21世紀大學英語第四冊Unit6課文詳析（讀寫教程）

導語：EQ是一個人自我情緒管理以及管理他人情緒的能力指數，下面是一篇講述EQ因子的英語課文，歡迎大家來學習。

　　Nancy Gibbs

It turns out that a scientist can see the future by watching four-year-olds interact with a marshmallow. The researcher invites the children, one by one, into a plain room and begins the gentle torment. You can have this marshmallow right now, he says. But if you wait while I run an errand, you can have two marshmallows when I get back. And then he leaves.

Some children grab for the treat the minute he's out the door. Some last a few minutes before they give in. But others are determined to wait. They cover their eyes; they put their heads down; they sing to themselves; they try to play games or even fall asleep. When the researcher returns, he gives these children their hard-earned marshmallows. And then, science waits for them to grow up.

By the time the children reach high school, something remarkable has happened. A survey of the children's parents and teachers found that those who as four-year-olds had enough self-control to hold out for the second marshmallow generally grew up to be better adjusted, more popular, adventurous, confident and dependable teenagers. The children who gave in to temptation early on were more likely to be lonely, easily frustrated and stubborn. They could not endure stress and shied away from challenges. And when some of the students in the two groups took the Scholastic Aptitude Test, the kids who had held out longer scored an average of 210 points higher.

When we think of brilliance we see Einstein, deep-eyed, woolly haired, a thinking machine with skin and mismatched socks. High achievers, we imagine, were wired for greatness from birth. But then you have to wonder why, over time, natural talent seems to ignite in some people and dim in others. This is where the marshmallows come in. It seems that the ability to delay gratification is a master skill, a triumph of the reasoning brain over the impulsive one. It is a sign, in short, of emotional intelligence. And it doesn't show up on an IQ test.

For most of this century, scientists have worshipped the hardware of the brain and the software of the mind; the messy powers of the heart were left to the poets. But cognitive theory could simply not explain the questions we wonder about most: why some people just seem to have a gift for living well; why the smartest kid in the class will probably not end up the richest; why we like some people virtually on sight and distrust others; why some people remain upbeat in the face of troubles that would sink a less resilient soul. What qualities of the mind or spirit, in short, determine who succeeds?

The phrase "emotional intelligence" was coined by Yale psychologist Peter Salovey and the University of New Hampshire's John Mayer five years ago to describe qualities like understanding one's own feelings, empathy for the feelings of others and "the regulation of emotion in a way that enhances living." Their notion is about to bound into the national conversation, handily shortened to EQ, thanks to a new book, Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman. Goleman, a Harvard psychology Ph.D. and a New York Times science writer with a gift for making even the most difficult scientific theories digestible to lay readers, has brought together a decade's worth of behavioral research into how the mind processes feelings. His goal, he announces on the cover, is to redefine what it means to be smart. His thesis: when it comes to predicting people's success, brainpower as measured by IQ and standardized achievement tests may actually matter less than the qualities of mind once thought of as "character" before the word began to sound old-fashioned.

At first glance, there would seem to be little that's new here to any close reader of fortune cookies. There may be no less original idea than the notion that our hearts hold dominion over our heads. "I was so angry," we say, "I couldn't think straight." Neither is it surprising that "people skills" are useful, which amounts to saying, it's good to be nice. "It's so true it's trivial," says Dr. Paul McHugh, director of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. But if it were that simple, the book would not be quite so interesting or its implications so controversial.

This is no abstract investigation. Goleman is looking for antidotes to restore "civility to our streets and caring to our communal life." He sees practical applications everywhere for how companies should decide whom to hire, how couples can increase the odds that their marriages will last, how parents should raise their children and how schools should teach them. When street gangs substitute for families and schoolyard insults end in stabbings, when more than half of marriages end in divorce, when the majority of the children murdered in this country are killed by parents and stepparents, many of whom say they were trying to discipline the child for behavior like blocking the TV or crying too much, it suggests a demand for remedial emotional education.

