1、专业八级分类模拟 335 及答案解析(总分：100.00，做题时间：90 分钟)一、WRITING(总题数：6，分数：100.00)1.题目要求：Affluent Chinese are traveling abroad frantically buying international brands such as Louis Vuitton, Chanel and Gucci. Why do you think China“s rich spend big on luxury goods? The following are opinions from different consumers
2、. Read the excerpts carefully and write your response in about 300 words, in which you should: 1. summarize briefly the different opinions; 2. give your comment. Marks will be awarded for content relevance, content sufficiency, organization and language quality. Failure to follow the above instructi
3、ons may result in, a loss of marks. Mrok (Japan): I would like to say that it is also a trend of a group of people who become rich from being poor in a short time. So, most of them are eager to show their “success“ in the economic aspect in order to earn respect from others, and luxury goods seem to
4、 be the best “symbol of success“. Another reason for this is the highly-valued competition in Chinese society, as well as in other East Asian neighbors. That is why those people buy Prada by day but sleep in a 2-star hotel by night (they don“t want to be “the loser“ in the “competition“). It also ha
5、ppened in Japan 20 years ago. Gaoshuangera (China): As a student, I don“t understand why we need a LV bag, especially if purchasing it with our parents“ money. Also, I don“t like the idea that “people look down on me if I don“t have a LV bag“. If you are really rich and you can afford a LV hag easil
6、y, why not? But if you want it just because of what others say, it is just “xurongxin“ (vanity) as we say in Chinese. Himani (India): I think it“s true not only of China but also of many other Asian countries like India because these countries have very high import taxes. Also it“s a matter of statu
7、s symbol when people brag about visiting abroad and going shopping in the US or in the UK. Felix (the US): China has imposed high import tariffs on luxuries, partly for the protectionism of their local productswhich is understandable. When living in Hong Kong and Singapore, I used to wonder why the
8、mainland Chinese would be so ready to spend big money on luxury goods when traveling. I now understand that their purchasing behavior is partly due to practical considerations (cheaper, more varieties, better service, etc.) and partly due to pent-up demand. Xilaren (Greece): I had the chance to visi
9、t luxury shops in Athens, which had at least 15 Chinese women and men buying Gucci handbags. What is surprising to me is that none of them bought luxury shoes or clothes. Wearing a Rolex and carrying a Gucci handbag require matching shoes and clothes. Otherwise the luxury products are a failure. Thi
10、s kind of buying shows me something saddening. Do these people care only about showing off by holding a Gucci handbag and do not care about clothes and shoes simply because nobody can recognize the brand of the shoes? If this is the case, then it is really saddening. JGVk (the UK): I have met many C
11、hinese visitors in London. One of the main reasons why they buy many luxury items, instead of one or two, is simple. Many of them are first-time overseas tourists. In China and in most of Asia, there is a social obligation to buy presents of equal quality for friends and relatives. Over time, this “
12、obligation“ may disappeartherefore, their shopping habits will change over the next few years. （分数：16.50）_2.题目要求：A campaign calling for the death penalty for child traffickers has recently gone viral on China“s online social networks. Do you agree or disagree that child trafficking should be a death
13、 penalty offense? Do you think death penalty deters child traffickers? The following are opinions from different sides. Read the excerpts carefully and write your response in about 300 words, in which you should: 1. summarize briefly the different opinions; 2. give your comment. Marks will be awarde
14、d for content relevance, content sufficiency, organization and language quality. Failure to follow the above instructions may result in a loss of marks. Pnp Child traffickers must be sentenced to death because their greed brings pain and lasting misery to parents whose kids they traffic in! If you k
15、now a bit of the suffering of those parents who lost their kids to traffickers, their sleepless nights, their nightmares thinking of their beloved kids, their lives being turned upside down, and being unable to lead a normal life, you probably won“t suggest such a soft approach! The death penalty is
16、 a very powerful deterrent; traffickers would think twice before they embark on this heinous crime against humanity! To postulate that it will endanger the lives of the kids, and therefore the death penalty should not be applied, is to cave in to the traffickers! I feel sorry for the kids and their
