2022年考研英语考试模拟卷（1）.docx

2022年考研英语考试模拟卷（1）本卷共分为1大题50小题，作答时间为180分钟，总分100分，60分及格。一、单项选择题（共50题，每题2分。每题的备选项中，只有一个最符合题意） 1.The purpose of the author in writing this passage is to urge the FedAto incline to a tighter policy.Bto put investment in tech-sector.Cto consider possible rate hikes.Dto abandon a neutral stance. 2.According to the author, the American economyAis nowhere near a sustainable growth.Bis at its weakest point.Cis near to complete recovery at hand.Dis much better than it seems. 3.Which of the following is NOT mentioned in the passageAThe US economy is gradually recovering from the steep declines.BThe Fed should take in account the shift in its outlook on economy.CIt is not the proper timing for the Fed to consider rate interests.DIt is necessary that the Fed make adjustments to its monetary policy. 4.The best title for this passage may beAA Construction Company under Fire.BFears Haunted in the World.CA Debate on Building Upwards.DSkyscrapers on the Boom. 5.The author's attitude toward the construction of skyscrapers seems to be that ofAopposition.Bindifference.Capproval.Dsuspicion. 6.In the wake of September 11, the construction techniques of skyscrapers are innovated so as to make themAlook incredibly smart in design.Bmore resistant to potential disasters.Csound particularly luxurious.Dmore protective to their occupants. 7.It can be inferred from Paragraph 5 that in Japan skyscrapersAare already under construction.Bprove to be quake-resistant.Care absolutely prohibited.Dturn out be energy-efficient. 8.When the writer says that the London Bridge Tower would not stand in Manhattan, he meansAits residents are unlikely to embrace skyscrapers.BEurope is one of the largest financial markets.CAmericans hold a continuing fear of terrorism.DKPF has been subjected to strong criticisms. 9.Section Reading Comprehension Part A Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. Text 1 The planet’s wild creatures face a new threat from yuppies, empty nesters, singletons and one parent families. Biologists studying the pressure on the planet’s dwindling biodiversity today report on a new reason for alarm. Although the rate of growth in the human population is decreasing, the number of individual households is exploding. Even where populations have actually dwindledin some regions of New Zealand, for instancethe number of individual households has increased, because of divorce, career choice, smaller families and longer lifespans. Jianguo Liu of Michigan State University and colleagues from Stanford University in California re port in Nature, in a paper published online in advance, that a greater number of individual house holds, each containing on average fewer people, meant more pressure on natural resources. Towns and cities began to sprawl as new homes were built. Each household needed fuel to heat and light it; each household required its own plumbing, cooking and refrigeration. In larger households, the efficiency of resource consumption will be a lot higher, because more people share things, Dr. Liu said. He and his colleagues looked at the population patterns of life in 141 countries, including 76 hotspot regions unusually rich in a variety of endemic wildlife. These hot spots included Australia, New Zealand, the US, Brazil, China, India, Kenya, and Italy. They found that between 1985 and 2000 in the hotspot parts of the globe, the annual 3.1% growth rate in the number of households was far higher than the population growth rate of 1.8 %. Had the average household size remained at the 1985 level, the scientists report, there would have been 155m fewer households in hotspot countries in 2000. Paradoxically, smaller households do not mean smaller homes. In Indian River county, Florida, the average area of a one-storey, single family house increased 33 % in the past three decades. Dr. Liu’s work grew from the alarming discovery that the giant pandas living in China’s Wolong reserve were more at risk now than they were when the reserve was first established. The local population had grown, but the total number of homes had increased more swiftly, to make greater inroads into the bamboo forests. Gretchen Daily of Stanford, one of the authors, said: We all depend on open space and wild places, not just for peace of mind but for vital services such as crop pollination, water purification and climate stabilization. The alarming thing about this study is the finding that, if family groups continue to become smaller and smaller, we might continue losing biodiversityeven if we get the aggregate human population size stabilised.The first paragraph mainly tells us that（）Athe amount of wildlife is diminishing.Bthe population of human is decreasing.CNew Zealanders live an unstable life.Dthe structure of families is changing.10.Section Reading Comprehension Part A Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. Text 1 The planet’s wild creatures face a new threat from yuppies, empty nesters, singletons and one parent families. Biologists studying the pressure on the planet’s dwindling biodiversity today report on a new reason for alarm. Although the rate of growth in the human population is decreasing, the number of individual households is exploding. Even where populations have actually dwindledin some regions of New Zealand, for instancethe number of individual households has increased, because of divorce, career choice, smaller families and longer lifespans. Jianguo Liu of Michigan State University and colleagues from Stanford University in California re port in Nature, in a paper published online in advance, that a greater number of individual house holds, each containing on average fewer people, meant more pressure on natural resources. Towns and cities began to sprawl as new homes were built. Each household needed fuel to heat and light it; each household required its own plumbing, cooking and refrigeration. In larger households, the efficiency of resource consumption will be a lot higher, because more people share things, Dr. Liu said. He and his colleagues looked at the population patterns of life in 141 countries, including 76 hotspot regions unusually rich in a variety of endemic wildlife. These hot spots included Australia, New Zealand, the US, Brazil, China, India, Kenya, and Italy. They found that between 1985 and 2000 in the hotspot parts of the globe, the annual 3.1% growth rate in the number of households was far higher than the population growth rate of 1.8 %. Had the average household size remained at the 1985 level, the scientists report, there would have been 155m fewer households in hotspot countries in 2000. Paradoxically, smaller households do not mean smaller homes. In Indian River county, Florida, the average area of a one-storey, single family house increased 33 % in the past three decades. Dr. Liu’s work grew from the alarming discovery that the giant pandas living in China’s Wolong reserve were more at risk now than they were when the reserve was first established. The local population had grown, but the total number of homes had increased more swiftly, to make greater