1、考研英语（阅读）模拟试卷 104 及答案与解析Part ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)0 Its a brand new worlda world built around brands. Hard-charging, noise-making, culture-shaping brands are everywhere. Theyre on supermarket shelves, of
2、course, but also in business plans for dotcom startups and in the names of sports complexes. Brands are infiltrating peoples everyday livesby sticking their logos on clothes, in concert programs, on subway-station walls, even in elementary-school classrooms.We live in an age in which CBS newscasters
3、 wear Nike jackets on the air, in which Burger King and McDonalds open kiosks in elementary-school lunchrooms, in which schools like Stanford University are endowed with a Yahoo! Founders Chair. But as brands reach(and then overreach)into every aspect of our lives, the companies behind them invite m
4、ore questions, deeper scrutinyand an inevitable backlash by consumers.“Our intellectual lives and our public spaces are being taken over by marketingand that has real implications for citizenship,“ says author and activist Naomi Klein. “Its important for any healthy culture to have public spacea pla
5、ce where people are treated as citizens instead of as consumers. Weve completely lost that space.“Since the mid-1980s, as more and more companies have shifted from being about products to being about ideasStarbucks isnt selling coffee; its selling community!those companies have poured more and more
6、resources into marketing campaigns.To pay for those campaigns, those same companies figured out ways to cut costs elsewhere for example, by using contract labor at home and low-wage labor in developing countries. Contract laborers are hired on a temporary, per-assignment basis, and employers have no
7、 obligation to provide any benefits(such as health insurance)or long-term job security. This saves companies money but obviously puts workers in vulnerable situations. In the United States, contract labor has given rise to so-called McJobs, which employers and workers alike pretend are temporaryeven
8、 though these jobs are usually held by adults who are trying to support families.The massive expansion of marketing campaigns in the 1980s coincided with the reduction of government spending for schools and for museums. This made those institutions much too willing, even eager, to partner with priva
9、te companies. But companies took advantage of the needs of those institutions, reaching too far, and overwhelming the civic space with their marketing agendas.1 Which of the following does the author NOT state as a factor in the increasing presence of brands in peoples lives?（A）The aggressive nature
10、 of corporate marketing.（B） The lack of government funding for schools and museums.（C） The lack of government regulations of marketing methods.（D）The corporate funding of public spaces.2 Naomi Kleins attitude towards the infiltration of brands into public spaces is one of _.（A）concern（B） ambivalence
11、（C） outrage（D）acceptance3 The text suggests that most contract laborers in the U. S._.（A）pretend to be part-time workers（B） may have trouble supporting their families financially（C） have work conditions comparable to those of low-wage workers overseas（D）are likely to receive health benefits from the
12、ir employers4 This text is mainly about_.（A）the problems with current corporate practices（B） the nature of current marketing campaigns and strategies（C） the importance of brands in American culture（D）the excessive presence of brands and marketing in peoples lives5 The last paragraph tells us that_.（
13、A）inadequate federal funding facilitated the privatization of schools and museums（B） public institutions were too quick to accept corporate marketing as a source of funding（C） companies manipulated schools through sophisticated ad campaigns（D）by the 1980s, very few public institutions were not being
14、 funded by corporations5 For centuries in Spain and Latin America, heading home for lunch and a snooze with the family was something like a national right, but with global capitalism standardizing work hours, this idyllic habit is fast becoming an endangered pleasure. Ironically, all this is happeni
15、ng just as researchers are beginning to note the health benefits of the mid-afternoon nap.According to a nationwide survey, less than 25 percent of Spaniards still enjoy siestas. And like Spain, much of Latin America has adopted Americanized work schedules, too, with shortened lunch times and more r
16、igid work hours. Last year the Mexican government passed a law limiting lunch breaks to one hour and requiring its employees to work their eight-hour shift between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Before the mandate, workers would break up the shiftgoing home midday for a long break with the family and returning t
17、o work until about 9 or 10 p.m. The idea of siesta is changing in Greece, Italy and Portugal, too, as they rush to join their more “industrious“ counterparts in the global market.Most Americans I know covet sleep, but the idea of taking a nap mid-afternoon equates with laziness, unemployment and gen
