[考研类试卷]考研英语（一）模拟试卷66及答案与解析.doc

1、考研英语（一）模拟试卷 66 及答案与解析一、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. (10 points) 0 Worriers, beware: all that worrying may be for nothing. Anxiety has long been【C1】_as a symptom of super-awareness and sensitivity t

2、o clanger, but a study published in Biological Psychology turns that logic on its【C2】_.Tahl Frenkel, a graduate student in psychology at Tel Aviv University, asked 17 students who had anxious personalities and 22 students who were more cool-headed to【C3 】_when they detected fear in a series of incre

3、asingly frightened faces. As expected, the anxious group【C4】_up before their calmer【C5】_. The twist,【 C6】 _, came from the volunteers brain activity, recorded with electrodes on each students scalp. The brains of anxious subjects barely responded to the images【C7 】_the frightened face had reached a

4、certain obvious【C8 】_, at which point their brains leapt into action【C9】_caught off guard.【C10 】 _nonanxious respondents showed increasing brain activity【C11】_in the exercise, which【C12】_up subtly with each increasingly fearful face. Although their【C13】_response was slower, their brain activity sugg

5、ests that the cool-headed subjects【C14】_subtle differences in the images more quickly.The result implies that worriers are less【C15】_potential danger【C16】_the common theory that anxious individuals are super-alert. Frenkel believes that worriers low sensitivity to external warning signs causes them

6、to be【C17】_frequently by the【C18】_sudden appearance of threats, which leaves them in a state of chronic stress. The brain activity in nonanxious subjects, Frenkel explains, may be【C19 】_of an “early subconscious【C20 】_mechanism,“ which keeps them cool, calm and collected.1 【C1 】（A）dismissed（B） class

7、ified（C） rejected（D）interpreted2 【C2 】（A）head（B） face（C） shoulder（D）mind3 【C3 】（A）recall（B） identify（C） illustrate（D）speculate4 【C4 】（A）talked（B） spoke（C） called（D）sang5 【C5 】（A）acquaintances（B） associates（C） counterparts（D）colleagues6 【C6 】（A）indeed（B） moreover（C） likewise（D）however7 【C7 】（A）though

8、（B） until（C） since（D）while8 【C8 】（A）threshold（B） horizon（C） ceiling（D）latitude9 【C9 】（A）as though（B） even when（C） the moment（D）in that10 【C10 】（A）Therefore（B） Similarly（C） Meanwhile（D）Actually11 【C11 】（A）later（B） repeatedly（C） earlier（D）particularly12 【C12 】（A）sped（B） built（C） turned（D）rose13 【C13 】

9、（A）mental（B） muscular（C） psychological（D）behavioral14 【C14 】（A）picked up on（B） put up with（C） faced up to（D）came up with15 【C15 】（A）resistant to（B） aware of（C） hostile to（D）afraid of16 【C16 】（A）affirming（B） modifying（C） shaping（D）challenging17 【C17 】（A）irritated（B） perplexed（C） startled（D）suppressed

10、18 【C18 】（A）seemingly（B） obviously（C） fairly（D）relatively 19 【C19 】（A）source（B） requirement（C） evidence（D）assessment 20 【C20 】（A）defending（B） learning（C） escaping（D）warningPart ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)20 Su

11、ppose Charles Darwin had been swept overboard and drowned during the voyage of the Beagle. What would the world be like without him? That is the question Peter Bowler sets out to answer in Darwin Deleted. He uses the notion of a world without Darwin to explore the context of evolutionary thought in

12、the 19th century, and examine exactly what Darwins contributions were.In many ways, says Bowler, Darwin played less of a role than you might suppose. The concept of evolution was already around before Darwins Origin was published in 1859. Geologists were beginning to realise that Earth was much more

13、 than a few thousand years old, and palaeontologists were piecing together a fossil record that testified to vast changes in life forms over a long period of time. Darwins big idea was that evolution proceeded by natural selection; better-adapted individuals are more likely to survive and reproduce,

14、 and thus pass on adaptive traits to their offspring, while less well-adapted individuals die taking their failed traits with them. Others, notably Alfred Russel Wallace, came up a similar idea at about the same time, but only Darwins book attracted wide attention.That concept, with its emphasis on

