[外语类试卷]大学英语六级（2013年12月考试改革适用）模拟试卷174及答案与解析.doc

1、大学英语六级（ 2013年 12月考试改革适用）模拟试卷 174及答案与解析 一、 Part I Writing 1 For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write an essay entitled On Self-improvement by commenting on the saying, “ There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man: true nobility is being superior to your former self. “ You s

2、hould write at least 150 words but no more than 200 words. Section A （ A） Australia. （ B） America. （ C） Britain. （ D） Austria. （ A） Approval. （ B） Disapproval. （ C） Cautious. （ D） Uncertain. （ A） He will give up his right in voting. （ B） He will vote randomly. （ C） He is forced to pick one party. （

3、D） He must take politics seriously. （ A） When they are in a hurry. （ B） When they are forced to vote. （ C） When they dislike all the parties. （ D） When they dont want to waste their votes. （ A） In the basement. （ B） On the ground floor. （ C） On upper floors. （ D） In the penthouse. （ A） In 236 BC. （

4、B） In the Middle Ages. （ C） In the Agriculture Age. （ D） In the Industrial Revolution. （ A） Wind. （ B） Gas. （ C） Steam power. （ D） Solar power. （ A） The U.S. A. （ B） Italy. （ C） China. （ D） Russia. Section B （ A） Teens have more means to make friends. （ B） Teens have less longing for more friends. （

5、 C） Teens have better understanding of friendships. （ D） Teens are more tolerant of loneliness. （ A） The economic changes. （ B） The advanced technology. （ C） Smaller families. （ D） High level of self-esteem. （ A） Similar researches in other countries. （ B） The impact of social networks. （ C） The deg

6、ree of modernization. （ D） The quality of peoples friendships. （ A） Anthropology. （ B） Art. （ C） Biology. （ D） Psychology. （ A） They have the same ancestor. （ B） Van Truong is a fan of Van Gogh. （ C） Van Truong used her notes to form a Van Goghs painting. （ D） Van Truong hopes to be a painter as fam

7、ous as Van Gogh. （ A） It makes her popular among students. （ B） It avoids the dullness of study. （ C） It saves her lots of money. （ D） It makes the notes easy to understand. （ A） Because of its bright color. （ B） Because of its high value. （ C） Because of its profound meaning. （ D） Because of its st

8、ructural arrangement. Section C （ A） They investigate the retirement homes in America. （ B） They are on issues facing senior citizens in America. （ C） They describe the great pleasures of the golden years. （ D） They are filled with fond memories of his grandparents. （ A） The loss of the ability to t

9、ake care of himself. （ B） The feeling of not being important any more. （ C） Being unable to find a good retirement home. （ D） Leaving the home he had lived in for 60 years. （ A） The loss of identity and self-worth. （ B） Fear of being replaced or discarded. （ C） Freedom from pressure and worldly care

10、s. （ D） The possession of wealth and high respect. （ A） The urgency of pension reform. （ B） Medical care for senior citizens. （ C） Finding meaningful roles for the elderly in society. （ D） The development of public facilities for senior citizens. （ A） They have better memories than normal people. （

11、B） They can focus on multiple tasks at a time. （ C） Their brains have been trained at an early age. （ D） Their households supply a good study environment. （ A） We will have better memories and problem solving abilities. （ B） We will be more capable of communicating with others. （ C） We will get more

12、 achievements in academic areas. （ D） We will be able to speak more foreign languages. （ A） Our brains will perform more functions. （ B） Our brains will have a quicker response. （ C） Our brains will function stronger. （ D） Our brains will keep young and healthy. （ A） It makes good use of athletic sp

13、irit in different areas. （ B） It focuses on athletes performance in games. （ C） It arouses peoples craze in various sports. （ D） It helps people deal with their mental problems. （ A） Getting well prepared for each game. （ B） Knowing the end result you want. （ C） Cooperating with other team members.

14、（ D） Practicing more than normal people. （ A） We can focus on what we can do every day. （ B） We can have a regular break between tasks. （ C） We will feel more relaxed and comfortable. （ D） We will have a more balanced life. Section A 26 Until recently, the medical community believed that most hearin

15、g loss was caused by hear cells in the ear degrading as we age. But evidence is emerging that sound levels at sporting events, concerts, nightclubs and on personal devices can cause lasting damage to the connections between hear cells in the ear and the nerves that【 C1】 _sounds to the brain. Over 1.

