1、专业英语八级模拟试卷 48（无答案）SECTION A MINI-LECTUREDirections: In this section you sill hear a mini-lecture. You will hear the lecture ONCE ONLY. While listening, take notes on the important points. Your notes will not be marked, but you will need them to complete a gap-filling task after the mini-lecture. Whe
2、n the lecture is over, you will be given two minutes to check your notes, and another ten minutes to complete the gap-filling task on ANSWER SHEET ONE. Use the blank sheet for note-taking.0 How Market Leaders Keep Their EdgeResearch finds that there are three methods with which big companies keep th
3、eir advantages, and researchers name them three different value disciplines.1) Discipline of【1】_Excellence: 【1】_The company wins through cost.These companies usually try to provide customers with【2】_and 【2】_easy service, or both. They may also try their best to cut cost.Price/Costco is an example.2)
4、 Discipline of Product【3】_: 【3】_This kind of companies usually win with product.These companies attract customers mainly by continuously【4】_their product or services. 【4】_In order to achieve this purpose, they have to challenge themselves in three ways:a) They must be【5】_ ; 【5】_b) They must commerci
5、alize their【6】_ quickly; 【6】_c) They must keep【7】_ 【7】_3) Discipline of Customer Intimacy:Companies of this kind mainly win with intimate【8】_ 【8】_Intimate customer relation is like the relation between closeneighbours. These companies usually try to provide what a particularcustomer wants rather tha
6、n what the【9】_ wants in general. 【9】_These companies regard it important to understand customers andtheir need.【10】_ is the greatest assets to these companies. What they value is 【10】_not instant profit, but relationships.Cable Microsoft Corp. said it did not believe Windows users were too vulnerabl
7、e and made no immediate plans to update its software.11 Using Watsons technique to attack a computer running Windows “would not be something that would be easy to do,“ said Steve Lipner, Microsofts director for security engineering strategy.12 Already in recent weeks, some U. S. government agencies
8、and companies operating the most important digital pipelines have fortified their own vulnerable systems because of early warnings communicated by some security organizations. The White House has expressed concerns especially about risks to crucial Internet routers because attacks against them could
9、 profoundly disrupt online traffic.13 “Any flaw to a fundamental protocol would raise significant concern and require significant attention by the folks who run the major infrastructures of the Internet,“ said Amir Yoran, the governments cyber security chief. The flaw has dominated discussions since
10、 last week among experts in security circles.14 The public announcement coincides with a presentation Watson expects to make Thursday at an Internet security conference in Vancouver, British Columbia, where Watson said he would disclose full details of his research. Watson predicted that backers wou
11、ld understand how to begin launching attacks “within five minutes of walking out of that meeting.“21 Which of the following is NOT true?（A）Serious flaw uncovered in a core Internet technology had attracted international attention.（B） The Internet is held together by the glue.（C） Normal Internet oper
12、ations may survive the hacker attacks.（D）Hackers could attack computers without getting online. 22 “Somebody“ in “somebody released some tigers“ in Para. 5 refers specifically to_.（A）Internet providers（B） Internet users（C） routers（D）hackers 23 At the end of the article, the author seems to suggest_.
