范文一:2014年考研英语一阅读A真题
In order to “ change lives for the better ” and reduce “ dependency. ” GeorgeOsbome , Chancellor of the Exchequer , inroduced the “ upfront work search ” sebeme. Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV. register for online job search , and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit - and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly. What could be more reasonable?
More apparent reasonableness followed. There will now be a seven-day wait for the jobseeker's allowance. “ There first few days should be spent looking for work , not looking to sign on. ” he4 claimed , “ We're doing these things because we know they help people stay off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster. ” Help ? Rellay? On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with “ reforms ” to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work , and subsidises laziness. What motivated him, we were to understand, was his zeal for “ fundamental fairness” - protecting the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most descring claimants received their benefits.
Losing a job is hurting: you don't skip down to the jobcenter with a song in your heart, delighted at the prospect of doubling your income from the generous state. It is financially terrifying , psychologically embarrassing and you know that suport is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. You are now not wanted ; you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life. Worse , the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared. Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always : a job.
But in Osbomeland, your first instinct is to fall into depency - permanent dependency if you can get it - supported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood. It is as though 20 years of erer-thougher reforms of the job search and benefit administration system never happend. The principle of British welfare is no longer that you cna insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and receive unconditional payments if the disaster happens. Even the very phrase “ jobseeker's allowance ” is about redefining rhe unemployed as a “ jobseeker ” who had no fundamental right to a benefit he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions. Instead, the claimant receives a time-limited “ allowance ,” conditional on actively seeking a job ; no entitlement and no insurance , at $71.70 a week, one of the least generous in the EU.
21. George Osborue's scheme was intended to
[A]provide the unemployed with easier access to benefits.
[B]encourage jobseekers active engagement in job seeking.
[C]motivate the unemployed to report voluntarily.
[D]guarantee jobseekers legitimate right to benefits.
22. The phrase “ to sign on ” most probably means
[A] to check on the availability of jobs at the jobcentre.
[B]to accept the government's restriction on the allowance.
[C]to register for an allowance form the government.
[D]to attend a government job-training program.
23. What prompted the chancellor to develop his scheme?
[A]A desire to secure a better life for all
[B]An eagerness to protect the unemployed.
[C] An urge to be generous to the claimants.
[D]A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayers.
24.According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one feel
[A]uneasy
[B]enraged
[C]insulted
[D]guilty
25.To which of the following would the author most probably agree?
[A]The British welfare system indulges jobseekers laziness.
[B]Osborne's reforms will reduce the risk of unemployment.
[C]The jobseekers' allowance has met their actual needs.
[D]Unemployment benefits should not be made conditional.
阅读理解:Text2
All around the world , lawyers generate more hostility than the members of any other profession -with the possible exception of journalism. But there are few places where clients have more grounds for complaint than America.
During the decade before the economic crisis spending on legal services in America grew twice as inflation. The best lawyers made skyscrapers-full of money ,
tempting ever more students to pile into law schools.But most law graduates never get a big -firm job. Many of them instead become the kind of nuisance-lawsuit filer that makes the tort system a costlt nightmare.
There are many reasons for this. One is the excessive costs of a legal education.There is just one path for a lawer in most American states a four-year undergraduate degree in some unrelated subject, then a three-year law degree at one of 200 law schools authorized by the American Bar Association and an expensive preparation for the bar exam. This leaves today's average law-school graduate with $1000, 000 of debt on top of undergraduate debts. Law-school debt means that they have to work fearsomely hard.
Reforming the system would help both lawyers and their customers. Sensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them. One idea is to allow people to study law as an undergraduate degree. Another is to let students sit for the bar after only two years of law school. If the bar exam is truly a stem enough test for a would-be lawyer , those who can sit it earlier should be allowed to do so. Students who do not need the extra training could cut their debt mountain by a third.
The other reason why costs are so high is the restrictive guild-like ownership syucture of the business. Except in the District of Columbia , non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm. This keeps fees high and innovation slow. There is pressure for change from within the profession , but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.
In fact, allowing non-lawyers to own shares in law firms would reduce costs and improve services to customers , by encouraging law firms to use technology and improve services to customers, by encouraging law firms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus on improving firms' efficiency.
After all, other countries, such as Australia and Britain, have started liberalizing there legal professions. America should follow.
26. A lot of students take up law as their profession due to
[A] the growing demand from clients.
[B] the increasing pressure of inflation.
[C] the prospect of working in big firms.
[D] the attraction of financial rewards.
27. Which of the following adds to the costs of legal education in most American states ?
[A] Higher tuition fees for undergraduate studies.
[B] Admissions approval from the bar association.
[C] Pursuing a bachelor's degree in another major.
[D] Receiving training by professional associations.
