[外语类试卷]专业英语八级（文化类阅读理解）模拟试卷1及答案与解析.doc

《[外语类试卷]专业英语八级（文化类阅读理解）模拟试卷1及答案与解析.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《[外语类试卷]专业英语八级（文化类阅读理解）模拟试卷1及答案与解析.doc（21页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、专业英语八级（文化类阅读理解）模拟试卷 1及答案与解析 0 Diaspora networks of Huguenots, Scots, Jews and many others have always been a potent economic force, but the cheapness and ease of modern travel has made them larger and more numerous than ever before. There are now 215m first-generation migrants around the world: that

2、s 3% of the worlds population. If they were a nation, it would be a little larger than Brazil. There are more Chinese people living outside China than there are French people in France. Some 22m Indians are scattered all over the globe. Small concentrations of ethnic and linguistic groups have alway

3、s been found in surprising places Lebanese in west Africa, Japanese in Brazil and Welsh in Patagonia, for instance but they have been joined by newer ones, such as west Africans in southern China. These networks of kinship and language make it easier to do business across borders. They speed the flo

4、w of information: a Chinese trader in Indonesia who spots a gap in the market for cheap umbrellas will alert his cousin in Shenzhen who knows someone who runs an umbrella factory. Kinship ties foster trust, so they can seal the deal and get the umbrellas to Jakarta before the rainy season ends. Trus

5、t matters, especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak. So does a knowledge of the local culture. That is why so much foreign direct investment in China still passes through the Chinese diaspora. And modern communications make these networks an even more powerful tool of business. D

6、iasporas also help spread ideas. Many of the emerging worlds brightest minds are educated at Western universities. An increasing number go home, taking with them both knowledge and contacts. Indian computer scientists in Bangalore bounce ideas constantly off their Indian friends in Silicon Valley. C

7、hinas technology industry is dominated by “sea turtles“ . Diasporas spread money, too. Migrants into rich countries not only send cash to their families; they also help companies in their host country operate in their home country. A Harvard Business School study shows that American companies that e

8、mploy lots of ethnic Chinese people find it much easier to set up in China without a joint venture with a local firm. Such arguments are unlikely to make much headway against hostility towards immigrants in rich countries. Fury against foreigners is usually based on two notions: that because so many

9、 migrants claim welfare they are a drain on the public purse; and that because they are prepared to work harder for less pay they will depress the wages of those at the bottom of the pile. The first is usually not true, and the second is hard to establish either way. Some studies do indeed suggest t

10、hat competition from unskilled immigrants depresses the wages of unskilled locals. But others find this effect to be small or non-existent. Nor is it possible to establish the impact of migration on overall growth. The sums are simply too difficult. Yet there are good reasons for believing that it i

11、s likely to be positive. Migrants tend to be hard-working and innovative. That spurs productivity and company formation. A recent study carried out by Duke University showed that, while immigrants make up an eighth of Americas population, they founded a quarter of the countrys technology and enginee

12、ring firms. And, by linking the West with emerging markets, diasporas help rich countries to plug into fast-growing economies. Rich countries are thus likely to benefit from looser immigration policy; and fears that poor countries will suffer as a result of a “brain drain“ are overblown. The prospec

13、t of working abroad spurs more people to acquire valuable skills, and not all subsequently emigrate. Skilled migrants send money home, and they often return to set up new businesses. One study found that unless they lose more than 20% of their university graduates, the brain drain makes poor countri

14、es richer. Government as well as business gains from the spread of ideas through diasporas. Some 500,000 Chinese people have studied abroad and returned, mostly in the past decade; they dominate the think-tanks that advise the government, and are moving up the ranks of the Communist Party. Cheng Li

15、of the Brookings Institution, an American think-tank, predicts that they will be 15-17% of its Central Committee next year, up from 6% in 2002. As for the old world, its desire to close its borders is understandable but dangerous. Migration brings youth to ageing countries, and allows ideas to circu

16、late in millions of mobile minds. That is good both for those who arrive with suitcases and dreams and for those who should welcome them. From The Economist, November 19, 2010 1 According to the passage, which of the following best defines “diaspora networks“? （ A） The ties of travellers, immigrants

17、, emigrants, etc （ B） Social connections of people who are dispersed from their homeland. （ C） The sense of kinship felt by ethnic minorities or people from developing countries. （ D） The social ties of migrants residing in varied countries. 2 Which of the following statements is NOT true concerning

18、 the merits of diaspora? （ A） It facilitates information acquisition. （ B） It provides emerging countries with more knowledge and technologies. （ C） It stimulates the establishment of foreign-funded enterprises in migrants home country. （ D） It infuses energy into the Western world. 3 What is the au

19、thors attitude towards diaspora? （ A） favorable （ B） neutral （ C） critical （ D） ambiguous 4 In paragraph 8, the word “overblown“ most likely refers to_. （ A） devastating （ B） blooming （ C） exaggerated （ D） out-dated 5 According to the passage, the author seems to suggest EXCEPT_. （ A） brain drain wi

20、ll make poor countries richer than before if under control （ B） sea turtles are willing to build a more democratic country （ C） the developed country should be tolerant towards migrants （ D） working abroad is alluring to people all around the world 5 Last June, Mens Fashion Week in Milan took place

21、a few days after Miuccia Prada and her husband, Patrizio Bertelli, who runs the business end of their empire, had raised $2.1 billion with a long-delayed, much ballyhooed initial public offering on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. Both the I.P.O. and Pradas runway show a collection of Day-Glo floral pr

