1、考研英语（一）模拟试卷 142 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 Insurance companies provide a service to the community by protecting it against expected and unexpected disasters. Before an insur
2、ance company will agree to【B1 】_anything, it collects accurate figures about the【B2】_. It knows, for example, that the risk of a man being killed in a plane accident is less than the risk he【B3】_in crossing a busy road. This【B4】 _it to quote low figures for travel insurance. Sometimes the risk may b
3、e high,as in motor-racing or mountaineering. Then the company【B5】_a much higher price.【B6】_too many climbers have accidents, the price rises still further. If the majority of climbers fall off mountains,the company will【B7】_to insure them.An ordinary householder may wish to protect his home against
4、fire or his【B8】_against burglary. A shop keeper may wish to insure against【B9 】_. In 【 B10】_cases,the company will check its statistics and quote a premium. If it is【B11】_,it may refuse to quote. If it insures a shop and then receives a suspicious【B12】_,it will【B13】_the claim as a means of protectin
5、g itself against false claims. It is not unknown for a businessman in debt to burn down his own premises so that he can claim much money from his insurance company. He can be sure that the fire will be investigated most carefully. Insurance companies also【B14】_insurance against shipwreck or disaster
6、 in the air. Planes and ships are very expensive, so a large【B15 】_is charged,but a【B16】_is given to companies with an accident-free record.Every week insurance companies receive premium【B17】_from customers. These payments can form a very large total【B18】_millions of dollars. The company does not le
7、ave the money in the bank. It【B19 】_in property, shares, farms and even antique paintings and stamps. Its aim is to obtain the best possible return on its investment. This is not so greedy as it may seem, since this is one way by which it can deep its premiums down and continue to make a profit【B20】
8、_being of service to the community.1 【B1 】（A）assure（B） insure（C） ensure（D）pressure2 【B2 】（A）threat（B） danger（C） risk（D）trouble3 【B3 】（A）holds（B） issues（C） intends（D）takes4 【B4 】（A）enables（B） occurs（C） refers（D）makes5 【B5 】（A）demands（B） provider（C） charges（D）offers6 【B6 】（A）If（B） When（C） Unless（D）Aft
9、er7 【B7 】（A）decline（B） incline（C） refuse（D）foresee8 【B8 】（A）property（B） income（C） investment（D）premises9 【B9 】（A）hijacking（B） kidnapping（C） robbery（D）theft10 【B10 】（A）ordinary（B） normal（C） common（D）usual11 【B11 】（A）awkward（B） unknown（C） curious（D）suspicious12 【B12 】（A）source（B） claim（C） statue（D）ori
10、gin13 【B13 】（A）discover（B） insure（C） investigate（D）protect14 【B14 】（A）receive（B） extend（C） accept（D）prevent15 【B15 】（A）premium（B） price（C） relief（D）property16 【B16 】（A）deduction（B） reduction（C） induction（D）production17 【B17 】（A）payments（B） fund（C） capital（D）allowance18 【B18 】（A）bringing up（B） turnin
11、g out（C） arriving at（D）running into19 【B19 】（A）puts（B） invests（C） awards（D）imparts20 【B20 】（A）though（B） when（C） for（D）whilePart ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)20 A curious phenomenon occurs during every economic c
12、risisthe rich whine that they are the ones who are suffering most. In current context, the wealthy even demands more tax cuts and more cuts in spending for programs aiding the poor, as every Republican presidential candidate promises.I first noticed this woe-is-me attitude among the rich in 1974 whe
13、n Alan Greenspan had just been named chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. One of his first tasks was to address a conference with emphasis on cutting programs to aid the poor, which brought demonstrators to the event. In an effort to show that everyone was suffering from inflation, Mr. Gree
14、nspan said, “ If you really wanted to examine percentage-wise who was hurt the most on their income, it was Wall Street brokers. “The urge to find ways to pity the well-off is still alive and well. Last week, Bloomberg News reported that declining bonuses are creating severe hardship for many in the
15、 top 1 percent of income distribution. One of them, Andrew Schiff, complained that his $350,000 salary barely covers his expenses. Others lamented that they could no longer go to Aspen to ski and must buy discount salmon.I have to admit that everyones suffering is subjective. But there does seem to
16、be a widespread view that the poor dont suffer as much from economic downturns because they are used to being at the bottom. As Bob Dylan put it, “ When you got, nothing, you got nothing to lose. “ Those with expectations of staying on top, who have grown used to living the good life, no doubt do su
17、ffer meaningfully when those expectations are shattered and they must learn to get by on incomes only five or 10 times the poverty-level income rather than 20 or 30 times.Admittedly, there doesnt yet seem to be much downside for Republican candidates pandering to the rich. For one thing, they all ha
