专业八级-600及答案解析.doc

《专业八级-600及答案解析.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《专业八级-600及答案解析.doc（28页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、专业八级-600 及答案解析(总分：100.00，做题时间：90 分钟)一、PART LISTENING COM(总题数：0，分数：0.00)二、SECTION A(总题数：1，分数：15.00)Writing Experimental Reports. Content of an experimental report, e.g. study subject/area study 1 study 2 . 3 of an experimental report providing details regarding readers as 4 . Structure of an experime

2、ntal report feature: highly structured and 5 sections and their content: INTRODUCTION 6 ; why you did it METHOD how you did it RESULT what you found out 7 what you think it shows . Sense of readership 8 : reader is the marker 9 : reader is an idealized, hypothetical, intelligent person with little k

3、nowledge of your study tasks to fulfill in an experimental report: 10 to relevant area necessary background information development of clear arguments definition of 11 precise description of data 12 . Demands and expectations in report writing early stage: understanding of study subject/area and its

4、 13 basic grasp of the report“s format later stage: 14 on research significance things to avoid in writing INTRODUCTION: inadequate material 15 of research justification for the study （分数：15.00）填空项 1:_三、SECTION B(总题数：2，分数：10.00)（分数：5.00）A.New ideas about wars.B.A feeling of freedom.C.A sense of inde

5、pendence.D.New ways of living.A.They began to drink in public with men.B.They listened to jazz and danced together.C.They dressed more daringly.D.They smoked more than before.A.Jazz became a big hit.B.Movies made them excited.C.They were shy to dance in public.D.They often listened to opera.A.Many y

6、oung women were forced to join the army.B.The rate of students attending high schools decreased.C.People were becoming more conservative.D.American women were increasingly independent.A.Offering women more career opportunities.B.Giving women rights to use new machines.C.Authorizing women voting righ

7、ts.D.Protecting women from family violence.（分数：5.00）A.They helped government to make laws.B.They provided more practical courses.C.They helped women fight for their rights.D.They brought convenience to people.A.The world enjoyed great peace.B.Women also went out to work.C.The economic conditions imp

8、roved greatly.D.Social violence decreased a lot.A.Their life became more colorful.B.People struggled to make ends meet.C.There were more and more big families.D.Their life didn“t change a lot.A.News about exploration attracted people.B.People were interested in disaster news.C.Sports news fascinated

9、 people.D.Forces that pushed the social changes changed.A.He used to lead a wild way of life.B.He was a famous football player.C.He was short but very strong.D.He was admired for his bravery.四、PART READING COMPR(总题数：1，分数：22.00)SECTION A MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS In this section there are several pas

10、sages followed by fourteen multiple choice questions. For each multiple choice question, there are four suggested answers marked A, B, C and D. Choose the one that you think is the best answer and mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET TWO. PASSAGE ONE English is the most successful language in the histo

11、ry of the world. It is spoken on every continent, is learnt as a second language by school children and is the vehicle of science, global business and popular culture. Many think it will spread without end. But Nicholas Ostler, a scholar of the rise and fall of languages, makes a surprising predicti

12、on in his latest book: the days of English as the world“s lingua-franca may be numbered. Conquest, trade and religion were the biggest forces behind the spread of earlier lingua-francas (the author uses a hyphen to distinguish the phrase from Lingua Franca, an Italian-based trade language used durin

13、g the Renaissance). A linguist of astonishing voracity, Mr Ostler plunges happily into his tales from ancient history. The Achaemenid emperors, vanquishers of the Babylonians in 539BC, spoke Persian as their native language, but pragmatically adopted Aramaic as the world“s first “interlingua“. Offic

14、ial long-distance communications were written in Aramaic, sent across the empire and then translated from Aramaic upon arrival. Persian itself would serve as a lingua-franca not at the time of the empire“s greatest heights but roughly from 1000AD to 1800. The Turkic conquerors of Central Asia, Anato

15、lia and the Middle East, though they adopted Islam and worshipped in Arabic, often kept Persian as the language of the court and of literature. Persian was also the court language of Turkic-ruled Mughal India when the British East India Company arrived. Some lingua-francas have ridden trade routes,