28. Hindrance to the reform of the legal system originates from
[A] lawyers' and clients' strong resistance.
[B] the rigid bodies governing the profession.
[C] the stern exam for would-be lawyers.
[D] non-professionals' sharp criticism.
29. The guild-like ownership structure is considered “ restrictive ” partly because it
[A] bans outsiders' involvement in the profession.
[B] keeps lawyers from holding law-firm shares.
[C] aggravates the ethical situation in the trade.
[D] prevents lawyers from gaining due profits.
30. In this text, the author mainly discusses
[A] flawed ownership of America's law firms and causes.
[B] the factors that help make a successful lawyer in American.
[C] a problem in America's legal profession and solutions to it.
[D] the role of undergraduate studies in America's legal education.
阅读理解:Text 3
The USS3-millon Fundamental Physics Prize is indeed an interesting experiment as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year's award in Mach And it is far from the only one of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years. Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of internet entrepreneurs. These benefactors
have succeeded in their chosen fields , they say , and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.
What's not to like ? Quite a lot , according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature. You cannot buy class , as the old saying goes , and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels. The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them , say scientists. They could distort the status quo of peer-reviewed research. They do not fund peer-reviewed research. They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.
The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism. Some want to shock , others to draw people into science , or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.
As Nature has pointed before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes - both new and old - are distributed. The breakthrough prize in Life Sciences , launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include. But the Nobel Foundation's limit of limit of three recipients per prize , each of whom must still be living , has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research - as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson. The Nobels were , of course , themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money. Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.
As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards , two things seem clear. First , most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. Second , it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere. It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism - that is the culture of research, after all - but it is the prize-givers' money to do with as they please. It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
31.The Fundamental physics Prize is seen as
[A] a symbol of the entrepreneurs' wealth
[B] a possible replacement of the Nobel Prizes
[C] an example of bankers' investments
[D] a handsome reward for researchers
32.The critics think that the new awards will most benefit
[A]the profit-oriented scientists
[B]the founders of the new awards
[C]the achievement-based system
[D]peer-review-led research
33.The discovery of the Higgs boson is a typical case which involves
[A]contreversies over the recipients' status
[B]the joint effort of modern researchers
[C]legitimate concerns over the new prizes
[D]the demonstration of research findings
34.According to Paragraph4, which of the following is true of the Nobels? [A]Their endurance has done justice to them
[B]Their legitimacy has long been in dispute
[C]They are the most representative honor
[D]History has never cast doubt on them
35.the author believes that the now awards are
[A]acceptable despite the criticism
[B]harmful to the culture of research
[C]subject to undesirable changes
[D]unworthy of public attention
阅读理解:Text 4
“ The Heart of the Matter , ” the just-released report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAAS ), deserves praise for affirming the importance of the humanities and social sciences to the prosperity and security of liberal democracy in America. Regrettably , however, the report's failure to address the true nature of the critics facing liberal education may cause more harm than good.
In 2010, leading congressional Democrats and Republicans sent liners to the AAAS asking that it identify actions that could be taken by“ federal , atste and local ” to “ maintain national excellence in humanities and social scientific scholarship and education. ” In response , the American Academy formed the Commission on the Humanities and Social Sciences. Among the commission's 51members are top-tier-university presidents, scholars, lawyers, judges, and business
executives. As well ad prominent figures from diplomacy, filmmaking, music and journalism.
The goals identified in the report are generally admirable. Because representative government representative government presupposes an informed citizenry , the report supports full literacy, stresses the study of history and government , particularly American history and American government ; and encourages the use of new digital technologies. To encourage innovation and competition , the report calls fornicated investment in research , the crafting of coherent curricula that improve students' ability to solve problems and communicate effectively in the 21st century , increased funding for teachers and the encouragement of scholars to bring their learning to bear on the great challengers of the day. The report also advocates greater study of foreign languages, international affairs and the expansion of study abroad programs.
Unfortunately , despite 2% years in the making,“ The heart of the Matter” never gets to the heart of the matter, the illiberal nature of library education at our leading colleges and universities. The commission ignores that for several decades America's colleges and universities have produced graduates who don't know the content and character of liberal education and are thus deprived of its benefits.Sadly , the spirit of inquiry once at home on campus has been replaced by the use of humanities and social sciences an vehicles for publicizing “ progressive , ” or left-liberal propaganda.
Today , professors routinely treat the progressive interpretation of history and progressive public policy as the proper subject of study while portraying conservative or classical liberal ideas-such as free markets and self-reliance-as falling outside the boundaries of routine , and sometimes legitimate , intellectual investigation.
The AAAS displays great enthusiasm for liberal education. Yet its report may well set back reform by obscuring the depth and breadth of the challenge that Congress asked it to illuminate.