16、 1 billion teenagers and young adults worldwide could be at risk of hearing loss as a result of【 C2】 _to unsafe levels of recreational noise, according to a recent World Health Organization report. To make matters worse, this kind of hearing loss doesnt show up on【 C3】 _tests. Researchers are callin

17、g it a hidden epidemic. “ We think this problem is【 C4】 _prevalent, but its difficult to measure because the tools we have available today are not sensitive enough,“ says Konstantina Stankovic, an auditory neuroscientist and surgeon at Massachusetts Eye and Ear, and Harvard Medical School, in Boston

18、. Stankovic is now working with colleagues at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne to develop imaging【 C5】 _that would allow us to see this kind of neural damage in living brains. This could help with early diagnosis. Others are developing drugs that could help【 C6】 _the connections

19、 between the ear and the brain. To properly【 C7】 _our ears, loud noises should be banned in many public places just as smoking is now, says Stankovic. Some countries have laws in place to protect【 C8】 _in bars and clubs by monitoring noise levels. Last year, Minneapolis City Council made it【 C9】 _fo

20、r bars and clubs to offer free ear buds to patrons. Stankovic thinks more will need to be done to change【 C10】_accepted norms around recreational noise. “ I think it will require a public health effort similar to the efforts for limiting smoking, because of the peer pressure associated with loud mus

21、ic and noisy environments,“ she says. A)compulsory I)socially B)condense J)standard C)exposure K)techniques D)incredibly L)transmit E)independently M)treat F)protection N)uneasy G)restore O)workers H)safeguard 27 【 C1】 28 【 C2】 29 【 C3】 30 【 C4】 31 【 C5】 32 【 C6】 33 【 C7】 34 【 C8】 35 【 C9】 36 【 C10】

22、 Section B 36 Rising Inequality Is Holding Back the U. S. Economy AIn announcing his run for the presidency last month, Jeb Bush has set an ambitious goal of 4 percent real growth in gross domestic product(GDP). This goal has been greeted with substantial skepticism from parts of the economics estab

23、lishment, while some economists have praised it as a “worthy and viable aspiration“ that could be achieved with growth-oriented policies. Our recent research implies that a 4 percent growth goal for first term of the next President is not only possible, but is what we should strive to achieve. Like

24、Hubbard and Warsh, veteran Republican economic policymakers, we agree that the U. S. needs policies that raise labor force participation, accelerate productivity growth and improve expectations. Where we part ways is the tactics. BTheir recommendations focus on supply-side policies, such as tax refo

25、rm, regulatory reform, reduced trade friction and education and training. Our research implies that a weak demand side explains the sluggish(萧条的 )recovery from the Great Recession, with the rise of income inequality as a central factor. Consequently, our policy prescriptions revolve around increasin

26、g the take-home pay of the majority of American households. The Great Recession, which began in December 2007, was the most severe American economic downturn in three-quarters of a century. Most economists did not anticipate ahead of time that this kind of thing could happen, although we warned that

27、 “it could get ugly out there“ in October 2007. CBut as the severity of the recession became apparent in the dark days of late 2008 and early 2009, many economists predicted a swift bounce-back, reasoning from historical evidence that deep downturns are followed by rapid recoveries. Sadly, that pred

28、iction was also incorrect. The growth path following the Great Recession has been historically sluggish. Our recent research, supported by the Institute for New Economic Thinking, helps explain why: The economic drag from decades of rising income inequality has held back consumer spending. DOur work

29、 studies the link between rising income inequality and U. S. household demand over the past several decades. From the middle 1980s until the middle 2000s, American consumers spent liberally despite the fact that income growth stagnated(停滞 )for most of the population. We show that the annual growth r

30、ate of household income slowed markedly in 1980 for the bottom 95 percent of the income distribution, while income growth for the top 5 percent accelerated at the same time. The result was the widely discussed rise of income inequality. EIt is also well known that household debt grew rapidly during

31、this period. Our work points out that the buildup of debt relative to income was concentrated in the bottom 95 percent of the income distribution. Debt to income for the top 5 percent bounced around with little clear trend: When the financial crisis hit, our work shows that the bottom 95 percent of