15、struggle, competition and the relentless elimination out of failures, was a bombshell. How could a merciful God permit such violence, such wastefulness? Darwins theory instantly polarised the public, with conservative Christians rejecting it outright and anti-religionists using it as an argument aga

16、inst the established church. Without Darwin, Bowler says, anti-religionists might have seized another sword, perhaps using geological evidence for an ancient Earth as their weapon.Modern opponents may argue that Darwinism laid the foundation for societal amorality, resulting in two world wars and th

17、e Nazi atrocities. So would a world without Darwin have been a kinder, gentler place? Not likely, says Bowler, who shows that the factors underlying the horrors of the past century or so, such as racism or imperialism, existed long before Darwin. True, the notion of Darwinism provided a useful rheto

18、rical framework, as when Nazis spoke of “racial purification“ as a step toward the evolution of better humans. But without Darwin they could easily have turned to another metaphor, says Bowler, such as the need to excise a cancer from society.All this is fascinating and should have made a lively boo

19、k. But Bowler is so elaborate on his historical detail, so careful to explore every angle of each point he makes, that he often leaves the reader unsure where he is going. Even so, the book is worth the effort. Bowler concludes that where Darwin really mattered was in timing. Here, ironically, the s

20、hock of his book, and the polarisation it caused, may have delayed the acceptance of evolution. The great man was ahead of his time, and science may have paid a price for that.21 We learn from Paragraph 2 that the idea of evolution through natural selection _.（A）had arisen long before the publicatio

21、n of Origin（B） was less influential than generally supposed（C） was shared by some of Darwins contemporaries（D）originated from geological evidences and fossil records22 Which of the following is true of Darwins theory of evolution?（A）It was initiated as a weapon against religion.（B） It offered solide

22、r evidences against religion than geology.（C） It split the religionists into two opposing groups.（D）It met strong oppositions from religionists.23 According to Bowler,attributing two world wars to Darwinism is_.（A）a shallow viewpoint（B） a profound insight（C） a reasonable account（D）an untested excuse

23、24 According to Darwin Deleted, Darwin_.（A）holds some responsibility for decline in social morality（B） has deferred the public embrace of evolution（C） emphasizes cooperation over competition（D）contributes little to scientific development25 The authors attitude towards Darwin Deleted can be generally

24、 described as_.（A）approving（B） skeptical（C） indifferent（D）critical25 When a coalition of internet activists and web companies scuppered the Hollywood-sponsored Stop Online Piracy Act(SOPA)last year, they warned Congress that future attempts to push through legislation that threatened digital freedom

25、s would be met with a similar response. Now some of them are up in arms again, this time against the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act(C1SPA). This is one of several bills designed to reinforce Americas cyber-defences that were being discussed by the House of Representatives.Whatever the

26、 outcome of the deliberations, the fuss surrounding CISPA is unlikely to die down soon. Its fans, which include companies such as IBM and Intel, say the bills provisions will help America defend itself against attempts by hackers to penetrate vital infrastructure and pinch companies intellectual pro

27、perty. CISPAs critics, which include the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital-rights group, and Mozilla, the maker of the Firefox web browser, argue that it could achieve that goal without ignoring privacy laws designed to prevent the government getting its hands on citizens private data withou

28、t proper judicial oversight.CISPA aims to encourage intelligence-sharing. Companies and spies often keep quiet a-bout cyber-threats because they fear that sharing the details may land them in legal hot water. But this makes it harder both to hunt hackers, and to defend power grids and other infrastr

29、ucture against online assaults. The bill encourages both groups to be more forthcoming by offering them an exemption from civil and criminal liability when gathering and sharing data about cyber-threats.The trouble is that although its goal is laudable, the bill is vague about what sort of informati

30、on on cyber-threats can be shared. So in theory everything from e-mails to medical records could end up being shipped to intelligence agencies, even if it is not needed. Harvey Anderson of Mozilla says CISPA “creates a black hole“ through which all kinds of data could be sucked in by the government.