13、（A）there is no solution to the flaw in the Internet technology（B） there is much worry within the academic circle about Internet security（C） US government is indifferent to the hacker attacks（D）Internet traffic is easily vulnerable to hack attacks 23 1 For the Greeks, beauty was a virtue: a kind of e
14、xcellence. Persons then were assumed to be what we now have to call-lamely, enviously whole persons. If it did occur to the Greeks to distinguish between a persons “inside“ and “outside,“ they still expected that inner beauty would be matched by beauty of the other kind. The well-born young Athenian
15、s who gathered around Socrates found it quite paradoxical that their hero was so intelligent, so brave, so honorable, so seductive-and so ugly. One of Socrates main pedagogical acts was to be ugly-and teach those innocent, no doubt splendid-looking disciples of his how full of paradoxes life really
16、was.2 They may have resisted Socrates lesson. We do not. Several thousand years later, we are more wary of the enchantments of beauty. We not only split off-with the greatest facility-the “inside“ (character, intellect) from the “outside“ (looks); but we are actually surprised when someone who is be
17、autiful is also intelligent, talented, good.3 It was principally the influence of Christianity that deprived beauty of the central place it had in classical ideals of human excellence. By limiting excellence (virtus in Latin) to moral virtue only, Christianity set beauty adrift-as an alienated, arbi
18、trary, superficial enchantment. And beauty has continued to lose prestige. For close to two centuries it has become a convention to attribute beauty to only one of the two sexes: the sex which, however fair, is always Second. Associating beauty with women has put beauty even further on the defensive
19、, morally.4 A beautiful woman, we say in English, but a handsome man. “Handsome“ is the masculine equivalent of-and refusal of-a compliment which has accumulated certain demeaning overtones, by being reserved for women only. That one can call a man “beautiful“ in French and in Italian suggests that
20、Catholic countries-unlike those countriesshaped by the Protestant version of Christianity-still retain some vestiges of the pagan admiration for beauty. But the difference, if one exists, is of degree only. In every modern country that is Christian or post-Christian, women are the beautiful sex-to t
21、he detriment of the notion of beauty as well as of women.24 The author means _ by “whole persons“ in Para. 1.（A）persons of beauty（B） persons of virtue（C） persons of excellence（D）none of the above 25 Why does the author speculate that Socrates disciples may have resisted his lessons?（A）Because Socrat
22、es was ugly.（B） Because Socrates taught them to be critical.（C） Because they had a different expectation.（D）Because they were innocent. 26 The author does not think of it as a(n)_to call women the beautiful sex.（A）compliment（B） insult（C） abuse（D）humiliation 27 Which of the following is NOT true acco
23、rding to the passage?（A）Christianity draws a distinction between beauty and excellence.（B） People has lost their admiration for beauty throughout Christian society.（C） Handsome is the equivalent of “beautiful“ in meaning.（D）Women are thought to be inferior. 27 1 We often hear people ask such a quest
24、ion: Why do bad things happen to good people? The problem is: What kind of people are good? Some people make a distinction between two kinds of “good“ people. One kind of “good“ refers to innocence, as in a 2-year-old child who dies in an accident and who never intentionally hurt anyone. Another kin
25、d of “good“ refers to people who have lived long lives of humility or service, like Martin Luther King, Jr. To really answer this question, though, we have to challenge our assumptions. Why do we assume that people always get what they deserve? What if being “good“ was dependent on a lot of bad thin
26、gs happening to you?2 Looking at being “good“ as increasing strength of self, it would take trials and tribulations to increase our appreciation of what we have. Losing my life savings in an identity theft ring definitely wouldnt be a good thing, but the subsequent realization that I need to focus l
27、ess on material things and more on my emotional, social and spiritual being would be priceless. Suffering can be a blessing.3 In fact, not only is such stress necessary for increasing strength, but if bad things dont happen to good people, then perhaps they would lose those inner qualities that iden
28、tify them as “good.“4 When we think of “good“ people, we often imagine them with some sort of amazing intrinsic motivation, such as utter humility or divine inspiration. But perhaps its not that these “good“ people have such a high intrinsic motivation, but rather that others motivationis shifted to
29、 more extrinsic factors.5 Social psychologists call this shift the overjustification effect. Theyve found in various experiments that people who first started a task with inner motivation could lose that drive when given external rewards. For instance, lets say some students really like to study and
30、 end up doing well in school. Half of those students are then given money as a reward for their good grades. Eventually, those students will tend to get good grades for the money and not for their original passion. In fact, the paid students performance will decrease if you take away any money.6 Thi