36. According to Paragraph 1, what is the author's attitude toward the AAAS's report ?
[A] Critical
[B] Appreciative.
[C] Contemptuous.
[D] Tolerant.
37. Influential figures in the Congress required that the AAAS report on how to
[A] retain people's interest in liberal education.
[B] define the government's role in education.
[C] keep a leading position in liberal education.
[D] safeguard individuals' rights to education.
38. According to Paragraph 3, the report suggest
[A] an exclusive study of American history.
[B] a greater emphasis on theoretical subjects.
[C] the application of emerging technologies.
[D] funding for the study of foreign languages.
40. Which of the following would would be the best title for text?
[A] Ways to Grasp “ The Heart of the Matter”
[B] Illiberal Education and “ The Heart of the Matter”
[C] The AAAS's Contribution to Liberal Education
[D] Progressive Policy vs. Liberal Education
范文二:2014考研英语阅读理解原文之英语一text3
英语一 text3原文
Young upstarts
Lucrative prizes emulating the Nobels bring welcome money and publicity for science.
When a theoretical physicist who has worked on quantum field and string theory calls attention to an “interesting experiment”, the experiment deserves notice. This is particularly true when that experiment is an attempt to deliver a little Hollywood glamour to physics, with an Oscars-style ceremony and gigantic cash prizes.
The US$3-million Fundamental Physics Prize is indeed an interesting
experi ment, as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March. And it is far from the only one of its type. As a News Feature
on. discusses, a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years. Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs. These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.
What’s not to like? Quite a lot, according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature. You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels. The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them, say scientists. They could distort the meritocracy of peer-review-led research. They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research. They do not fund peer-reviewed research. They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius. The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism. Some want to shock, others to draw people into science, or to better reward those who have made their careers in research. Several want to show that leading scientists can attain the lifestyles of financiers and footballers.
As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes — both new and old — are distributed. The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include. But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research — as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson. The Nobels were, of course, themselves set up
by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money. Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.
As much as some scientists may grumble about the new awards, the financial doping that they bring to research and the wisdom of the goals behind them, two things seem clear. First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere. It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism — that is the culture of research, after all — but it is the prize-givers’ money to do with as they please. It is wise to accept such gifts with gratitude and grace.
范文三:2014考研英语真题英语一阅读部分
Text 1
① In order to “ change lives for the better” and reduce “ dependency, ” George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the “ upfront work search ” scheme. ② Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV, register for online job search, and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit — and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly. ③ What could be more reasonable?
① More apparent reasonableness followed. ② There will now be a seven-day wait for the jobseeker's allowance. ③“ Those first few days should be spent looking for work, not looking to sign on,” he claimed. ④“ We're doing these things because we know they help people stay off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster.”⑤ Help? ⑥ Really? ⑦ On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with “ reforms ” to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidises laziness. ⑧ What motivated him, we were to understand, was his zeal for “ fundamental fairness” — protecting the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most deserving claimants received their benefits.
① Losing a job is hurting: you don't skip down to the jobcentre with a song in your heart, delighted at the prospect of doubling your income from the generous state. ② It is financially terrifying, psychologically embarrassing and you know that support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. ③ You are now not wanted; you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life. ④ Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared. ⑤ Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always: a job.
① But in Osborneland, your first instinct is to fall into dependency — permanent dependency if you can get it — supported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood. ② It is as though 20 years of ever-tougher reforms of the job search and benefit administration system never happened. ③ The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and receive unconditional payments if the disaster happens. ④ Even the very phrase “ jobseeker's allowance” is about redefining the unemployed as a “ jobseeker ” who had no fundamental right to a benefit he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions. ⑤ Instead, the claimant receives a time-limited “ allowance, ” conditional on actively seeking a job; no entitlement and no insurance, at £ 71.70 a week, one of the least generous in the EU.
21.George Osborne's scheme was intended to__________.
[A] provide the unemployed with easier access to benefits
[B] encourage jobseekers' active engagement in job seeking
[C] motivate the unemployed to report voluntarily
[D] guarantee jobseekers' legitimate right to benefits
22.The phrase “ to sign on” (Line 2, Para. 2) most probably means__________. [A] to check on the availability of jobs at the jobcentre
[B] to accept the government's restrictions on the allowance
[C] to register for an allowance from the government
[D] to attend a governmental job-training program
23.What promoted the chancellor to develop his scheme?
[A] A desire to secure a better life for all.
[B] An eagerness to protect the unemployed.
[C] An urge to be generous to the claimants.
[D] A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayers.
24.According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one feel__________. [A] uneasy
[B] enraged
[C] insulted
[D] guilty
25.To which of the following would the author most probably agree?