16、but these are tongues of convenience that change quickly with circumstances. Phoenician spread from its home in modem Lebanon along the northem coast of Africa, where (pronounced in Latin as Punic) it became the language of the Carthaginian empire. But Rome“s destruction of Carthage in 146BC reduced

17、 it to a dwindling local vernacular. Greek, by contrast, planted deeper roots, surviving not only Rome“s rise but also its fall, to serve as the lingua-franca of the eastern Mediterranean for over 1,000 years. What does all this, then, have to do with English? Often very little. It seems sometimes t

18、hat Mr Ostler, fascinated by ancient uses of language, wanted to write a different sort of book but was persuaded by his publisher to play up the English angle. The core arguments about the future of English come in two chapters at the end of the book. But the predictions are striking. English is ex

19、panding as a lingua-franca but not as a mother tongue. More than 1 billion people speak English worldwide but only about 330 million of them as a first language, and this population is not spreading. The future of English is in the hands of countries outside the core Anglophone group . Will they alw

20、ays learn English? Mr Ostler suggests that two new factorsmodem nationalism and technologywill check the spread of English. The pragmatism (实用主义) of the Achaemenids and Mughals is striking because no confident modem nation would today make a foreign language official. Several of Britain“s ex-colonie

21、s once did so but only because English was a neutral language among competing native tongues. English has been rejected in other ex-colonies, such as Sri Lanka and Tanzania, where Anglophone elites gave way to Sinhala-and Swahili-speaking nationalists. In 1990 the Netherlands considered but rejected

22、 on nationalist grounds making English the sole language of university education. English will fade as a lingua-franca, Mr Ostler argues, but not because some other language will take its place. No pretender is pan-regional enough, and only Africa“s linguistic situation may be sufficiently fluid to

23、have its future choices influenced by outsiders. Rather, English will have no successor because none will be needed. Technology, Mr Ostler believes, will fill the need. This argument relies on huge advances in computer translation and speech recognition. Mr Ostler acknowledges that so far such softw

24、are is a disappointment even after 50 years of intense research, and an explosion in the power of computers. But half a century, though aeons in computer time, is an instant in the sweep of language history. Mr Ostler is surely right about the nationalist limits to the spread of English as a mother-

25、tongue. If he is right about the technology too, future generations will come to see English as something like calligraphy or Latin: prestigious and traditional, but increasingly dispensable. PASSAGE TWO Many of the psychologists, artists and moral philosophers I know are liberal, so it seems strang

26、e that American liberalism should adopt an economic philosophy that excludes psychology, emotion and morality. Yet that is what has happened. The economic approach embraced by the most prominent liberals over the past few years is mostly mechanical. The economy is treated like a big machine; the peo

27、ple in it like rational, utility maximizing cogs (齿轮). The performance of the economic machine can be predicted with quantitative macroeconomic models. These models can be used to make highly specific projections. If the government borrows $1 and then spends it, it will produce $1.50 worth of econom

28、ic activity. If the government spends $800 billion on a stimulus package, that will produce 3.5 million in new jobs. Everything is rigorous. Everything is science. Conservatives, who are usually stereotyped as narrow-eyed business-school types, have gone all Oprah-esque in trying to argue against th

29、ese liberals. If the government borrows trillions of dollars, this will increase public anxiety and uncertainty, the conservatives worry. The liberal technicians brush aside this soft-headed mush. These psychological concerns are mythological, they say. That“s gaseous blathering from those who lack

30、quantitative rigor. Other people get moralistic. This country is already too profligate, they cry. It already shops too much and borrows too much. How can we solve our problems by borrowing and spending more? The liberal technicians brush this away, too. Economics is a rational activity detached fro

31、m morality. Hardheaded policy makers have to have the courage to flout conventional moralityto borrow even when the country is sick of borrowing. The liberal technicians have an impressive certainty about them. They have amputated those things that can“t be contained in models, like emotional contag

32、ions, cultural particularities and webs of relationships. As a result, everything is explainable and predictable. They can stand on the platform of science and dismiss the poor souls down below. Yet over the past 21 months, it has been harder to groove to their certainty. To start with, the economy

33、has not responded as the modelers projected, either in the months after the stimulus was passed or this summer, when it was supposed to be producing hundreds of thousands of jobs. It has become harder to define how much good the stimulus package is doing. An $800 billion measure must leave a large f

