭晓。

【para3】评选现状👉1901-66年,诺奖评选更多采取的是私人委员会裁断而非综合专家意见的方式。背后支持方具有一定影响。

【Para4】提名门槛👉诺奖提名门槛不高:1901-66年间,每年各奖项平均有55个提名。

【Para5】提名率≠得奖率👉从历史数据看,评选者并不将提名率作为评判依据。

【Para6】提奖后辈👉受已往诺奖得主提名的候选人更受评选者青睐,得奖几率更大。

【Para7】人为干预👉理论上,这种不平衡应反映出相应候选人实力更强。实际确有一位诺奖得主提高候选人入选可能。

【para8-9】 举例证明(爱因斯坦的提名)

  -Para8 数据支撑👉爱因斯坦提名的11位候选人均摘得诺奖桂冠,说明他的支持起到了关键作用。

  -Para9 举例说明👉斯特恩和泡利在经过诸多次提名后,受爱因斯坦支持,成功获得诺奖。


03 原文阅读 518 words

Nobel prizes: Noblesse oblige

Nobel laureates have had extra sway over who gets to join their club


【para1】THE NOBEL prizes, whose winners are announced this month (see Science), may be the world’s most coveted awards. As soon as a new crop of laureates is named, critics start comparing the victors’ achievements with those of previous winners, reigniting debates over past snubs.


【para2】A full account of why, say, Stephen Hawking was passed over will have to wait until 2068: the Nobel Foundation’s rules prevent disclosure about the selection process for 50 years. But once this statute of limitations ends, the foundation reveals who offered nominations, and whom they endorsed. Its data start in 1901 and end in 1953 for medicine; 1966 for physics, chemistry and literature; and 1967 for peace. (The economics prize was first awarded in 1969.)


【para3】Nomination lists do not explain omissions like Leo Tolstoy (who got 19 nominations) or Mahatma Gandhi (who got 12). But they do show that in 1901-66, Nobel voters handed out awards more in the style of a private members’ club than of a survey of expert opinion. Whereas candidates with lots of nominations often fell short, those with the right backers—like Albert Einstein or other laureates—fared better.

【para4】The bar to a Nobel nomination is low. For the peace prize, public officials, jurists and the like submit names to a committee, chosen by Norway’s parliament, that picks the winner. For the others, Swedish academies solicit names from thousands of people, mostly professors, and hold a vote for the laureate. On average, 55 nominations per year were filed for each prize in 1901-66.

【para5】Historically, voters paid little heed to consensus among nominators. In literature and medicine, the candidate with the most nominations won just 11% and 12% of the time; in peace and chemistry, the rates were 23% and 26%. Only in physics, at 42%, did nomination leaders have a big advantage. In 1956 Ramón Menéndez Pidal, a linguist and historian, got 60% of nominations for the literature prize, but still lost.

【para6】However, voters did make one group of nominators happy: current and future laureates. Candidates put forward by past victors went on to win at some point in the future 40% more often than did those whose nominators never won a Nobel.(文末分享解析) People whose nominators became laureates later on also won unusually often. This implies that being accomplished enough to merit future Nobel consideration was sufficient to gain extra influence over voters.

【para7】In theory, this imbalance could simply reflect laureates nominating stronger candidates. However, at least one Nobel winner seems to have boosted his nominees’ chances, rather than merely naming superstars who would have won anyway.

【para8】According to the Nobel Foundation’s online archive, all 11 of Einstein’s nominees won a prize. Some were already famous, like Max Planck; others, like Walther Bothe, were lesser-known. In two cases, his support seems to have been decisive.

【para9】In 1940 Einstein supported Otto Stern, a physicist who had already had 60 nominations. Stern won the next time the prize was given. Similarly, Wolfgang Pauli, whose “exclusion principle” is central to quantum mechanics, had received 20 nominations before Einstein backed him in 1945. He got his prize that same year.


✨今日【精读课】长句解析分享:

【para6】Candidates put forward by past victors went on to win at some point in the future 40% more often than did those whose nominators never won a Nobel

💡本句例证由已往得主提名的候选人更容易在将来得奖。句子涉及到概率对比,用到比较级,主干可归结为【A went on to win 40% more often than did B】,助动词did =went on to win👉相比B, A之后获奖的概率会高出40%。

👩‍🏫此处涉及到一个#比较状语从句的倒装#语法点:主从复合句中,than或as引导的比较状语从句和方式状语从句,如果谓语动词省略或表语省略,且是两个句子的主语相比较时,常用倒装,尤其在从句过长时。这种倒装也可以看作是为了强调主语,常出现在文学性较强的文体中。

🌰 She works as hard as does anyone else in the factory.她像工厂里其他人一样努力工作。

🌰 John will give you more than will Jack. 约翰给你的将比杰克多。

⭐️紫色过去分词结构put forward by~做后置定语限定修饰【Candidates👉被以往得主提名的候选人

⭐️绿色介词结构  at some point in the future充当【went on to win】的时间状语👉在将来某一时候获奖

⭐️红色whose定从限定修饰【those👉其提名者从未获得过诺贝尔奖

句子大意:与未获诺奖者推荐的人选相比,已往得主提名的候选人将多40%的概率在将来获得诺贝尔奖。



全文注释 / 全文翻译 / 脉络梳理

长难句解析 / 翻译训练 / 答疑互动

可了解阅读训练营
适合考研/雅思/托福/专四/专八/CATTI/六级
或提升英语阅读能力、开拓眼界

培养逻辑思维、持续性阅读训练

欢迎了解精读训练营



--END-

了解阅读训练营戳大图

(已进任一读者群的无需重复进)

推荐阅读