[A] The British welfare system indulges jobseekers' laziness.
[B] Osborne's reforms will reduce the risk of unemployment.
[C] The jobseekers' allowance has met their actual needs.
[D] Unemployment benefits should not be made conditional.
Text 2
① All around the world, lawyers generate more hostility than the members of any other profession — with the possible exception of journalism. ② But there are few places where clients have more grounds for complaint than America.
① During the decade before the economic crisis, spending on legal services in America grew twice as fast as inflation. ② The best lawyers made skyscrapers-full of money, tempting ever more students to pile into law schools. ③ But most law graduates never get a big-firm job. ④ Many of them instead become the kind of nuisance-lawsuit filer that makes the tort system a costly nightmare.
① There are many reasons for this. ② One is the excessive costs of a legal education. ③ There is just one path for a lawyer in most American states: a four-year undergraduate degree in some unrelated subjects, then a three-year law degree at one of 200 law schools authorized by the American Bar Association and an expensive preparation for the bar exam. ④ This leaves today's average law-school graduate with $100,000 of debt on top of undergraduate debts. ⑤ Law-school debt means that many cannot afford to go into government or non-profit work, and that they have to work fearsomely hard.
① Reforming the system would help both lawyers and their customers. ② Sensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them. ③ One idea is to allow people to study law as an undergraduate degree. ④ Another is to let students sit for the bar after only two years of law school. ⑤ If the bar exam is truly a stern enough test for a would-be lawyer, those who can sit it earlier should be allowed to do so. ⑥ Students who do not need the extra training could cut their debt mountain by a third.
① The other reason why costs are so high is the restrictive guild-like ownership structure of the business. ② Except in the District of Columbia, non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm. ③ This keeps fees high and innovation slow. ④ There is pressure for change from within the profession, but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.
① In fact, allowing non-lawyers to own shares in law firms would reduce costs and improve services to customers, by encouraging law firms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus on improving firms' efficiency. ② After all, other countries, such as Australia and Britain, have started liberalizing their legal professions. ③ America should follow.
26.A lot of students take up law as their profession due to__________.
[A] the growing demand from clients
[B] the increasing pressure of inflation
[C] the prospect of working in big firms
[D] the attraction of financial rewards
27.Which of the following adds to the costs of legal education in most American states?
[A] Higher tuition fees for undergraduate studies.
[B] Admissions approval from the bar association.
[C] Pursuing a bachelor's degree in another major.
[D] Receiving training by professional associations.
28.Hindrance to the reform of the legal system originates from__________.
[A] lawyers' and clients' strong resistance
[B] the rigid bodies governing the profession
[C] the stern exam for would-be lawyers
[D] non-professionals' sharp criticism
29.The guild-like ownership structure is considered “ restrictive ” partly because it__________. [A] bans outsiders' involvement in the profession
[B] keeps lawyers from holding law-firm shares
[C] aggravates the ethical situation in the trade
[D] prevents lawyers from gaining due profits
30.In this text, the author mainly discusses__________.
[A] flawed ownership of America's law firms and its causes
[B] the factors that help make a successful lawyer in America
[C] a problem in America's legal profession and solutions to it
[D] the role of undergraduate studies in America's legal education
Text 3
① The US$3-million Fundamental Physics Prize is indeed an interesting experiment, as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year's award in March. ② And it is far from the only one of its type. ③ As a News Feature article in Nature discusses, a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years. ④ Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs. ⑤ These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.
① What's not to like? ② Quite a lot, according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature. ③ You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels. ④ The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them, say scientists. ⑤ They could distort the achievement-based system of peer-review-led research. ⑥ They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research. ⑦ They do not fund peer-reviewed research. ⑧ They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.
① The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism. ② Some want to shock, others to draw people into science, or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.
① As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes — both new and old — are distributed. ② The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include. ③ But the Nobel Foundation's limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research — as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson. ④ The Nobels were, of course, themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money. ⑤ Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.
① As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards, two things seem clear. ② First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. ③ Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere. ④ It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism — that is the culture of research, after all — but it is the prize-givers' money to do with as they please. ⑤ It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
31.The Fundamental Physics Prize is seen as__________.
[A] a symbol of the entrepreneurs' wealth
[B] a possible replacement of the Nobel Prizes
[C] an example of bankers' investment
[D] a handsome reward for researchers
32.The critics think that the new awards will most benefit__________.
[A] the profit-oriented scientists
[B] the founders of the new awards
[C] the achievement-based system
[D] peer-review-led research
33.The discovery of the Higgs boson is a typical case which involves__________. [A] controversies over the recipients' status
[B] the joint effort of modern researchers
[C] legitimate concerns over the new prizes
[D] the demonstration of research findings
34.According to Paragraph 4, which of the following is true of the Nobels? [A] Their endurance has done justice to them.