18、eral sneakiness. Yet according to a National Sleep Survey poll, 65 percent of adults do not get enough sleep. Numerous scientific studies document the benefits of nap taking, including one 1997 study on the deleterious effects of sleep deprivation in the journal Internal Medicine. The researchers fo
19、und that fatigue harms not only marital and social relations but worker productivity.According to Mark Rosekind, a former NASA scientist and founder of Alertness Solutions in Cupertino, Calif., which educates businesses about the advantages of sanctioning naps, were biologically programmed to get sl
20、eepy between 3 and 5 p.m. and 3 and 5 a.m. Our internal timekeepercalled the circadian clockoperates on a 24-hour rotation and every 12 hours theres a dip. In accordance with these natural sleep rhythms, Rosekind recommends that naps be either for 40 minutes or for two hours. Latin American countrie
21、s, asserts Rosekind, have had it right all along. Theyve been in sync with their clocks; we havent.Since most of the world is sleep-deprived, getting well under the recommended eight hours a night(adults get an average of 6.5 hours nightly), we usually operate on a kind of idle midday. Naps are even
22、 more useful now that most of us forfeit sleep because of insane work schedules, longer commute times and stress. In a study published last April, Brazilian medical researchers noted that blood pressure and arterial blood pressure dropped during a siesta.6 In the second sentence of para. 1, “all thi
23、s“ refers to_.（A）the habit of napping（B） the standardizing of work hours（C） the decline of the siesta tradition（D）the growth of global capitalism7 We can infer from the second paragraph that Mexican workers now_.（A）work fewer hours than in the past（B） get home from work much later than in the past（C
24、） work more reasonable hours than in the past（D）finish the workday earlier than in the past8 The word “covet“ in paragraph 3 most likely means “_“.（A）need（B） desire（C） lack（D）value9 The author suggests that most Americans feel that_.（A）Spanish culture is inefficient（B） nap-taking will put their jobs
25、 at risk（C） nap-taking is a sign of laziness（D）they get plenty of sleep10 This text is mainly about_.（A）the health benefits of afternoon naps（B） the negative effects of sleep-deprivation on health and worker productivity（C） the importance of the siesta tradition in Spain and Latin America（D）the sies
26、ta tradition and its health benefits10 The Internet, e-commerce and globalization are making a new economic era possible. By the middle of the 21 st century, capitalist markets will largely be replaced by a new kind of economic system based on networked relationships, contractual arrangements and ac
27、cess rights.Has the quality of our lives at work, at home and in our communities increased in direct proportion to all the new Internet and business-to-business Intranet services being introduced into our lives? I have asked this question to hundreds of CEOs and corporate executives in Europe and th
28、e United States. Surprisingly, virtually everyone has said, “No, quite the contrary.“ The very people responsible for ushering in what some have called a “technological renaissance“ say they are working longer hours, feel more stressed, are more impatient, and are even less civil in their dealings w
29、ith colleagues and friendsnot to mention strangers. And whats more revealing, they place much of the blame on the very same technologies they are so aggressively championing.The techno gurus promised us that access would make life more convenient and give us more time. Instead, the very technologica
30、l wonders that were supposed to liberate us have begun to enslave us in a web of connections from which there seems to be no easy escape.If an earlier generation was preoccupied with the quest to enclose a vast geographic frontier, the dotcom generation, it seems, is more caught up in the colonizati
31、on of time. Every spare moment of our time is being filled with some form of commercial connection, making time itself the most scarce of all resources. Our e-mail, voice mail and cell phones, our 24-hour electronic trading markets, online banking services, all-night e-commerce, and 24-hour Internet
32、 news and entertainment all holler for our attention.And while we have created every kind of labor-and time-saving device to service our needs, we are beginning to feel like we have less time available to us than any other humans in history. That is because the great proliferation of labor-and time-
33、saving services only increases the diversity, pace and flow of commodified activity around us. For example, e-mail is a great convenience. However, we now find ourselves spending much of our day frantically responding to each others electronic messages. The cell phone is a great time-saver. Except n