32、Americans could no longer get the rising debt they needed to continue to spend along the trend they established in the years leading up to the crisis. The result was a sharp cutback in household demand relative to income that caused the collapse of the Great Recession. FWhat about the recovery? Hous

33、ehold demand in 2013(the most recent observation we have because our computations incorporate data that are released with a lag and are available at an annual frequency only)was a stunning 17. 5 percent below its pre-recession trend, with no sign of recovering back toward the trend. What happened? O

34、ur research implies that the cutoff of credit for the group of households falling behind as income inequality rose prevented their spending from recovering to its pre-recession path. GWhile there is no reason to necessarily expect that consumer spending will follow a constant trend over long periods

35、 of time, the practical reality is that the U. S. economy needed the pre-recession trend of demand to maintain adequate growth and at least a rough approximation of full employment prior to 2007. In the middle 2000s, there was no sign of excess demand in the U. S. economy. Inflation was tame and int

36、erest rates were low. Wage growth was stagnant. Although some gradual slowing in long-term U. S. growth might have been predicted as the large baby-boom generation ages, the overall labor force participation rate was actually rising prior to the recession, so there was no reason to expect any signif

37、icant decline in labor resources in the years immediately following 2007. HYes, the way many Americans were financing their demand was unsustainable, but there is no indication that businesses could not sustainably continue to produce along the pre-recession trend if they had been able to sell the o

38、utput. Our interpretation of the evidence is that the demand drag that could be expected as the result of rising inequality is, after a delay of a-quarter century, finally constraining the U. S. economy. Intuition, theory and evidence predict that high-income people spend, on average, a smaller shar

39、e of their income than everyone else does. So as a higher share of income goes into the pockets of the well-to-do, the household sector as a whole is likely to recycle less of its income back into spending, which slows the path of demand growth. IA possible problem with this prediction for the U. S.

40、 in recent years is that income inequality began to rise in the early 1980s, but household demand remained strong through 2006. Our argument is that the demand drag from rising inequality was postponed by the buildup of debt: The bottom 95 percent borrowed rather than cut back their spending when th

41、eir income growth slowed. But as the crisis hit, lending to households collapsed, and the trend of rising debt could not continue. JThe effect of rising inequality has hit the economy hard. As a result, todays economy is underperforming. No one can know precisely how much of the stagnation in househ

42、old demand is due to the rise of inequality, but our estimates imply that the current path of total demand in the economy is at least 10 percent below where it would have been with the income distribution of the early 1980s. Where demand goes, so follows output and employment. This analysis links to

43、 the call for 4 percent growth. Considering conventional estimates of the long-term trend growth of the economy, a 4 percent growth rate through the next U. S. Presidents first term would go a long way toward closing the gap in output that opened with the collapse of household spending in the Great

44、Recession and has yet to be filled. KHow can we move toward this goal? Our research strongly implies that the main problem is on the demand side, not the supply side. The U. S. needs to find a way to boost demand growth by arresting, and hopefully reversing, the dramatic rise of inequality. The basi

45、c argument is exceedingly simple: The economy continues to be held back by insufficient household spending, and if the income share of Americans outside of the top sliver rises, household spending will increase. Policies that raise the minimum wage and reduce the tax burden of low- and middle-income

46、 households would help. LIn our view, however, the best method to achieve this objective would be to restore wage growth across the income distribution as occurred in the decades after World War II. Meeting this objective is challenging for a variety of reasons, including the fact that there remains

47、 no clear consensus about what has caused the rise of American economic inequality. But the need to address inequality is not just a matter of social justice: it also is important to get the economy back on the right track after more than seven years of stagnation. We can do better. 37 Americans wer

48、e free with their money though their income growth mostly remained still from the late 20th century to the early 21st century. 38 Contrary to many economists claims, the U. S. economy didnt experience rapid recoveries after the Great Recession. 39 Labor resources were not expected to suffer from a s

49、harp fall in the years after 2007. 40 Reducing the income inequality is of significance in terms of social justice and economic recovery. 41 The author differs from some economic policymakers on the strategies the U. S. should take to boost the economy. 42 The author estimates that the current demand should have been ten percent higher if the income distribution remained the same as the early 1980s. 43 The majority of the low-income earners continued to take on more loans rather than cut expenses wh