inroads into the bamboo forests. Gretchen Daily of Stanford, one of the authors, said: We all depend on open space and wild places, not just for peace of mind but for vital services such as crop pollination, water purification and climate stabilization. The alarming thing about this study is the finding that, if family groups continue to become smaller and smaller, we might continue losing biodiversityeven if we get the aggregate human population size stabilised."Hotspot" regions(Line 7, Para. 2) refer to（）Atropical zones,Bplaces of scenic beauty,Careas with high population density.Dregions rich in a variety of creatures.11.Section Reading Comprehension Part A Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. Text 1 The planet’s wild creatures face a new threat from yuppies, empty nesters, singletons and one parent families. Biologists studying the pressure on the planet’s dwindling biodiversity today report on a new reason for alarm. Although the rate of growth in the human population is decreasing, the number of individual households is exploding. Even where populations have actually dwindledin some regions of New Zealand, for instancethe number of individual households has increased, because of divorce, career choice, smaller families and longer lifespans. Jianguo Liu of Michigan State University and colleagues from Stanford University in California re port in Nature, in a paper published online in advance, that a greater number of individual house holds, each containing on average fewer people, meant more pressure on natural resources. Towns and cities began to sprawl as new homes were built. Each household needed fuel to heat and light it; each household required its own plumbing, cooking and refrigeration. In larger households, the efficiency of resource consumption will be a lot higher, because more people share things, Dr. Liu said. He and his colleagues looked at the population patterns of life in 141 countries, including 76 hotspot regions unusually rich in a variety of endemic wildlife. These hot spots included Australia, New Zealand, the US, Brazil, China, India, Kenya, and Italy. They found that between 1985 and 2000 in the hotspot parts of the globe, the annual 3.1% growth rate in the number of households was far higher than the population growth rate of 1.8 %. Had the average household size remained at the 1985 level, the scientists report, there would have been 155m fewer households in hotspot countries in 2000. Paradoxically, smaller households do not mean smaller homes. In Indian River county, Florida, the average area of a one-storey, single family house increased 33 % in the past three decades. Dr. Liu’s work grew from the alarming discovery that the giant pandas living in China’s Wolong reserve were more at risk now than they were when the reserve was first established. The local population had grown, but the total number of homes had increased more swiftly, to make greater inroads into the bamboo forests. Gretchen Daily of Stanford, one of the authors, said: We all depend on open space and wild places, not just for peace of mind but for vital services such as crop pollination, water purification and climate stabilization. The alarming thing about this study is the finding that, if family groups continue to become smaller and smaller, we might continue losing biodiversityeven if we get the aggregate human population size stabilised.Which of the following might be the best title for this passage（）ASmaller Households, Larger Damage.BWildlife, Also Right to Live.CSoaring Population, Rising Hazard to Wildlife.DEnvironmental Pollution, Enormous Threat to Wildlife.12.Section Reading Comprehension Part A Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. Text 1 The planet’s wild creatures face a new threat from yuppies, empty nesters, singletons and one parent families. Biologists studying the pressure on the planet’s dwindling biodiversity today report on a new reason for alarm. Although the rate of growth in the human population is decreasing, the number of individual households is exploding. Even where populations have actually dwindledin some regions of New Zealand, for instancethe number of individual households has increased, because of divorce, career choice, smaller families and longer lifespans. Jianguo Liu of Michigan State University and colleagues from Stanford University in California re port in Nature, in a paper published online in advance, that a greater number of individual house holds, each containing on average fewer people, meant more pressure on natural resources. Towns and cities began to sprawl as new homes were built. Each household needed fuel to heat and light it; each household required its own plumbing, cooking and refrigeration. In larger households, the efficiency of resource consumption will be a lot higher, because more people share things, Dr. Liu said. He and his colleagues looked at the population patterns of life in 141 countries, including 76 hotspot regions unusually rich in a variety of endemic wildlife. These hot spots included Australia, New Zealand, the US, Brazil, China, India, Kenya, and Italy. They found that between 1985 and 2000 in the hotspot parts of the globe, the annual 3.1% growth rate in the number of households was far higher than the population growth rate of 1.8 %. Had the average household size remained at the 1985 level, the scientists report, there would have been 155m fewer households in hotspot countries in 2000. Paradoxically, smaller households do not mean smaller homes. In Indian River county, Florida, the average area of a one-storey, single family house increased 33 % in the past three decades. Dr. Liu’s work grew from the alarming discovery that the giant pandas living in China’s Wolong reserve were more at risk now than they were when the reserve was first established. The local population had grown, but the total number of homes had increased more swiftly, to make greater inroads into the bamboo forests. Gretchen Daily of Stanford, one of the authors, said: We all depend on open space and wild places, not just for peace of mind but for vital services such as crop pollination, water purification and climate stabilization. The alarming thing about this study is the finding that, if family groups continue to become smaller and smaller, we might continue losing biodiversityeven if we get the aggregate human population size stabilised.According to Dr. Liu's paper, the dwindling of biodiversity is due to（）Athe reduction in average home size.Bthe improvement of living conditions.Cthe increasing number of residences.Dthe decline of population growth rate.13.Text 2 Browse through the racks of dresses, skirts, and tops in almost any trendy clothing store in fashion-savvy Argentina, and whether you find something that fits depends on your size. But shops carry fewif anyoptions for curvaceous women. When you go into a store and find an extra large, you know that it is really the equivalent of a medium or even a small based on American standards. You feel frustrated bemuse you start to think that everybody is l