2012年全国硕士研究生招生考试英语（一）试题.docx

《2012年全国硕士研究生招生考试英语（一）试题.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《2012年全国硕士研究生招生考试英语（一）试题.docx（14页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、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. (lOpoints)The ethical judgments of the Supreme Court justices have become an important issue recently. The court cannot 1 its legitimacy as guardian of

2、 the rule of law 2 justices behave like politicians. Yet, in several instances, justices acted in ways that 3 the courts reputation for being independent and impartial.Justice Antonin Scalia, for example, appeared at political events. That kind of activity makes it less likely that the courts decisi

3、ons 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 the code of conduct that_7_ to the rest of the federal judiciary.This and other similar cases 8 the question of whether there 1s still a _9

4、_ between the court and politics.The framers of the Constitution envisioned law 10 having authority apart from politics. They gave justices permanent positions 11 they would be free to _lL those in power and have no need to 13 political support. Our legal system was designed to set law apart from po

5、litics precisely because they are so closely_H_.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, the law it 16 is inescapably political - which is why decisions split along id

6、eological 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.- 13 -1. A emphasize2. A when3. A restored4. A chall

7、enged5. A advanced6. A resistant7. A resorts8. A evade9. A line10. A by11. A so12. A serve13. A confirm14. A guarded15. A concepts16. A excludes 17 . A dismissed18. A suppress 19. A accessible20. A by all meansB maintainC modifyD recognizeB lestC beforeD unlessB weakenedC establishedD eliminatedB co

8、mpromisedC suspectedD acceptedB caughtC boundD foundedB subjectC immuneD proneB sticksC leadsD appliesB raiseC denyD settleB barrierC similarityD conflictB asC throughD towardsB sinceC providedD thoughB satisfyC upsetD replaceB expressC cultivateD offerB followedC studiedD tiedB theoriesC divisionsD

9、 conventionsB questionsC shapesD controlsB releasedC rankedD distortedB exploitC addressD ignoreB amiableC agreeableD accountableB at all costsC in a wordD as a resultSection IIReading ComprehensionPart A Directions:Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A,B,

10、 C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points)Text 1Come on - Everybodys 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 leads to no good - drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book

11、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 and possibly the world.Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Pr

12、ize, 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 loveLife recruits young people to promote safe sex among their

13、 peers.The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lameness of many public-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits, and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. Dare to be different, please

14、dont smoke! 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 skilled at applying peer pressure.But on the general effectiv

15、eness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Club is filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as its presented here is that it doesnt work v

16、ery 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 behavior. An emerging body of research shows that positive health hab

17、its - as 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 experts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer the

18、ir 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 from the outside: in the real world, as in school, we insist o

19、n choosing our own friends.21. According to the first paragraph, peer pressure often emerges asA a supplement to the social cure.B a stimulus to group dynamics.C an obstacle to social progress.D a cause of undesirable behaviors.22. Rosenberg holds that public-health advocates shouldA recruit profess

20、ional advertisers.B learn from advertisers experience.C stay away from commercial advertisers.D recognize the limitations of advertisements.23. In the authors view, Rosenbergs book fails toA adequately probe social and biological factors.B effectively evade the flaws of the social cure.C illustrate

21、the functions of state funding.D produce a long-lasting social effect.24. Paragraph 5 shows that our imitation of behaviorsA is harmful to our networks of friends.B will mislead behavioral studies.C occurs without our realizing it.D can produce negative health habits.25. The author suggests in the l

22、ast paragraph that the effect of peer pressure isA harmful.B desirable.C profound.D questionable.Text2A 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 when it announced it was renegin

23、g on a longstanding commitment to abide by the states strict nuclear regulations.Instead, the company has done precisely what it had long promised it would not: challenge the constitutionality of Vermonts rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to keep its Vermont Yankee nuclear po

24、wer 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 from state regulators to operat

25、e past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plants license be subject to the Vermont legislatures approval. Then, too, the company went along.Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or it simply didnt foresee what would happen n

26、ext. 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 Entergys management - especially after the company made misleading statements about the pipe.

27、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 nuclear issues. The legal iss

28、ues 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 precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid concerns about the patchwork regulati

29、ons 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 state. But there should be

30、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 it open for another 20 years. But as the Nucle

31、ar Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the companys application, it should keep in mind what promises from Entergy are worth.26. The phrase reneging on (Line 3, Para. 1) is closest in meaning toA condemning.B reaffirming.C dishonoring.D securing.27. . By entering into the 2002 agreement, Entergy int

32、ended toA obtain protection from Vermont regulators.B seek favor from the federal legislature.C acquire an extension of its business license.D get permission to purchase a power plant.28. According to Paragraph 4, Entergy seems to have problems with itsA managerial practices.B technical innovativene

33、ss.C financial goals.D business vision.29. In the authors view, the Vermont case will testA Entergys capacity to fulfill all its promises.B the nature of states patchwork regulations.C the federal authority over nuclear issues.D the limits of states power over nuclear issues.30. It can be inferred f

34、rom the last paragraph thatA Entergys business elsewhere might be affected.B the authority of the NRC will be defied.C Entergy will withdraw its Plymouth application.D Vermonts reputation might be damaged.Text3In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waiting to be o

35、bserved 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 experiences. Pri

36、or knowledge and interests 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 researchers me, here, now becomes the communitys anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is

38、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; editor

39、s 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. As a discovery claim works its way through

40、 the community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individuals discovery claim into the communitys credible discovery.Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific work tends

41、to focus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication 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

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

43、 seen 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 happens to a discovery claim

44、 - a process thatcorresponds 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 ofreason.31. According to the first paragraph, the process of discovery is characterized by i

45、tsA uncertainty and complexity.B misconception and deceptiveness.C logicality and objectivity.D systematicness and regularity.32. It can be inferred from Paragraph 2 that credibility process requiresA strict inspection.B shared efforts.C individual wisdom.D persistent innovation.33. Paragraph 3 show

46、s that a discovery claim becomes credible after itA has attracted the attention of the general public.B has been examined by the scientific community.C has received recognition from editors and reviewers.D has been frequently quoted by peer scientists.34. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi would most likely agree

47、 thatA scientific claims will survive challenges.B discoveries today inspire future research.C efforts to make discoveries are justified.D scientific work calls for a critical mind.35. Which of the following would be the best title of the text?A Novelty as an Engine of Scientific Development.B Collective Scrutiny in Scientific Discovery.C Evolution of Credibility in Doing Science.D Challenge to Credibility at the Gate to Science.Text4