34、ootprint, but it is hard to find in a $70 trillion global economy. Moreover, it has been harder to accept that psychological factors like uncertainty and anxiety really are a mirage. The first time a business leader tells you she is holding off on investing because she is scared about the future, yo

35、u dismiss it as anecdote. But over the past few years, I“ve had hundreds of such conversations. It“s been harder to dismiss morality as a phantom concern, too. Maybe in a nation of robots the government can run a policy that offends the morality of the citizenry, but not in a nation of human beings,

36、 as the recent elections showed. Nor has the world come to look simpler and easier to manipulate since the stimulus passed. It now looks more complicated. It“s one thing to hatch an ideal policy in an academic lab, but in the real world, context is everything. Ethan Ilzetzki of the London School of

37、Economics and Enrique G. Mendoza and Carlos A. Vegh of the University of Maryland examined stimulus efforts in 44 countries. In a recent National Bureau of Economic Research paper, they argued that fiscal stimulus can be quite effective in low-debt countries with fixed exchange rates and closed econ

38、omies. Stimulus measures are generally not as effective, on the other hand, in countries like the U.S. with high debt and floating exchange rates. The authors of the paper pointed to a series of specific circumstances that complicate, to say the least, the effectiveness of increasing public spending

39、: How much stimulus money ends up flowing abroad? What is the relationship between fiscal policy and monetary policy? How do investors respond to fear of future interest rate increases? One could go on. It“s become harder to have confidence that legislators can successfully enact the brilliant polic

40、ies that liberal technicians come up with. Far from entering the age of macroeconomic mastery and social science triumph, we seem to be entering an age in which statecraft is, once again, an art, not a science. When you look around the world at the countries that have come through the recession best

41、, it“s not the countries with the brilliant and aggressive stimulus models. It“s the ones like Germany that had the best economic fundamentals beforehand. PASSAGE THREE I used to look at my closet and see clothes. These days, whenever I cast my eyes upon the stacks of shoes and hangers of shirts, sw

42、eaters and jackets, I see water. It takes 569 gallons to manufacture a T-shirt, from its start in the cotton fields to its appearance on store shelves. A pair of running shoes? 1,247 gallons. Until last fall, I“d been oblivious to my “water footprint“, which is defined as the total volume of freshwa

43、ter that is used to produce goods and services, according to the Water Footprint Network. The Dutch nonprofit has been working to raise awareness of freshwater scarcity since 2008, but it was through the “Green Blue Book“ by Thomas M. Kostigen that I was able to see how my own actions factored in. I

44、“ve installed gray-water systems to reuse the wastewater from my laundry machine and bathtub and reroute it to my landscapesystems that save, on average, 50 gallons of water per day. I“ve set up rain barrels and infiltration pits to collect thousands of gallons of storm water cascading from my roof.

45、 I“ve even entered the last bastion of greendominstalling a composting toilet. Suffice to say, I“ve been feeling pretty satisfied with myself for all the drinking water I“ve saved with these big-ticket projects. Now I realize that my daily consumption choices could have an even larger effectnot only

46、 on the local water supply but also globally: 1.1 billion people have no access to freshwater, and, in the future, those who do have access will have less of it. To see how much virtual water I was using, I logged on to the “Green Blue Book“ website and used its water footprint calculator, entering

47、my daily consumption habits. Tallying up the water footprint of my breakfast, lunch, dinner and snacks, as well as my daily dose of over-the-counter uppers and downerscoffee, wine and beerI“m using 512 gallons of virtual water each day just to feed myself. In a word: alarming. Even more alarming was

48、 how much hidden water I was using to get dressed. I“m hardly a clotheshorse, but the few new items I buy once again trumped the amount of water flowing from my faucets each day. If I“m serious about saving water, I realized I could make some simple lifestyle shifts. Looking more closely at the area

49、s in my life that use the most virtual water, it was food and clothes, specifically meat, coffee and, oddly, blue jeans and leather jackets. Being a motorcyclist, I own an unusually large amount of leatherboots and jackets in particular. All of it is enormously water intensive. It takes 7,996 gallons to make a leather jacket, leather being a byproduct of beef. It takes 2,866 gallons of water to make a single pair of blue jeans, because they“re made from water-hogging cotton. Crunching the numbers for the amount of clothes I