34、ow we are always potentially in reach of someone else who wants our attention.Social conservatives talk about the decline in civility and blame it on the loss of a moral compass and religious values. Has anyone bothered to ask whether the hyperspeed culture is making all of us less patient and less
35、willing to listen and defer, consider and reflect?Maybe we need to ask what kinds of connections really count and what types of access really matter in the e-economy era. If this new technology revolution is only about hyperefficiency, then we risk losing something even more precious than timeour se
36、nse of what it means to be a caring human being.11 The author suggests that the most valuable resource in todays society is_.（A）technology（B） economic assets（C） access to information（D）time12 We learn from this text that many corporate executives feel that_.（A）technological advances are essential to
37、 todays economic system（B） technology has actually led to a decline in their quality of life（C） longer hours are making their workers more impatient and uncivil（D）technology can be blamed for many of todays social problems13 The phrase “the colonization of time“(line 2, para. 4)refers to_.（A）the fil
38、ling of every moment of time with commercial transactions（B） the quest for efficiency in the workplace（C） the growing use of electronic mail and other time-saving services（D）the impact of technology on our sense of time14 In the sixth paragraph the author suggests that_.（A）new technologies may make
39、people more impatient（B） social conservatives do not understand the importance of technology（C） the speed of modern culture may improve our moral and religious values（D）people in the technology sector are less civil than those in other fields 15 The best title for this text could be_.（A）The Failure
40、of the Technological Renaissance（B） Even Corporate Executives Get the Blues（C） The New Internet Economy（D）The Disadvantages of Too Much Access15 How different would the world be today if there had been no 9/11? What if the attacks had been foiled or bungled? One obvious answer is that Americans woul
41、d probably care a lot less than they do about the rest of the world.Back on the eve of destruction, in early September 2001, only 13 percent of Americans believed that the U.S. should be “the single world leader.“ And fewer than a third favored higher defense spending. Now those figures are naturall
42、y much higher. Right?Wrong. According to the most recent surveys, just 12 percent of Americans today think the U.S. should be the sole superpoweralmost exactly the same proportion as on the eve of the 9/11 attacks. The share of Americans who want to see higher spending on national security is actual
43、ly down to 26 percent. Paradoxically, Americans today seem less interested in the wider world than they were before the Twin Towers were felled.In the past 10 years, the U.S. has directly or indirectly overthrown at least three governments in the Muslim world. Yet Americans today feel less powerful
44、than they did then. In 2001 just over a quarter felt that the U.S. had “a less important role as a world leader compared to 10 years ago.“ The latest figure is 41 percent.Three explanations suggest themselves. First, wielding power abroad proved harder in practice than in neoconservative theory. Sec
45、ond, the financial crisis has dampened American spirits. A third possibility is that 9/11 simply didnt have that big an impact on American opinion.Yet to conclude that 9/11 didnt change much is to misunderstand the historical process. The world is a seriously complex place, and a small change to the
46、 web of events can have huge consequences. Our difficulty is imagining what those consequences might have been.So lets play a game like the one my friends at the Muzzy Lane software company are currently designing, which has the working title “New World Disorder.“ The game simulates the complex inte
47、raction of economics, politics, and international relations, allowing us to replay the past.Lets start in January 2001 and thwart the 9/11 attacks by having Condi Rice and Paul Wolfowitz heed Richard Clarkes warnings about Al Qaeda. The game starts off well. Al -Qaeda is preemptively decapitated, it
48、s leaders rounded up in a series of covert operations and left to the tender mercies of their home governments. President Bush gets to focus on tax cuts, his first love.But then, three years later, the murky details of this operation surface on the front page of The New York Times. John Kerry, the D
49、emocratic candidate for the presidency, denounces the “criminal conduct“ of the Bush administration. Liberal pundits foam at the mouth. Ordinary Americans, unseared by 9/11, are shocked. Osama bin Laden issues a fierce denunciation of the U.S. from his Saudi prison cell. It triggers a wave of popular anger in the Middle East that topples any regime seen as too close to Washington.In other words, if things had happened differently 10 years agoif there had been no 9/11 and no re