[B] Their legitimacy has long been in dispute.
[C] They are the most representative honor.
[D] History has never cast doubt on them.
35.The author believes that the new awards are__________.
[A] acceptable despite the criticism
[B] harmful to the culture of research
[C] subject to undesirable changes
[D] unworthy of public attention
Text 4
“ The Heart of the Matter,” the just-released report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAAS ) , deserves praise for affirming the importance of the humanities and social sciences to the prosperity and security of liberal democracy in America. Regrettably, however, the report's failure to address the true nature of the crisis facing liberal education may cause more harm than good.
In 2010, leading congressional Democrats and Republicans sent letters to the AAAS asking that it identify actions that could be taken by “ federal, state and local governments, universities, foundations, educators, individual benefactors and others” to “ maintain national excellence in humanities and social scientific scholarship and education.” In response, the American Academy formed the Commission on the Humanities and Social Sciences. Among the commission's 51 members are top-tier-university presidents, scholars, lawyers, judges, and business executives, as well as prominent figures from diplomacy, filmmaking, music and journalism.
The goals identified in the report are generally admirable. Because representative government presupposes an informed citizenry, the report supports full literacy; stresses the study of history and government, particularly American history and American government; and encourages the use of new digital technologies. To encourage innovation and competition, the report calls for increased investment in research, the crafting of coherent curricula that improve students' ability to solve problems and communicate effectively in the 21st century, increased funding for teachers and the encouragement of scholars to bring their learning to bear on the great challenges of the day. The report also advocates greater study of foreign languages, international affairs and the expansion of study abroad programs.
Unfortunately, despite 14-06 years in the making, “ The Heart of the Matter” never gets to the heart of the matter: the illiberal nature of liberal education at our leading colleges and universities. The commission ignores that for several decades America's colleges and universities have produced graduates who don't know the content and character of liberal education and are thus deprived of its benefits. Sadly, the spirit of inquiry once at home on campus has been replaced by the use of the humanities and social sciences as vehicles for publicizing “ progressive, ” or left-liberal propaganda.
Today, professors routinely treat the progressive interpretation of history and progressive public policy as the proper subject of study while portraying conservative or classical liberal ideas — such as free markets or self-reliance — as falling outside the boundaries of routine, and sometimes legitimate, intellectual investigation.
The AAAS displays great enthusiasm for liberal education. Yet its report may well set back reform by
obscuring the depth and breadth of the challenge that Congress asked it to illuminate.
36.According to Paragraph 1, what is the author's attitude toward the AAAS's report? [A] Critical.
[B] Appreciative.
[C] Contemptuous.
[D] Tolerant.
37.Influential figures in the Congress required that the AAAS report on how to __________. [A] retain people's interest in liberal education
[B] define the government's role in education
[C] keep a leading position in liberal education
[D] safeguard individuals' rights to education
38.According to Paragraph 3, the report suggests__________.
[A] an exclusive study of American history
[B] a greater emphasis on theoretical subjects
[C] the application of emerging technologies
[D] funding for the study of foreign languages
39.The author implies in Paragraph 5 that professors are__________.
[A] supportive of free markets
[B] cautious about intellectual investigation
[C] conservative about public policy
[D] biased against classical liberal ideas
40.Which of the following would be the best title for the text?
[A] Ways to Grasp “ The Heart of the Matter”
[B] Illiberal Education and “ The Heart of the Matter”
[C] The AAAS's Contribution to Liberal Education
[D] Progressive Policy vs. Liberal Education
范文四:2014考研英语阅读专项冲刺练习及答案(一)
2014考研英语阅读专项冲刺练习及答案 (一 )
Recent years have brought minority-owned businesses in the United States unprecedented opportunities — as well as new and significant risks. Civil rights activists have long argued that one of the principal reasons why Blacks, Hispanics, and other minority groups have difficulty establishing themselves in business is that they lack access to the sizable orders and subcontracts that are generated by large companies. Now Congress, in apparent agreement, has required by law that businesses awarded federal contracts of more than $500,000 do their best to find minority subcontractors and record their efforts to do so on forms filed with the government. Indeed, some federal and local agencies have gone so far as to set specific percentage goals for apportioning parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises.
Corporate response appears to have been substantial. According to figures collected in 1977, the total of corporate contracts with minority businesses rose from $77 million in 1972 to $1.1 billion in 1977. The projected total of corporate contracts with minority businesses for the early 1980’ s is estimated to be over 53 billion per year with no letup anticipated in the next decade.