17、parents. Smuffy Death penalty will not deter the child traffickers, since child trafficking is such a lucrative trade. Instead, it will pose a serious threat to the child victims. China should reform its adoption system, thus forcing some families to resort to legal measures to adopt a child. Seneca
18、 I am opposed to any killing of people, legal or otherwise. Death penalty solves no problem and only helps barbarity gain acceptance in the population. It is utterly devastating to lose one“s child to a kidnapper who resells him to someone else. But have you ever taken the causes of this crime into
19、consideration? China has enacted and enforced the one child family policy. This policy is quite reasonable against a background of demographics and economics, but it is unnatural and it also creates untold sufferings. What if a woman miscarries and loses her ability to conceive again? What if a coup
20、le have waited too long for their child to come? They have little option but to visit the grey and black market in search of a child. The question as to how to judicially treat child abductors and traffickers is a different one. Many crimes are committed out of sheer avarice; killing in retaliation
21、does not make people more moral. Just think how lightly some corrupt officials get off the hook and you can understand that the death penalty is no solution. The countries in West Europe that have no death penalty have the lowest crime rates while the countries with death penalty see their crime rat
22、es go from bad to worse. Becky5512 Every child is the treasure of his parents. If you are in a situation where you are trapped in losing your child and unfortunately getting the news about the slack crackdown on those traffickers, how painful and desperate will you be? Definitely, effective measures
23、 should be taken to block the channel of trafficking children. Seanboyce88 You may think that offenders would think twice but an American research has shown that, the death penalty is an awful deterrent. It is simply an act of vengeance. I believe that the use of punishment is to teach someone right
24、 from wrong, and that most actions stem from societal issues. If poor people had better wages, maybe they wouldn“t have to be child traffickers to pay the bills. Killing for vengeance just creates a spiral of hate. Nothing is gained from it. （分数：16.50）_3.题目要求：Recently, one local committee voted (5-2
25、) to pass a measure requiring distributors of bottled or canned sugary, drinks to put a warning label on their beverage, ls putting warning labels on sugary drinks a good idea or a bad one? The following are opinions from different sides. Read the excerpts carefully and write your response in about
26、300 words, in which you should: 1. summarize briefly the different opinions; 2. give your comment. Marks will be awarded for content relevance, content sufficiency, organization and language quality. Failure to follow the above instructions may result in a loss of marks. Loveboy56 With the labels, w
27、e can know, if we need to, the amount that we drink. If we have the labels then doctors can know if the amount that we drink is dangerous; with this we can protect our bodies from sugar defects, brain defects, and blood clots. If you disagree, then think about all the people who die because of sugar
28、. I“m not saying that sodas and candies are bad; I am saying that having sodas and candies every day can harm you. Krampus People should know what they are drinking when they are drinking sodas! I do not get it! When you purchase a soda, you should know that there is a lot of sugar in it. In the end
29、, I just do not believe these “warnings“ are going to stop any one from drinking their favorite soda anyway. We have all been taught that sugar is bad, so to reiterate that is pointless and it is a waste of money for those soda brands. Even a moderately educated blind person should understand that w
30、hen they purchase soda. And if you still need to check if there is sugar in Coca Cola, there is something called nutrition facts. Simply turn the can and you will find a white box. Yes, that is it. Congratulations! You did it! Or do we want to put a sugar warning in the front to save people the extr
31、a effort to turn a can? Pet 4050 Many people don“t know what they are putting in their body, so with the help of the warning labels there can be less people drinking sugary drinks and less deaths every year. It helps people to be more careful with what they eat and drink because you never know what
32、might happen if people just keep drinking or eating things with sugar or just junk in general. One day we are all going to die if we don“t do something now. Queenk There are already “warnings“ which are nutrition facts. Besides those, it needs nothing else to let consumers know what they are drinkin