And it is here the arguments will break out. Goleman's highly popularized conclusions, says McHugh, "will chill any veteran scholar of psychotherapy and any neuroscientist who worries about how his research may come to be applied." While many researchers in this relatively new field are glad to see emotional issues finally taken seriously, they fear that a notion as handy as EQ invites misuse. Goleman admits the danger of suggesting that you can assign a numerical value to a person's character as well as his intellect; Goleman never even uses the phrase EQ in his book. But he did somewhat reluctantly approve an "unscientific" EQ test in USA Today with choices like "I am aware of even subtle feelings as I have them," and "I can sense the pulse of a group or relationship and state unspoken feelings."

"You don't want to take an average of your emotional skill," argues Harvard psychology professor Jerome Kagan, a pioneer in child-development research. "That's what's wrong with the concept of intelligence for mental skills too. Some people handle anger well but can't handle fear. Some people can't take joy. So each emotion has to be viewed differently." EQ is not the opposite of IQ. Some people are blessed with a lot of both, some with little of either. What researchers have been trying to understand is how they complement each other; how one's ability to handle stress, for instance, affects the ability to concentrate and put intelligence to use. Among the ingredients for success, researchers now generally agree that IQ counts for about 20%; the rest depends on everything from class to luck to the neural pathways that have developed in the brain over millions of years of human evolution.

EQ

(abbr.)emotional quotient 情商

interact

vi. (with) act or have an effect on each other 相互作用;相互影響

marshmallow

n. soft sweet made from sugar and gelatine 果汁軟糖

torment

n. severe physical or mental suffering (肉體或精神上的)折磨，痛苦

vt. cause severe suffering to 折磨;使痛苦

errand

n. small job that requires a short journey, usu. for sb. else (短程的)差事，差使

hard-earned

a. gained with great difficulty or effort 辛苦掙來的

survey

n. investigation 調查

adventurous

a. eager for or fond of adventure 渴望冒險的，喜歡冒險的

dependable

a. that may be depended on 可信賴的，可靠的

scholastic

a. of schools and education 學校的;教育的;學業的

aptitude

n. natural ability or skill 天生的才能或技巧;天資

brilliance

n. the quality of being brilliant 光輝，輝煌;壯麗;(卓越的)才華，才智

woolly

a. 羊毛(制)的;產羊毛的;像羊毛的

mismatch

vt. match (people or things) wrongly or unsuitably 使錯配，配合不當

sock

n. short stocking covering the ankle and lower part of the leg 短襪

ignite

v. (cause to) catch fire, burn (使)著火，燃燒;發光

dim

v. (cause to) become dim (使)變暗淡;(使)變模糊;(使)失去光澤

impulsive

a. (of people and their behavior) marked by sudden action that is undertaken without careful thought (指人或人的行為)憑衝動的;易衝動的

messy

a. in a state of disorder; dirty: causing dirt or disorder 凌亂的;髒的;搞亂的;搞髒的

upbeat

a. optimistic or cheerful 樂觀的;快樂的

resilient

a. 1. 有彈性的，有回彈力的;能復原的

2. 有復原力的;富有活力的;適應性強的

empathy

n. ability to imagine and share another person's feelings, experience, etc. 同情;同感;共鳴

handily

ad. 靈巧地，熟練地;輕易地;近便地

digestible

a. that can be digested; relatively easy to understand 可消化的;可吸收的.;較易理解的

behavioral

a. of behavior 行為的

thesis

n. 1. statement or theory put forward and supported by argument 論題，命題;論點

2. long written essay submitted by a candidate for a university degree; dissertation 畢業論文;學位論文

standardize

vt. make(sth.)conform to a fixed standard, shape, quality, type, etc. 使(某事物)標準化;使合乎標準(或規格)

fortune

n. 1. large amount of money; wealth 大筆的錢;財

2. chance; luck 機會;運氣

3. person's destiny or future; fate 命運;前途

cookie

n. biscuit 餅乾

fortune cookie

(U.S.)thin biscuit, folded to hold a printed message (e.g.a proverb, prophecy or joke) served in Chinese restaurants (美)籤語餅(中國餐館的摺疊形小餅，內有紙條，上寫預測運氣的格言或幽默套語)

