英语考研往年试题.docx

《英语考研往年试题.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《英语考研往年试题.docx（68页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、2012全国硕士硏究生入学统一考试英语试题Section I Use of EnglishDirections ：Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D on ANSWER SHEET 1. (10 points)The ethical judgments of the Supreme Court justices have become an important issue rcccnlly. The court cannot 1 its le

2、gitimacy as guardian of the rule of law 2 justices behave like politicians. Yet. in several instances, justices acted in ways that 3 the court s reputation for being independent and impartial.Justice Antonin Scalia, for example* appeared at political events. That kind of activiiy makes it less likel

3、y that the courts decisions will be 4 as impartial judgments. Part of the problem is that the justices are not 5 by an ethics code. At the very least, the court should make itself 6 to thecode of conduct that 7 to the rest of the federal judiciary.This and other similar cases 8 the question of wheth

4、er there is still a 9 between the court and politics.rhe framers of the Constitution envisioned law 10 having authority apart from politics. They gave justices permanent positions 11 they would be free to 12 those in power and have no need to 13 political support. Our legal system was designed to se

5、t law apart from politics precisely because they are so closely 14 .Constitutional law is political because it results from choices rooted in fundamental social 15 like liberty and property. When the court deals with social policy decisions 9 the law it 16 is inescapably political-which is why decis

6、ions split along ideological lines are so easily 17 as unjust.The justices must 18 doubts about the courts legitimacy by making themselves 19 to the code of conduct. That would make rulings more likely to be seen as separate from politics and, 20 , convincing as law.1. A emphasizeB maintainC modifyD

7、 recognize2. A whenB lestC before1) unless3. A restoredB weakenedC establishedD eliminated4. A challengedB compromisedJ suspectedD accepted5. A advancedB caughtPCI boundDj founded6.A resistantB subject| I immunvf I)1 prone7. A resortsB sticksC loadsI)J applies8. A evadeB raiseC deny 1D settle9.A lin

8、eEB barrierEC similarityED conflictio. CA byEB asEC thoughED towards11. EA soB sinceEC providedED though12. EA serveEB satisfyEC upsetED replace13. EAJ confirmEB expressEC cultivateED offer14. EA guardedEBj followedEC studiedED tied15 . A conceptsEB theoriesEC divisionsED conceptions16. EA excludesE

9、B questionsEC shapesED controls17. E A dismissedEB releasedEC rankedD distorted18. E A suppressB exploitEC addressD ignore19. E A accessibleEB amiableEC agreeableED accountable20. EA by all meansEB at all costsLC in a wordLD as a resultSection H Reading ComprehensionPart ADirections：Read the followi

10、ng four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET. (40 points.)Text 1Come onEverybodyf s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, is what most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually lead

11、s to no good-drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenberg contends that peer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in which organizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their lives

12、 and possibly the world.Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize offers a host of examples of the social cure in action： In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze sets out to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa an HIV-prevention initiative known as

13、 LoveLife recruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.The idea seems promising,and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lameness of many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on： they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits, and they demonstrate a seriously flaw

14、ed understanding of psychology. w Dare to be different, please don I smoke!n pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers-teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-health advocates ought to take a page from advertisers so

15、 skilled at applying peer pressure.Bui on I he general effectiveness of ihc social cure. Rosenberg is less persuasive. J o in the Club is filled with loo much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw

16、of the social cure as its presented here is that 2it doesnt work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed once state funding was cut. Evidence that the LoveLife program produces lasting changes is limited and mixed.Theres no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our beh

17、avior. An emerging body of research shows that positive health habitsas well as negative ones-spread through networks of friends via social communication. This is a subtle form of peer pressure： we unconsciously imitate the behavior we see every day.,Far less certain, however, is how successfully ex

18、perts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer iheir activities in virtuous directions. Its like the teacher who breaks up the troublemakers in the back row by pairing them with better-behaved classmates. The tactic never really works. And thats the problem with a social cure engineered

19、from the outside： in the real world, as in school, wc insist on choosing our own friends.21. According to the first paragraph, peer pressure often emerges asA a supplement to the social cureB a stimulus to group dynamicsL an obstacle to social progressD a cause of undesirable behaviors22. Rosenberg

20、holds that public advocates shouldA recruit professional advertisersB learn from advertisersexperienceCj stay away from commercial advertisersD recognize the limitations of advertisements23. In the authors view, Rosenbergs book fails toA adequately probe social and biological factorsB effectively ev