33、g. If we put warnings there, you might as well put warnings on everything. Gahia 786 There should be warning labels on sugary drinks, so that people could know what they are drinking. Nutrition facts are different from warning labels because nutrition facts do not warn us. For example, warning label
34、s warn us if we can get cancer while nutrition facts do not. 2016 hacker No one looks at labels on soda. It is a big waste of time and nobody cares about labels and we all drink what we want to drink. People can ask the company themselves if they want to know what they are drinking. So go have fun d
35、rinking something that you don“t even know what“s inside. Labels or not, I“m drinking my soda. （分数：16.50）_4.题目要求：Animal research, including medical research, toxicology testing, and psychological research involving animal subjects, has been used for several centuries as part of our efforts to better
36、 understand the world around us. Should animal testing be banned? The following are opinions from different sides. Read the excerpts carefully and write your response in about 300 words, in which you should: 1. summarize briefly the different opinions; 2. give your comment. Marks will be awarded for
37、 content relevance, content sufficiency, organization and language quality. Failure to follow the above instructions may result in a loss of marks. Clark: Animals have a right not to be harmed. The differences between us and other vertebrates (脊椎动物) are a matter of degree rather than kind. If we acc
38、ept as true for the sake of argument, that all humans have a right not to be harmed, simply by virtue of existing as a being of moral worth, then we must ask what makes animals so different. If animals can feel what we feel, and suffer as we suffer, then to discriminate merely on the arbitrary diffe
39、rence of belonging to a different species, is analogous to discriminating on the basis of any other morally arbitrary characteristic, such as race or sex. If sexual and racial moral discrimination is wrong, then so is speciesism. Frey: Animals“ rights are of less moral worth than human rights. Anima
40、l lives and human lives are of unequal value. This is due to the fact that no animal possesses all of these characteristics to the same degree as the average human, or even comes particularly close. Thus any rights ascribed to animals should be truncated relative to the rights we ascribe to humans.
41、Therefore animals should not rightly possess the same rights to not be experimented upon as humans might. To the extent to which causing some harm to animals brings great benefits to humans, we are morally justified in creating some moral harm, to achieve a far greater moral good. Peta: Research can
42、 be done effectively without experimenting on living creatures. Science and technology has moved faster than research protocols, however, and so there is no longer a need for animals to be experimented on. The previous necessity of the use of animals is no longer a good excuse for continued use of a
43、nimals for research. We would still retain all the benefits that previous animal research has brought to us but should not engage in any more. Thus modern research has no excuse for using animals. Tia: Animal research is necessary for the development of truly novel substances. After the effects, sid
44、e effects and more complex interactions of a drug have been confirmed using animal and non-animal testing, it will usually pass to what is called a phase I clinical trialtests on human volunteers to confirm how the drug will interact with human physiology and what dosages it should be administered i
45、n. The risk of a human volunteer involved in a phase I trial being harmed is extremely small, but only because animal tests, along with non-animal screening methods are a highly effective way of ensuring that dangerous novel drugs are not administered to humans. In the United Kingdom, over the past
46、twenty years or more, there have been no human deaths as a result of phase I clinical trial. Beth: It would send a positive social message, increasing animal welfare rights more generally in society. This creates a clear moral tension, as one group within society is able to inflect what to any other
47、 group would be illegal suffering and cruelty toward animals. If states are serious about persuading people against cock fighting, dancing bears, and the simple maltreatment of pets and farm animals, then such goals would be enhanced by a more consistent legal position about the treatment of animals
48、 by everyone in society. （分数：16.50）_5.题目要求：The conflict between economic development and environmental protection is constantly under public debate. Should developing countries prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict? The following are opinions from different sides. Read the excerpts carefully and write your response in about 300 words, in which you should: 1. summarize briefly the different opinions; 2. give your comment. Marks will be awarded for content relevance, content sufficiency
