英文学习笔记|《通勤时间为什么总让人痛苦?》

这是《经济学人》近期的一篇关于日常通勤正反两面性的论文，题目是

“The pros and cons of commuting”。这是一篇非常典型的 Economist 风格文章。它最大的特点不是“难词很多”，而是：用非常冷静、客观、学术化的方式讨论一个日常问题。

对于 IELTS、托福、大学英语阅读和英文写作来说，这类文章的结构特别值得学习和借鉴：

文章第一部分先提出现象并从人的共识切入：没有人会后悔“没有花更多时间通勤”；

第二部分引入研究与数据（Evidence）以支持作者中心论点；

第三部分提出“反面观点”（Counterargument）文章中间突然转折：But even long journeys can have benefits。

最后回到核心结论（Conclusion）并在文章结束时点明：新手妈妈最在意通勤时间。也就是说：虽然人人都说想要更短通勤，但真正会因为通勤改变人生选择的人群，是有育儿压力的女性。

第一部分：逐段翻译理解

第一段

Ask someone if they have regrets, and very few people will say: “I wish I had spent more of my life commuting.”

如果你问别人人生有没有遗憾，很少会有人说：

“我真希望自己人生中花更多时间在通勤上。”

The time spent travelling from home to work and back again tends to be neither relaxing nor productive.

每天往返于家和工作地点之间的时间，通常既不轻松，也没有效率。

It is usually routine and sometimes unpleasant: anything that involves loads of traffic or armpits is hard to like.

通勤往往枯燥重复，有时甚至令人不快：凡是涉及严重堵车或挤满“腋窝”的场景（指拥挤的人群），都很难让人喜欢。

第二段

In popular culture the monotony is the point.

在流行文化中，“单调乏味”本身就是通勤的核心特点。

Commuting becomes a trap (“Exit 8”), a window on the real action (“The Girl on the Train”) or a commentary on the softness of modern society (“The War of the Worlds”).

通勤可能被描绘成一种陷阱（《Exit 8》），也可能成为观察真实世界的窗口（《火车上的女孩》），或者被用来讽刺现代社会的脆弱与安逸（《世界大战》）。

The covid-19 pandemic gave people the chance to experience a commute-free existence, and many of them loved it.

新冠疫情让人们第一次体验到了“无需通勤”的生活，而很多人对此十分喜欢。

第三段

So when people are surveyed about their perfect commute time, the unsurprising answer tends to be “shorter”.

因此，当人们被问到理想通勤时间时，毫不意外，答案通常是：

“越短越好。”

On average people around the world spend roughly an hour a day commuting.

全球平均而言，人们每天大约花一小时通勤。

But however long their travel time is, they want to lop that total roughly in half.

但无论他们现在通勤多久，大多数人都希望把时间砍掉一半左右。

第四段

A study published last year by Jonas De Vos...

去年，伦敦大学学院（UCL）的 Jonas De Vos 发表了一项研究，调查了学校中超过 2000 名师生的通勤偏好。

The average actual commute time was a hefty 54 minutes one way; the average ideal time was 31 minutes.

他们实际平均单程通勤时间长达 54 分钟，而理想中的通勤时间则是 31 分钟。

Ideals vary depending on how someone gets to work...

理想通勤时间会因交通方式不同而有所差异。例如，一个坐火车通勤一小时的人，所能接受的理想通勤时间，通常会比骑车 30 分钟的人更长。

第五段

Long journeys can impose costs on employers as well as commuters.

长时间通勤不仅让员工付出代价，也会影响雇主。

For instance, they can increase staff turnover.

例如，它会提高员工流动率。研究发现：每增加 5 分钟单程通勤时间，教师在学区内转职到其他学校的概率会上升 0.8 到 1 个百分点。

第六段

Time spent travelling can also hurt productivity.

通勤时间还会损害工作效率。一项加拿大研究发现：如果企业搬迁导致发明家的通勤距离增加 10 公里，他们申请专利的数量平均会下降 5%。造成这种下降的原因并不完全清楚，但其中一种解释是：

人们花在工作上的时间减少了。

第七段

No one yearns to spend more of their life commuting, then.