18、ve billionaires and other ultrarich people funding super political action committees for them. But one of these days, the Republican nominee will be chosen and will have to compete in the general election against President Obama. And it is unlikely that the Republican nominee can win with only conse
19、rvative Republican votes; he will have to reach out to those who dont necessarily believe that cutting taxes for the rich is the one and only policy that will stimulate growth.As a January poll from the Pew Research Center shows, two-thirds of Americans see strong conflict between the rich and the p
20、oor, up from 47 percent in 2009. And a number of polls show that Americans support higher tax rates on millionaires by a ratio of 2-to-1 or more. I think the Republican nominee is going to have a hard time responding if all he has to say is the rich need more tax cuts to compensate them for all thei
21、r suffering during the economic crisis.21 From the passage, we know that Allan Greenspan_.（A）is a successful economic advisor that wins unparallel popularity（B） identifies with the Republicans in tax cut for the rich and aid cut for the poor（C） backs up the richs claim that they are hardest hit in e
22、conomic crisis（D）sympathizes more with the have-nots than with the haves22 The tone the author adopts in describing the sufferings of the rich in Paragraph 3 is_.（A）painful（B） satirical（C） suspicious（D）sympathetic23 In the authors opinion, “When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose“ is_.（A）a pre
23、vailing misconception about the poors condition in economic recession（B） a famous saying illustrative of the richs huge loss in economic recession（C） descriptive of the mainstream view that the poor should be given more aid（D）indicative of the huge wealth gap between the rich and the poor in America
24、24 The phrase “pandering to“ in Paragraph 5 is closest in meaning to_.（A）adjusting to（B） opposing to（C） catering to（D）attaching to25 It can be inferred from the last two paragraphs that_.（A）there is ulterior political considerations behind Republicans proposal to cut tax for rich（B） the Republican w
25、ill lose its edge over President Obama in next presidential election（C） the Republican bases their political proposals on deep insights into public opinion poll（D）the poll shows that preferential policies for the rich deepen misunderstanding between classes25 Being good-looking is useful in so many
26、ways. In addition to whatever personal pleasure it gives you, being attractive also helps you earn more money, find a higher-earning spouse and get better deals on mortgages. Each of these facts has been demonstrated over the past 20 years by many economists and other researchers. The effects are no
27、t small: one study showed that an American worker who was among the bottom one-seventh in looks, as assessed by randomly chosen observers, earned 10 to 15 percent less per year than a similar worker whose looks were assessed in the top one-third a lifetime difference, in a typical case, of about $23
28、0,000.Most of us, regardless of our professed attitudes, prefer as customers to buy from better-looking salespeople, as jurors to listen to better-looking attorneys, as voters to be led by better-looking politicians, as students to learn from better-looking professors. This is not a matter of evil e
29、mployers refusing to hire the ugly: in our roles as workers, customers and potential lovers we are all responsible for these effects.How could we remedy this injustice? A radical solution may be needed-, why not offer legal protections to the ugly, as we do with racial, ethnic and religious minoriti
30、es, women and handicapped individuals? We actually already do offer such protections in a few places, including in some jurisdictions in California, and in the District of Columbia, where discriminatory treatment based on looks in hiring, promotions, housing and other areas is prohibited. The mechan
31、ics of legislating this kind of protection are not as difficult as you might think. Ugliness could be protected generally in the United States by small extensions of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Ugly people could be allowed to seek help from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and ot
32、her agencies in overcoming the effects of discrimination.You might argue that people cant be classified by their looks that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. In one study, more than half of a group of people were assessed identically by each of two observers using a five-point scale; and very fe
33、w assessments differed by more than one point.There are possible other objections. “Ugliness“ is not a personal trait that many people choose to embrace; those whom we classify as protected might not be willing to admit that they are ugly. But with the chance of obtaining extra pay and promotions am
