英国历史文化概况（英文版）_董晓波编_9787566305251

　　《展望全国高等院校英语专业系列精品教材：英国历史文化概况（英文版）》遵循“以人为本”的理念，从中国学生实际出发，从不同方面向读者介绍英国的历史与文化现象。《展望全国高等院校英语专业系列精品教材：英国历史文化概况（英文版）》以英国历史文化发展为线索，展现英国各阶段历史进程中的国家概况，既训练语言技能，也丰富相关知识。《展望全国高等院校英语专业系列精品教材：英国历史文化概况（英文版）》采用真实地道的语言材料，主要取材于国外报刊杂志以及相关历史文献资料，穿插图表、照片等真实的视觉材料，生动直观。无论对广大学生还是对英国历史文化感兴趣的其他学习者来说，《展望全国高等院校英语专业系列精品教材：英国历史文化概况（英文版）》都是一本了解英国、积累历史文化知识、开阔视野、启发思路的良好读物。

　　英语教学既是语言教学，也是文化教学。美国著名人类学家萨丕尔指出：“语言不能脱离文化而存在。”（Sapir，1921）语言是文化的载体，每个民族都有自己独特的风俗习惯和文化背景，人们总是根据自己的文化背景及语言习惯用自己固有的方式去理解别人所写的东西，对于英语专业的学生而言，不熟悉英美国家的社会文化背景知识，就会给跨文化交际造成很大的障碍。随着全球化时代的到来和改革开放的深入，我国国际间跨文化交流与合作日益增多，同时，各行各业对具有夯实外语知识技能和广博全球文化知识的人才的需求也日益迫切。2004年，国家教育部高等教育司公布的《大学英语课程教学要求》明确地把学生“文化意识”的培养列入到英语教学中，认为在英语教学中培养学生的文化意识与培养学生的语言意识、语言技能同等重要。我们认为，优秀合格的外语人才只有充分了解目标语言国家的历史文化，才能真正有效地掌握语言知识，提高语言能力，更加有效地将这门语言运用于实践。《英国历史文化概况》（英文版）是《美国历史文化概况》（英文版）（对外经济贸易大学出版社，2010年版）的姐妹篇，是将了解英国历史文化知识与学习英语语言技能很好地结合在一起，为高等学校英语专业学生编选的融文化与历史知识为一体的新型英语教材。
　　本书遵循“以人为本”的理念，从中国学生实际出发，从不同方面向读者介绍英国的历史与文化现象。本书以英国历史文化发展为线索，展现英国各阶段历史进程中的国家概况，既训练语言技能，也丰富相关知识。本书采用真实地道的语言材料，主要取材于国外报刊杂志以及相关历史文献资料，穿插图表、照片等真实的视觉材料，生动直观。无论对广大学生还是对英国历史文化感兴趣的其他学习者来说，本书都是一本了解英国、积累历史文化知识、开阔视野、启发思路的良好读物。通过本书的学习可以进一步增进中国学生对英国历史文化的了解，并透过历史的表象了解英国文化核心，拓宽中国学生的文化视野，帮助中国学生提高英语表达能力，进一步提高跨文化交际的能力。本书可以作为英语专业知识基础课——英国文化、英国历史方向的专业课教材，也可以作为高等院校非英语专业本科学生和研究生公选课教材或课外泛读教材，也可供历史学专业英国史方向和对英国问题饶有兴趣的学生及希望通过对英国历史与文化的学习来提高英语技能的读者使用。

　　Following the accession of the UK to European Economic Community （now the European Union） in 1972， the UK became bound by European law and more importantly， the principle of the supremacy of European Union law. According to this principle， which was outlined by the European Court of Justice in 1964 in the case of Costa v. ENEL， laws of member states that conflict with EU laws must be disapplied by member states' courts. The conflict between the principles of the primacy of EU law and of parliamentary supremacy was illustrated in the judgment in Thoburn v Sunderland City Council， which held that the European Communities Act 1972， the Act that initiated British involvement in the EU， could not be implicitly repealed simply by the passing of subsequent legislation inconsistent with European law. The court went further and suggested that the 1972 Act formed part of a category of special "constitutional statutes" that were not subject to implied repeal. This exception to the doctrine of implied repeal was something of a novelty， though the court stated that it remained open for Parliament to expressly repeal the Act. It is politically inconceivable at the present time that Parliament would do so， and constitutional lawyers have also questioned whether such a step would be as straightforward in its legal effects as it might seem. The Thoburn judgment was handed down only by the Divisional Court （part of the High Court）， which occupies a relatively low level in the legal system.
　　The House of Commons alone possesses the power to pass a motion of no confidence in the Government， which requires the Government either to resign or seek fresh elections （see below）. Such a motion does not require passage by the Lords， or Royal Assent.
　　Parliament traditionally also has the power to remove individual members of the government by impeachment （with the Commons initiating the impeachment and the Lords trying the case）， although this power has not been used since 1806. By the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 it has the power to remove individual judges from office for misconduct.
　　Additionally， Dicey has observed that the constitution of Belgium "comes very near to a written reproduction of the English constitution."
　　……

我要评论