Promising as it is for minority businesses, this increased patronage poses dangers for them, too. First, minority firms risk expanding too fast and overextending themselves financially, since most are small concerns and, unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in new plants, staff, equipment, and the like in order to perform work subcontracted to them. If, thereafter, their subcontracts are for some reason reduced, such firms can face potentially crippling fixed expenses. The world of corporate purchasing can be frustrating for small entrepreneurs who get requests for elaborate formal estimates and bids. Both consume valuable time and resources, and a small company ’ s efforts
must soon result in orders, or both the morale and the financial health of the business will suffer.
A second risk is that White-owned companies may seek to cash in on the increasing apportionments through formation of joint ventures with minority-owned concerns. Of course, in many instances there are legitimate reasons for joint ventures; clearly, White and minority enterprises can team up to acquire business that neither could acquire alone. But civil rights groups and minority business owners have complained to Congress about minorities being set up as “ fronts ” with White backing, rather than being accepted as full partners in legitimate joint ventures.
Third, a minority enterprise that secures the business of one large corporate customer often run the danger of becoming- and remaining-dependent. Even in the best of circumstances, fierce competition from larger, more established companies makes it difficult for small concerns to broaden their customer bases: when such firms have nearly guaranteed orders from a single corporate benefactor, they may truly have to struggle against complacency arising from their current success.
1. The primary purpose of the text is to
[A] present a commonplace idea and its inaccuracies.
[B] describe a situation and its potential drawbacks.
[C] propose a temporary solution to a problem.
[D] analyze a frequent source of disagreement.
2. The text suggests that the failure of a large business to have its bids for subcontracts result quickly in orders might causes it to
[A] experience frustration but not serious financial harm.
[B] face potentially crippling fixed expenses.
[C] have to record its efforts on forms filed with the government.
[D] increase its spending with minority subcontractors.
3. It can be inferred from the text that, compared with the requirements of law, the percentage goals set by “ some federal and local agencies ” (line 9, paragraph 1) are
[A] more popular with large corporations.
[B] more concrete.
[C] less controversial.
[D] less expensive to enforce.
4. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author’ s assertion
that, in the 1970’ s, corporate response to federal requirements (line 1, paragraph 2) was substantial?
[A] Corporate contracts with minority-owned businesses totaled $2 billion in 1979.
[B] Between 1970 and 1972, corporate contracts with minority-owned businesses declined by 25 percent.