显然，没有人真的渴望把更多人生花在通勤上。

But even long journeys can have benefits.

但即使长时间通勤，也可能存在好处。研究显示，人们实际上能容忍的最长通勤时间，往往比他们当前通勤时间还长。这意味着，人们其实也意识到长通勤可能带来的优势：

• 更低房价
• 更好的居住环境
• 更多就业机会

第八段

Ismir Mulalic...

哥本哈根商学院的 Ismir Mulalic 指出：尽管交通技术发生了巨大变化，但全球平均一小时的通勤时间却长期保持稳定。他回忆自己参与的一项研究：一些因为公司搬迁而突然获得“更短通勤”的员工，竟然把这种“美好的礼物”浪费掉——他们搬家到了更远的地方。

第九段

A commute can bring rewards of its own, too.

通勤本身其实也可能带来某些好处。

Some scholars burble about commuting as “a liminal space”...

一些学者把通勤称作：

“一种边界空间（liminal space）”

虽然这个词听起来有点故作高深，但它确实反映了某种真实体验：

上下班路程能够帮助人们：

• 进入工作状态
• 或从工作状态中放松下来

此外，骑车和步行等主动通勤方式，比坐车更有利于幸福感。

第十段

Firms are right not to be indifferent to their employees’ journeys to work.

企业确实不应该忽视员工的通勤问题。

许多公司会提供：

• 金钱补助
• 停车位

来减轻员工通勤负担。混合办公与弹性工作时间，也能缓解通勤压力。

但真正能够从根本上改善通勤问题的力量，仍掌握在政策制定者手中：

例如：

• 更好的公共交通
• 更多住房供应

第十一段（结尾）

That means one event in particular.

有一种人生事件，会让通勤问题突然变得特别重要。

一项针对 2003 至 2013 年丹麦劳动人口的数据研究发现：

当女性有了孩子之后，如果她们通勤时间很长，就更有可能换工作。

而男性则没有这种明显变化。

Everyone says they want a shorter commute.

每个人都会说自己想要更短的通勤时间。

New mothers mean it.

但新手母亲是真的会因此改变人生选择。

第二部分：文章分析和写作借鉴

In recent years, remote work has become increasingly common due to advances in technology and changes brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic. While some people argue that working from home improves employees’ quality of life and benefits society, others believe it creates negative consequences for both workers and companies. This essay will discuss both perspectives before explaining why I believe remote work is beneficial overall when managed properly.

On the one hand, remote work offers several significant advantages. First, it allows employees to save considerable commuting time, which can reduce stress and improve work-life balance. Many workers spend hours travelling to and from the office every week, and eliminating this routine gives them more time for family, exercise, or rest. In addition, remote work can increase productivity in certain professions because employees are able to work in a quieter and more flexible environment. Companies may also benefit financially by reducing office-related expenses such as rent, electricity, and maintenance costs. From a broader perspective, fewer commuters can help decrease traffic congestion and carbon emissions, which is beneficial for the environment.

On the other hand, critics argue that remote work may lead to social isolation and weaker communication among colleagues. Employees who work from home for long periods may feel disconnected from their teams, which can negatively affect collaboration and mental well-being. Furthermore, some workers struggle to separate their professional and personal lives, especially when they lack a suitable workspace at home. This can result in longer working hours and increased burnout. Employers may also find it more difficult to supervise staff and maintain company culture when face-to-face interaction is limited.

In my opinion, although remote work presents certain challenges, its advantages outweigh the drawbacks. Most of the disadvantages can be addressed through effective management strategies, such as hybrid working arrangements, regular team meetings, and clear communication systems. Rather than replacing traditional offices completely, remote work should be integrated in a balanced and flexible way.

In conclusion, remote work has both positive and negative impacts on employees and organizations. However, if companies adopt appropriate policies to support workers, remote work can improve productivity, well-being, and even environmental sustainability.