21、ade the flaws of the social cureLillustrate the functions of state funding_D produce a long-lasting social effect24. Paragraph 5shows that our imitation of behaviorsA is harmful to our networks of friendsB will mislead behavioral studiesC occurs without our realizing itD can produce negative health

22、habits25. The author suggests in the last paragraph that the effect of peer pressure isA harmfulB desirableprofoundD questionableText 2A deal is a deal- except, apparently, when Entergy is involved. The company, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in Vermont last week

23、when it announced it was reneging on a longstanding commitment to abide by the strict states nuclear regulations.Instead. the company has done precisely what it had long promised it would not challenge the constitutionality of Vermont s rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to ke

24、ep its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant running. Its a stunning move.The conflict has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermonts only nuclear power plant, an aging reactor in Vernon. As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek permission

25、 from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plants license be subject to Vermont legislatures approval. Then, too, the company went along.Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or ii simply didnt

26、 foresee whal would happen next. A string of accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 2007 and the discovery of an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermont Yankees safety and Entergy management-especially after the company made misleading st

27、atements about the pipe. Enraged by Entergys behavior, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 last year against allowing an extension.Now the company is suddenly claiming that the 2002 agreement is invalid because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory power over nucl

28、ear issues. The legal issues in the case are obscure： whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will offer a precedentsetting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid concerns abou

29、t the patchwork regulations that could result if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word that debate would be beside the point.The company seems to have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is already so damaged that it has nothing left to lose by going to war with the stat

30、e. But there should be consequences. Permission to run a nuclear plant is a public trust. Entergy runs 11 other reactors in the United States including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep in open for another 20 y

31、ears. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the company s application, it should keep in mind what promises from Entergy are worth.2b. rhe phrase “reneging on(Line 3. para. 1) is closest in meaning toA condemningB reaffirmingC dishonoringD securing27. By entering into the 2002 agree

32、ment, Entergy intended toAobtain protection from Vermont regulatorsBj seek favor from the federal legislatureacquire an extension of its business licenseD get permission to purchase a power plant28. According to Paragraph 4, Entergy seems to have problems with itsA managerial practicesB technical in

33、novativenessC financial goalsD business vision29. In the authors view, the Vermont case will testA Entergys capacity to fulfill all its promisesB the mature of states patchwork regulationsLC the federal authority over nuclear issuesD the limits of states power over nuclear issues30. It can be inferr

34、ed from the last paragraph thatA Entergyrs business elsewhere might be affectedB the authority of the NRC will be defiedC Entergy will withdraw its Plymouth applicationD Vermont,s reputation might be damagedText 3In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waiting to b

35、e observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experience. Pr

36、ior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly staked mining c

37、laims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcherJ s me, here, now becomes the community s anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge

38、is the goal* not the starting point.Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. But * unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries； ed

39、itors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process； other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology, s a discovery claim works it through th

40、e community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs aboul the science and the technology involved transforms an individualdiscovery claim into the communitys credible discovery.I wo paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First. scientific work lends to f

41、ocus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as mcomplcie or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duj)lication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. The goal is new search, not re-search. Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that

42、 appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers, econd, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief, bel Laureate and physiologist Albert Szent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as 41 seeing what everybody has see

43、n and thinking what nobody has thought. But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.In the end, credibility u happensw to a discovery claim-

44、a process that corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind. We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each others reasoning and each others conceptions of reason.31. According to the first paragraph, the process of discovery is characterized by it

45、sA uncertainty and complexityB misconception and deceptivenessC logicality and objectivityDJ systematicness and regularity32. It can be inferred from Paragraph 2 that credibility process requiresA strict inspectionB shared effortsCj individual wisdomD persistent innovation33. Paragraph 3 shows that

46、a discovery claim becomes credible after itA has attracted the attention of the general publicB has been examined by the scientific communityC has received recognition from editors and reviewersD has been frequently quoted by peer scientists,34. Albert Szent-Gy? rgyi would most likely agree thatA sc

47、ientific claims will survive challengesB discoveries today inspire future researchCJ efforts to make discoveries are justifiedDj scientific work calls for a critical mind35. Which of the following would be the best title of the text?A Novelty as an Engine of Scientific DevelopmentB Collective Scrutiny in Scientific DiscoveryCj Evolution of Credibility in Doing ScienceD Challenge to Credibility at the Gate to ScienceText 4If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today, he would probably represent civil servant.When Hoffa