Since the days of Aristotle, a search for universal principles has characterized the scientific enterprise. In some ways, this quest for commonalities defines science. Newton’s laws of motion and Darwinian evolution each bind a host of different phenomena into a single explicatory framework.

(46) In physics, one approach takes this impulse for unification to its extreme, and seeks a theory of everything — a single generative equation for all we see. It is becoming less clear, however, that such a theory would be a simplification, given the dimensions and universes that it might entail. Nonetheless, unification of sorts remains a major goal.

This tendency in the natural sciences has long been evident in the social sciences too. (47) Here, Darwinism seems to offer justification, for if all humans share common origins, it seems reasonable to suppose that cultural diversity could also be traced to more constrained beginnings. Just as the bewildering variety of human courtship rituals might all be considered forms of sexual selection, perhaps the world’s languages, music, social and religious customs and even history are governed by universal features. (48)To filter out what is unique from what is shared might enable us to understand how complex cultural behavior arose and what guides it in evolutionary or cognitive terms.

That, at least, is the hope. But a comparative study of linguistic traits published online today supplies a reality check. Russell Gray at the University of Auckland and his colleagues consider the evolution of grammars in the light of two previous attempts to find universality in language.

The most famous of these efforts was initiated by Noam Chomsky, who suggested that humans are born with an innate language—acquisition capacity that dictates a universal grammar. A few generative rules are then sufficient to unfold the entire fundamental structure of a language, which is why children can learn it so quickly.

(49) The second, by Joshua Greenberg, takes a more empirical approach to universality, identifying traits (particularly in word order) shared by many language which are considered to represent biases that result from cognitive constraints.

Gray and his colleagues have put them to the test by examining four family trees that between them represent more than 2,000 languages. (50)Chomsky’s grammar should show patterns of language change that are independent of the family tree or the pathway tracked through it, whereas Greenbergian universality predicts strong co-dependencies between particular types of word-order relations. Neither of these patterns is borne out by the analysis, suggesting that the structures of the languages are lineage-specific and not governed by universals.

Part C

46. 【解析】本句结构比较简单，它是一个简单句，句子主干结构是one approach takes…and seeks…。破折号后面的部分是对前面提到的理论的进一步解释。

1)take …to extreme…把……发挥到极致，把。。。推至极限

2)theory of everything万有理论。或者也可以一个短语翻译出来"适用于任何事物的理论"

3)generative equation生成等式、生成方程。

【参考译文】物理学中的一个理论把这种归一的冲动发挥到了极致，它探寻一种万有理论----一个关于我们能看到的一切的生成方程式。

解析：

47. 【解析】对本句话的理解关键在于对for引导的句子的正确理解。因为有两个逗号，有的同学在考场比较紧急的时间和紧张的状态下容易把两个逗号间的部分理解为插入语，那么这句话就很难理解了。

1)for 引导的句子表原因与前句是并列关系，for原因并列句中又包含一个if引导的条件状语从句

2)"it seems reasonable to suppose that"对这句话的翻译可以翻译成一个长句，也可以分开翻译成"那么假设文化差异也能够追溯到更有限的源头, 这种假设看上去便是合理的了。"

3)对于 "cultural diversit"的理解，我们容易受到之前在备考中经常遇到的"cultural diversity"的影响，直接翻译成"文化多样性"，但在本文，前文很多次提到了共性，所以这里我们翻译为"文化差异"更合适。

【参考译文】在这里，达尔文主义似乎提供了有力的理由，因为如果全人类有共同的起源，那么假设文化差异也能够追溯到更有限的源头好像就是合理的了。

48. 【解析】这句话结构主要在于对三个"what"从句的理解。本题是三个what引导的从句第一个是what引导的宾语从句，做filter out 的宾语。第二个what是介词from的宾语，from 是固定搭配中的介词filter out A from B。第三个what是understand的宾语，和how并列

1)句子主干可以看做：To filter out A from B enables us to understand C and D

A指的是"what is contingent and unique"

B指的是"what is shared" how complex cultural behaviour arose"

C指的是"how complex cultural behaviour arose"

D指的是"what guides it in evolutionary or cognitive terms"

2)Filter out词组本意是滤掉，。这个单词可能有同学会不熟悉，但是如果对本句结构理解清楚，看到from这个介词，加之对前文大意的理解，我们可以猜出这个词的意思，或者理解为"区分"等也不影响全句的理解。以避免我们有的同学看到第一个单词不认识立马生出的胆怯情绪，影响下文判断。

【参考译文】把差异性和独特性从共性中过滤出来也许能让我们理解复杂的文化行为是如何产生的，是什么从进化或认知领域指导着它。

49. 【解析】本句结构比较明朗，关键是句子前部分单独很难理解，需要结合前文。这也恰恰说明了考研英语中的翻译首先是阅读理解的一部分，不是单独的翻译而已。