31、The bill does forbid the use by officials of personal information from medical records, tax returns and a list of other documents. But its critics say it would be far better if companies had to get rid of such data before sharing what is left. They also note that the broad legal protection CISPA off

32、ers to firms could be abused by companies keen to cover up mishaps in their handling of customer data. A more carefully worded legal remedy would stop that happening.All this has exposed a rift in the internet world Whereas Mozilla and other firms want CISPA to be overhauled or scrapped, some web fi

33、rms that helped sink SOPA seem ambivalent. Google claims it has taken no formal position on the draft legislation and is “watching the process closely“. But TechNet, an industry group whose members include the web giant and Facebook, has written to the House Intelligence Committee expressing support

34、 for CISPA. If Google and other web companies do have doubts about some of the bills provisions, now would be the time for them to sound the alarm.26 We learn from the first paragraph that SOPA has_.（A）incurred criticism（B） raised suspicion（C） received acclaim（D）aroused curiosity27 It can be inferre

35、d from Paragraph 2 that the critics criticize CISPA for its_.（A）obsession with cyber security（B） invasion of intellectual property（C） threat of privacy violation（D）lack of judicial oversight28 Harvey Anderson holds that CISPA_.（A）fails to clarify what kind of information can be shared（B） adds huge b

36、urden to intelligence agencies（C） facilitates the Americas cyber-defences by intelligence-sharing（D）helps the government get hands on personal data29 According to Paragraph 5, the critics note that CISPA_.（A）weakens government officials power（B） offers full data protection over access（C） lacks justi

37、fiable punishment for data misuse（D）stands all in favor of web companies30 The authors attitude towards the standing of those web firms like Google is one of_.（A）appreciation（B） understanding（C） indulgence（D）opposition30 This week, some 27,000 freshly published research articles will pour into the W

38、eb of Science, a vast online database of scientific publications. Almost all of these papers will stay there forever, a fixed contribution to the research literature. But maybe five or six will one day receive sciences ultimate post-publication punishment; retraction, the official declaration that a

39、 paper is so flawed that it must be withdrawn from the literature. It is reassuring that retractions are so rare, for behind at least half of them lies some shocking tale of scientific misconduct plagiarism, altered images or faked dataand the other half are admissions of embarrassing mistakes. But

40、retraction notices are increasing rapidly.Perhaps surprisingly, scientists and editors broadly welcome the trend. “I dont think theres any doubt that were detecting more fraud, and that systems are more responsive to misconduct. Its become more acceptable for journals to step in,“ says Nicholas Sten

41、eck, a research ethicist at the University of Michigan. But as retractions become more commonplace, stresses that have always existed in the system are starting to show more vividly.When the Committee on Publication Ethics(COPE)surveyed editors attitudes to retraction two years ago, it found huge di

42、fferences in policies and practices between journals. That survey led to retraction guidelines that COPE published in 2009. But its still the case that editors often have to be pushed to retract. Other frustrations include obscure retraction notices that dont explain why a paper has been withdrawn,

43、aj tendency for authors to keep citing retracted papers long after theyve been red-flagged and the fact that many scientists hear retraction and immediately think misconduct a stigma that may keep researchers from coming forward to admit honest errors.Perfection may be too much to expect from any sy

44、stem that has to deal with human error in all its messiness. But as more retractions hit the headlines, some researchers are calling for ways to improve their handling. Suggested reforms include better systems for linking papers to their retraction notices, more responsibility on the part of journal

45、 editors and, most of all, greater clarity about mistakes in research.The reasons behind the rise in retractions are still unclear. I dont think that there is suddenly a boom in the production of fraudulent or erroneous work. Instead, the growth in retractions has come from an increased awareness of

46、 research misconduct. Thats thanks in part to the setting up of regulatory bodies. These ensure greater accountability for the research institutions, which, along with researchers, are responsible for detecting mistakes.The growth also owes a lot to the emergence of software for easily detecting pla

47、giarism and image manipulation, combined with the greater number of readers that the Internet brings to research papers. In the future, wider use of such software could cause the rate of retraction notices to dip as fast as it increased, simply because more of the problematic papers will be screened

48、 out before they reach publication. On the other hand, editors newfound comfort with talking about retraction may lead to notices coming at an even greater rate.31 The first paragraph implies that the Web of Science_.（A）may have collected more articles than expected（B） may have loaded some serious f

49、lawed papers（C） might receive punishment from science community（D）might have got involved in scientific misconduct32 The present retraction system can be generally described as “_“.（A）lacking transparency and consistency（B） being responsive and responsible（C） being unfair and unjust to obscure authors（D）being guided clearly and improving greatly33 It can be concluded that there is recently a bo