[C] The figures collected in 1977 underrepresented the extent of corporate contracts with minority-owned businesses.
[D] The $1.1 billion represented the same percentage of total corporate spending in 1977 as did $77 million in 1972.
5. The author would most likely agree with which of the following statements about corporate response to working with minority subcontractors?
[A] Annoyed by the proliferation of “ front ” organizations, corporations are likely to reduce their efforts to work with minority-owned subcontractors in the near future.
[B] Although corporations showed considerable interest in working with minority businesses in the 1970’ s, their aversion to government paperwork made them reluctant to pursue many government contracts.
[C] The significant response of corporations in the 1970’ s is likely to be sustained and conceivably be increased throughout the 1980’ s.
[D] Although corporations are eager to cooperate with minority-owned businesses, a shortage of capital in the 1970’ s made substantial response impossible.
[答案与考点解析 ]
1. 【答案】 B
【考点解析】 本题是一道中心主旨题。 破解本题的关键在于考生是否完全理解本文第一 段首句的内容, 尤其是第一句中破折号后面的内容。 破折号后面的内容和选项 B 中的 “ its potential drawbacks”是相互吻合的。望考生注意培养捕捉全文中心主旨句的能力。
2. 【答案】 A
【考点解析】 这是一道逻辑思维上的反推题, 也可以说是逆向思维题。 本题反推即逆向思维 的信息依据在第三段的最后一句。 该句在谈论小的企业, 大概内容是 “??一个小企业的投 资要马上在定货中反映出效果, 否则其士气和财政前景都将深受影响” 。 根据小的企业的状 况,我们可以推导出大的企业所面临的处境。希望考生加强逆向思维即反推的解题能力。 3. 【答案】 B
【考点解析】本题是一道关键词语的理解题目,其答案信息来源在第一段的尾句, 原文 当中的 “ specific ”一词是本题的答案所在。考生要加强对原文中重点形容词和副词的理 解。
4. 【答案】 D
【考点解析】 这是一道反论题。 这种题的关键在于利用原文的信息否定原文所要表达的 观点。原文讲“少数民族企业签订的合同金额由 1972年的 7700万美元升至 1977年的 11亿美元” 。 原文所要表达的观点是合同金额的增长。 选项 D 正是利用原文的信息否定了原文 所要表达的观点。 选项 D 所表达的信息是变化增长数字背后的不变。 这种题属于较难的题型, 希望考生加以重视。
5. 【答案】 C
【考点解析】 这是一道关键词语理解题。 本题的答案信息在第二段的尾句, 句中 “ letup ” 一词决定了本题的正确答案是 C ,因为该词的含义是“停顿,减弱”。考生在备考过程中要 尽力扩大自己的词汇量。
[参考译文 ]
最近几年美国少数民族所有的企业可以说是空前的机会和重大风险并存。 ****活动家早 就指出过:黑人, 拉美裔美国人, 以及其他少数民族难以在生意场中立足的主要原因是他们 缺少能得到有规模的订货或与大公司分合同的机会。 现在议会以一致意见通过法律, 要求企 业获得价值 50万美元以上的联邦合同后要尽最大可能来寻找少数民族合作者,并且需将他 们在此点上的成效如何在政府中存档立案。 实际上, 一些联邦和地方机构走得更远, 它们甚 至规定了公共合同有多少比例要分给少数民族公司。
企业对此的反应是强烈的。从 1977年统计的数据看,与少数民族企业签订的合同金额 由 1972年的 7700万美元升至 1977年的 11亿美元。预计此金额要在 80年代前期达到每年 30亿美元以上,在下一个 10年中看来也不会停止。
尽管这对少数民族企业来说前途光明, 这种增加的财源也给它们带来了危险。 首先, 少 数民族企业冒着过快膨胀和财政上力不从心的危险, 因为它们大部分是小企业, 和大企业不 同之外在于它们为履行合同常需要在厂房、人员、设备 (以及诸如此类 ) 等上做一大笔投资。 如果其后由于某种原因其合同量减少, 它们将会遇到潜在的财政危机。 对于被要求做正式评 估和投标的小企业来说, 市场供求情况有可能令人非常沮丧。 评估和投标都消耗时间、 资源, 而且一个小企业的投资要马上在定货中反映出效果,否则其士气和财政前景都将深受影响。 第二个危险是有些白人企业想通过和少数民族企业合资也能享受更好的待遇。 当然, 在 许多时候,合资是有正当理由的 ; 显然,白人和少数民族企业可以联合起来做成任何一方都 无法单独完成的事业。 但是 ****组织和少数民族企业主已经向议会报怨:少数民族企业常在 合资中成为白人操纵者的前台傀儡,而不是平等的合作伙伴。
第三, 已获得一个大客户的生意的少数民族企业常会有陷入依赖性的危险。 即使在最好 的环境下,来自更大、更完备的对手的竞争常使一个小企业很难扩展自己的客户 ; 当这样的 企业已拥有来自一个客户的近乎稳定的定货时, 它们确实需要和眼前的胜利所滋生出的自满 做斗争。
小提示:目前本科生就业市场竞争激烈,就业主体是研究生,在如今考研竞争日渐激 烈的情况下,我们想要不在考研大军中变成分母,我们需要:早开始 +好计划 +正确的复习 思路 +好的辅导班(如果经济条件允许的情况下)。 2017考研开始准备复习啦,早起的鸟儿 有虫吃,一分耕耘一分收获。加油!
范文五:2014年考研英语一阅读 答案详解
46. 这也是为什么当我们试图用语言来描述音乐时,我们只能明确表达我们对于音乐的感受,而不能完全理解音乐本身。
【句型分析】本句主句主干为it is the reason,why引导定语从句,修饰the reason。定语从句的主干是all we can do is articulate our reactions and not grasp music
itself,其表语是不定式短语,由于主语中含有do,不定式符号to省略:articulate our reactions and not grasp music itself。our reactions之后to it为其定语,it指代music。定语从句中还包含when引导的时间状语从句。