dominion

n. (over) rule; powerful authority; effective control 統治;管轄;支配;控制

straight

ad. clearly, logically 清晰地;有條理地

controversial

a. causing or likely to cause argument or disagreement 引起爭論的;有爭議的

abstract

a. existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or practical existence 抽象的

antidote

n. 解毒藥;(喻)矯正方法，對抗手段

civility

n. fact or act of showing politeness; act of being civilized 禮貌，客氣，謙恭

communal

a. 1. of or referring to a commune or a community 公共的;社群的，集體的

2. for the use of all; shared 公用的;共有的

odds

n. (pl.) probability or chance 可能性;機會

schoolyard

n. 校園;操場

stab

vt. pierce(sth.) or wound (sb.) with a pointed tool or weapon; push (a knife, etc.) into sb./sth. 戳(某物);刺(某人);用(刀等)刺(或戳、捅)某人(或某物)

stabbing

n. instance of stabbing or being stabbed 用利器傷人

stepparent

n. 繼父，後父;繼母，後母

remedy

n. 藥品;治療(法);補救辦法;糾正辦法

vt. 醫治;治療;補救;糾正

remedial

a. 補救的;糾正的;補習的

popularize

vt. 1. make (sth.) generally liked 使(某事物)被大家喜歡，使受大家歡迎

2. make (sth.) known or available to the general public, esp. by presenting it in an easily understandable form 使(某事物)眾所周知;使普及

chill

vt. 1. make cold 使變冷;使冷卻;使感到冷

2. discourage 使沮喪;使掃興

n. 寒冷;風寒;冷淡;沮喪;掃興

scholar

n. person who studies an academic subject deeply 學者

psychotherapy

n. treatment of mental disorders by psychological methods 精神療法;心理療法

neuroscientist

n. 神經系統科學家

handy

a. (of an object, tool, machine, etc.) easy to use; useful for some purpose 便於使用的;有用的

numerical

a. of, expressed in or representing numbers 數字的;用數字表示的;代表數字的

approve

vt. 1. have a positive opinion of 贊成;稱許

2. accept, permit or officially agree to 批准;允許;對…表示認可

neural

a. the nerves 神經的

pathway

n. way or track made for or by people walking 小路，小徑(= path)

one by one

separately; individually in order 一個一個地;依次地

right now

immediately; at this moment 立即;此刻

run an errand

carry messages or perform similar minor tasks 跑腿，辦事(如送信、買東西等)

hold out

refuse to give in 堅持;堅定不移;不屈服

early on

soon after the start of a past event 在初期;早先

shy away from

avoid or move away from out of shyness, fear, etc. (由於羞怯或恐懼等)躲開，避開;迴避

over time

as time goes by 隨著時間過去

come in

have a part to play in sth. 在某事中起作用

show up

1. become visible; become increasingly vivid or obvious 顯現出來;變得更鮮明;變得更醒目

2. appear; arrive; be present; turn up 出現;來到;出席;露面

at/on sight

as soon as sb./sth. is seen 一見就

in the face of

1. in spite of 不顧

2. confronted by 面對;在…面前

when it comes to

1. when the subject is; on the subject of 談到;涉及

2. when dealing with 在處理…時

amount to

1. add up to; reach the total of 合計;共計

2. be equal to; be the equivalent of 等於;相當於

substitute for

serve as a substitute for, replace 代替

end in

have as a result or conclusion 以…為結果;以…告終

break out

start suddenly 突然發生;爆發

use

a particular purpose 使用

count for

be worth 值;(在數量、比例方面)佔

Nancy Gibbs

南希·吉布斯

Scholastic Aptitude Test

(U.S.) a test prepared and supervised by the College Entrance Examination Board to test the general intelligence and academic aptitude of a prospective applicant to a college (美)學習能力傾向測驗

Peter Salovey

彼得·薩洛韋

John Mayer

約翰·邁耶

Daniel Goleman

丹尼爾·戈爾曼

Paul McHugh

保羅·麥克休

Johns Hopkins University

約翰斯·霍普金斯大學

USA Today

《今日美國》(美國報紙名)

Jerome Kagan

傑羅姆·卡根