31、s brings us back to why bad things happen to good people. If good things happened to me every time I did a good thing, then eventually I would only be good because I expected rewards and not for the sake of being good itself. Maybe this is why we think of people like Mother Teresa as good; she works
32、 hard without expecting lavish pay, whereas were trying to get highest-possible paying jobs coming out of college. There is an intrinsic motivation beyond our simple societal rules of karma.7 In any case, these are just a few things to think about. Obviously, if little Billy gets hurt in a horrible
33、accident, it wouldnt be really meaningful to tell his mom about the overjustification effect.8 But its worth considering that not only do bad things happen to good people, but perhaps its those bad things that make them good.28 The author mentions all BUT _ of the following assumptions that people m
34、ay have.（A）bad things should not happen to good people（B） people always get what they deserve（C） good people are intrinsically good（D）no good people intentionally hurt anyone 29 By saying “suffering can be a blessing“, the author means that_.（A）a bad thing is generally followed by a good thing（B） it
35、 is hard to tell a bad thing from a good thing（C） a bad thing sometimes can do good to people（D）a thing bad to One person may be good to another 30 According to the author, the possibility of an overjustification effect may suggest_.（A）some so-called good people may not be intrinsically good（B） all
36、good people are intrinsically good（C） some people are more resistant to extrinsic factors（D）some people may be good for the sake of being good itself 31 The author uses the “little Billy“ example to_.（A）drive home the meaning of overjustification effect（B） prove bad things do happen to good people（C
37、） dissociate one group of “good“ people from another（D）show sympathy for people like Billy 31 1 About the time that schools and others quite reasonably became interested in seeing to it that all children, whatever their background, were fairly treated, intelligence testing became unpopular.2 Some th
38、ought it was unfair to minority children. Through the past few decades such testing has gone out of fashion and many communities have indeed forbidden it. However, paradoxically, just recently a group of black parents filed a lawsuit in California claiming that the states ban on IQ testing discrimin
39、ates against their children by denying them the opportunity to take the test. (They believed, correctly, that IQ tests are a valid method of evaluating children for special education classes. ) The judge, therefore, reversed, at least partially, his original decision.3 And so the argument goes on an
40、d on. Does it benefit or harm children from minority groups to have their intelligence tested? We have always been on the side of permitting, even facilitating, such testing. If a child of any color or group is doing poorly in school it seems to us very important to know whether it is because he or
41、she is of low intelligence, or whether some other factor is the cause.4 What school and family can do to improve poor performance is influenced by its cause. It is not discriminative to evaluate either a childs physical condition or his intellectual level. Unfortunately, intellectual level seems to
42、be a sensitive subject, and what the law allows us to do varies from time to time. The same fluctuation back and forth occurs in areas other than intelligence. Thirty years or so ago, for instance, white families were encouraged to adopt black children. It was considered discriminative not to do so.
43、 And then the style changed and this cross-racial adopting became generally unpopular, and social agencies felt that black children should go to black families only. It is hard to say what are the best procedures. But surely good will on the part of all of us is needed.5 As to intelligence, in our o
44、pinion, the more we know about any childs intellectual level, the better for the child in question.32 Intelligence testing became unpopular because_.（A）it was thought to be a discrimination against minority children（B） it failed to measure childrens intellectual level precisely（C） schools arc forbid
45、den to do it（D）it became useless 33 Some black parents claimed Californias ball on IQ testing as a discrimination against their children possibly because they thought_.（A）their children have not been fairly treated（B） their children may have proved highly intelligent（C） their children were not intel
46、ligently inferior（D）their children might have proved intellectually low enough to qualify for special education 34 To improve poor performance, all EXCEPT _ of the following are thought to be important.（A）getting to know the cause（B） law regulations（C） good will（D）proper procedures 35 It can be dedu
47、ced from the passage that the author_the practice of intelligence testing.（A）disapproves of（B） resents（C） favors（D）challenges 35 1 In proposed changes to Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education, the Bush administration wants to encourage creation of single-sex public sc
48、hools and classes.2 Our studies of sexism in Americas education system have praised private single-sex schools because they offer the promise that education can transform the future of girls. Girls who attend these schools speak more freely in class, are more likely to major in math and science, and perhaps most encouraging, are more likely to attend college and graduate school.3 So, given our past support for single-sex schools, you might expect us to be real cheerleaders for the new Bush administration plan.4 But we are not cheering.5 There is a