【翻译要点】?本句主干的主句是主系表结构,reason后why引导的定语从句较长,翻译时可以与主干部分结合,调整表达为:这也就是为什么?.。
?定语从句中,when引导时间状语从句,其中with words做状语,翻译时需调整语序到其修饰的to describe之前,可以表达为“当我们尝试用语言来描述音乐时”。定语从句的主干顺译即可,其中reaction根据语境,可以翻译为“感受”,其定语to it在表达时前置,it指代还原为“音乐”,则可以翻译为“所有我们能做的,就是明确表达我们对于音乐的感受”,或者调整表达为“我们只能明确表达我们对于音乐的感受”。and之后,grasp依据语境,需要翻译为“理解”
47. 人们普遍认为,他(贝多芬)是个思想自由、充满勇气的人,我发现勇气这一品质,是理解他作品的关键,更不必说是演出其作品的关键。
【句型分析】本句为并列句。第一个分句he was a freethinking person, and a
courageous one,句首by all accounts为固定搭配,意思是“根据各方面说”。第二个分句的主干为I find courage an essential quality,其中宾语为courage,而an essential quality是宾语补足语。quality后介词短语for the understanding of his work为其定语,其中还包含一个插入结构let alone the performance。
【翻译要点】? 第一个分句结构比较简单,句首固定搭配by all accounts,可以调整表达,翻译为“据大家所说”。主干顺译即可,其中he指代“贝多芬”,one指代person。这一部分可以翻译为“贝多芬是个思想自由、充满勇气的人”。
?第二个分句,主干为“我发现勇气是一个关键品质”,quality后为其定语for the understanding of his work,其中the understanding of his work意思为“对于其作品的理解”,把词性转化后,可以表达为“理解其作品”,这个介词短语需要调整语序前置于quality,可以翻译为“理解他作品 的关键品质”,则第二个分句可以表达为“我发现勇气,
是理解他作品的关键品质”。还可以调整表达为“我发现勇气这一品质,是理解他作品的关键”。
?在定语for the understanding of his work中的插入成分,在逻辑上let alone并列the understanding和the performance,二者共用定语of his works,顺译句末即可:更不必说是演出其作品的关键品质。
48. 贝多芬习惯最大限度来逐渐增高音量,然后突然跟上轻柔的乐段,在他之前,作曲家很少使用这种方式。
【句型分析】本句主干为Beethoven’s habit was used by composers before him。本句的谓语为被动语态,主语habit后介词短语of increasing the volume with an extreme
intensity and then abruptly following it with a sudden soft passage为其定语,是由介词of与and并列的两个动名词短语increasing the volume with an extreme intensity
和then abruptly following it with a sudden soft passage构成。
【翻译要点】?本句主干较为简单,但是主语habit后有很长的后置定语:Habit of increasing the volume?,其中“habit”可以词性转换为动词“习惯”,而中文常常先表达次要信息,则这一部分可以翻译一句话“贝多芬习惯增加?”,置于句首。第一个动名词短语中,with an extreme intensity为状语,表达时需调整语序到其修饰的increasing the volume前,根据语境,volume意思为“音量”,则increasing可以翻译为“增高”。这一部分可以翻译为“最大限度来逐渐增高音量”。第二个动名词短语then abruptly following it with a sudden soft passage,状语with a sudden soft passage需调整到following it前表达,其中passage根据语境,意思为“乐段”。则这一部分可以表达为“然后突然跟上轻柔的乐段”。整合本句主语与其定语,可以翻译为“贝多芬习惯最大限度来逐渐增高音量,然后突然跟上轻柔的乐段”。
?本句主干意思为“在他之前,作曲家很少使用贝多芬的习惯”。中文语义重心在后,将本部分翻译在句末即可。由于前句译文已经提到这种习惯,则这部分可以 表达为“在他之前,作曲家很少使用这种习惯”,结合语境还可以表达为“在他之前,作曲家很少使用这种方式”,或者“在他之前,只有极个别作曲家会使用这种 方式”。
49. 尤为重要的是贝多芬对于自由的看法,他认为,这种自由是与个人的权利和责任联系起来的:他倡导思想自由和个人言论自由。
【句型分析】本句为完全倒装,主句的主干是his view of freedom was Especially
significant。
his view of freedom后为which引导的非限定性定语从句,修饰freedom,关系代词which在定语从句中作主语。of the individual修饰the rights and responsibilities,冒号后进行解释说明。
【翻译要点】
? 本句主干为完全倒装,但是在翻译时,顺译即可,其中his指代“贝多芬的”,主干可以表达为:尤为重要的是,他(贝多芬)对于自由的看法?.。
? which引导定语从句,修饰freedom,表达时翻译成另一句话“对于他而言,这种自由是与个人的权利和责任联系起来的”,其中for him还可以调整表达为“他认为”。
?冒号后进行解释,可以翻译为:他倡导思想自由和个人言论自由。
50.我们可以这样解释贝多芬的大部分作品:苦难是不可避免的,但是与痛苦抗争的勇气使得生命值得继续。
【句型分析】本句主句主干为One could interpret much of the work of Beethoven,之后by saying that suffering is inevitable, but the courage to fight it renders
life worth living为状语,修饰interpret。其中that引导宾语从句suffering is inevitable, but the courage to fight it renders life worth living,为saying的宾语,宾语从句中it指代suffering。
【翻译要点】?本句主语one,可以翻译为“人们”或者“我们”。主干可以翻译为“我们可以解释贝多芬的大部分作品”。
?主干之后的状语,可以翻译为“通过说痛苦是无法避免的,但是与之相抗争的勇气使得生命值得继续。”
?整合主干,可以表达为“我们可以这样解释贝多芬的大部分作品:苦难是不可避免的,但是与痛苦抗争的勇气使得生命值得继续。”
转载请注明出处范文大全网 » 2014年考研英语一阅读A真