34、ounting to $230,000 in lost lifetime earnings, theres a large enough incentive to do so. Bringing antidiscrimination lawsuits is also costly, and few potential plaintiffs could afford to do so. But many attorneys would be willing to organize classes of plaintiffs to overcome these costs, just as the
35、y now do in racial-discrimination and other lawsuits.Economic arguments for protecting the ugly are as strong as those for protecting some groups currently covered by legislation. So why not go ahead and expand protection to the looks-challenged? Theres one legitimate concern. With increasingly tigh
36、t limits on government resources, expanding rights to yet another protected group would reduce protection for groups that have commanded our legislative and other attention for over 50 years. You might reasonably disagree and argue for protecting all deserving groups. Either way, you shouldnt be sur
37、prised to see theUnited States heading toward this new legal frontier.26 The main idea of the first paragraph is that_.（A）looking has something to do with the economic prospect of a person（B） the discrimination against the bad-looking is prevalent in daily life（C） the bad looking men earned 10-15 pe
38、rcent less than ordinary men per year（D）the shame of being ugly will go with a person through his life27 According to Paragraph 2, who should be responsible for the discrimination against bad looking people in the workplace?（A）The employer.（B） Public at large.（C） The customers.（D）The policy-makers.2
39、8 In the authors opinion, to legislate protection for the ugly is_.（A）ideologically radical（B） fundamentally unnecessary（C） economically unrealistic（D）legally feasible29 The result of the study mentioned in Paragraph 4 demonstrates that_.（A）peoples judgment on looking varies greatly（B） peoples judgm
40、ent on looking is generally the same（C） beauty is in the eye of the beholder（D）judgment on looking depends on your relationship with the person30 One possible way to reduce discrimination lawsuit cost is_.（A）lower compensation claim（B） apply for designated attorney（C） classify different prosecution
41、criterion（D）organize group lawsuit30 By now, the 2012 Republican presidential contenders have all been tattooed by the opposition, branded as boring, damaged, or even insane. The entire GOP(共和党的别称)is “ mad,“ as The New Republic recently put it, and the partys White House hopefuls display what The Ne
42、w Yorker calls “crackles of craziness. “ This kind of talk flows both ways, of course. But what if the big problem with Washingtonisnt nuttiness so much as a lack of it?Thats one takeaway from A First-Rate Madness, a new book of psychiatric case studies by Nassir Ghaemi, director of the Mood Disorde
43、rs Program at Tufts Medical Center. He argues that what sets apart the worlds great leaders isnt some splendidly healthy mind but an exceptionally broken one, coupled with the good luck to lead when extremity is needed. “Our greatest crisis leaders toil in sadness when society is happy,“ writes Ghae
44、mi. “Yet when calamity occurs, if they are in a position to act, they can lift up the rest of us. “If so, then what we need for these calamitous times is a calamitous mind, a madman in chief, someone whose abnormal brain can solve our abnormal problems. Perhaps the nicotine-free, no-drama Obama wont
45、 do after all. The good doctor isnt saying that all mental illness is a blessing. Only that the common diseases of the mindmania, depression, and related quirksshouldnt disqualify one from the upper stairs of public life, and for a simple reason; they are remarkably consistent predictors of brillian
46、t success.Depression in all its forms(which Ghaemi finds in Abraham Lincoln and the mildly bipolar Churchill)brings suffering, which makes one more clear-eyed, fit to recognize the worlds problems, and able to face them down like the noonday demon. Madness in all its forms(which Ghaemi detects in FD
47、R and JFK)brings resilience, which helps one learn from failure, often with enough creativity to make a new start. Most originally, Ghaemi coins “ the inverse law of sanity“ : the perils of well-being. Its why the poor, sane Neville Chamberlain chummed around with Nazi leaders while Churchills “blac
48、k dog“ foresaw a fight.In Ghaemis view, even our supposedly crazy leaders were too sane for their times, and the nation suffered. When Richard Nixon faced the Watergate crisis, “he handled it the way an average normal person would handle it: he lied, and he dug in, and he fought. “ Similarly, George
49、 W. Bush was “middle of the road in his personality traits,“ which is why his response to the September 11 attacks was simplistic, unwavering, and, above all, “normal. “So should we bring on the crazy in 2012? At the very least, we should rethink our definitions and stop assuming that normality is always good, and abnormality always bad. If Ghaemi is right, that is far too simplistic and stigmatizing, akin