22、ints and nerdy plaids inspired complaints from Giorgio Armani. “Fashion today is in the hands of the banks and of the stock market and not of its owners,“ he told the press. He went on to scold Prada for “bad taste that becomes chic.“ “Her clothes“, he added, “are sometimes ugly.“ Armanis perception

23、 was hardly novel, and Prada might not have disagreed “I fight against my good taste,“ she has said though she also might have pointed out that when bankers want a fashion insurance policy they buy one of Armanis suits. He is the champion of the risk-averse, and Prada has always slyly perverted the

24、canons of impeccability that his brand embodies. Only in the dressing room do you discover that her ostensibly proper little pleated skirts, ladylike silk blouses, and lace dinner suits are a test of your cool. If you cant wear them tongue-in-cheek, as Prada herself doesthumbing her crooked nose at

25、received ideas about beauty and sex appeal they can make you look like a governess. Invincible female self-possession is a central theme of the joint retrospective that opens in May at the Costume Institute of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, “Elsa Schiaparelli and Miuccia Prada: Impossible Conversat

26、ions.“ Its subjects were born six decades apart, and they never met, though some of their affinities seem almost genetic. They both had strict Catholic girlhoods in upper-crust families, with traditional expectations for women, and they both took heart from maternal aunts whose feistiness defied the

27、 mold. Schiaparelli is the more patrician her mother descended from the dukes of Tuscanybut her father was a university professor, and so was Pradas. Neither woman set out in life to design clothes, or even learned to sew. They were both ardent rebels and feminists who came of age at moments of ferm

28、ent in art and politics that ratified their disdain for conformity. Schiaparelli was involved with the Dada movement at its inception in Greenwich Village, after the First World War; Prada was a left-wing graduate student in Milan during the radical upheavals of the nineteen-seventies. These heady a

29、dventures delayed their careers. Schiaparelli was thirty-seven and Prada was thirty-nine when they delivered their first collections. But experience of the real world, which was a mans world for both of them, made them intolerant of female passivity and desperation. They dont really care what makes

30、a woman desirable to men. Their work asks you to consider what makes a woman desirable to herself. Andrew Bolton and Harold Koda, the curators of the Costume Institute, originally conceived of the retrospective as “an imaginary conversation,“ Bolton told me. But, as they began to compile quotations

31、from Schiaparelli and to interview Prada, they realized that this conceit was too tame. It is doubtful that the notoriously touchy Schiaparelli would have been happy about sharing a double bill, even with such an illustrious compatriot, or that Prada would have submitted to comparison with a contemp

32、orary. She is widely considered the most influential designer in the world today partly because her enigmatic code is so hard to copy: she changes the password every season. The title of the show alludes to a famous column in the Vanity Fair of the nineteen-thirties “Impossible Interviews“ which was

33、 illustrated by the Mexican artist Miguel Covarrubias. Among the mismatched sparring partners whom he caricatured with impious glee were Joseph Stalin and Schiaparelli. Her “interview“ with the dictator appeared in 1936, when she was at the height of her glory, and had recently returned to Paris fro

34、m a French trade fair in Moscow, where her presence made news. No other couturier had been willing to risk the censure that Schiaparelli received and shrugged off for consorting with the Bolsheviks, and, while she was there, she presented a capsule collection of Soviet-friendly fashions suitable for

35、 mass production. One of the ensembles was a simple black dress with a high neck, worn under a red coat, with outsize pockets, and a beret. From The New Yorker, March 26, 2012 6 In paragraph 1, whats the hidden meaning of “Fashion today is in the hands of the banks and of the stock market and not of

36、 its owners“ uttered by Armani? （ A） The bank wont lend as much money to him as they did to Prada. （ B） He didnt like Pradas fashion style. （ C） He is jealous of Pradas success. （ D） Their design guideline stands against each other. 7 Which statement of the following is NOT the common ground of Schi

37、aparelli and Prada? （ A） Both of them were born in purple. （ B） They were deeply influenced by their aunts. （ C） They started their career at a late age. （ D） They were in defiance of conformity. 8 According to the context, whats the meaning of the underlined word “enigmatic“ in paragraph 5? （ A） Ch

38、arming. （ B） Magnetic. （ C） Mysterious. （ D） Peculiar. 9 Which rhetorical device is used in this article? （ A） Contrast. （ B） Comparison. （ C） Personification. （ D） Metaphor. 9 Its always interesting to read the quotations of people who knew a mass murderer before he killed. They usually express com

39、plete bafflement that a person who seemed so kind and normal could do something so horrific. Friends of Robert Bales, who is accused of massacring 16 Afghan civilians, have expressed similar thoughts. Friends and teachers describe him as caring, gregarious and self-confident before he in the vague m

40、etaphor of common usage apparently “snapped“. As one childhood friend told The Times: “Thats not our Bobby. Something horrible, horrible had to happen to him.“ Any of us would be shocked if someone we knew and admired killed children. But these days its especially hard to think through these situati

41、ons because of the worldview that prevails in our culture. According to this view, most people are naturally good, because nature is good. The monstrosities of the world are caused by the few people who are fundamentally warped and evil. This worldview gives us an easy conscience, because we dont ha

42、ve to contemplate the evil in ourselves. But when somebody who seems mostly good does something completely awful, were rendered mute or confused. But of course it happens all the time. Thats because even people who contain reservoirs of compassion and neighborliness also possess a latent potential t

43、o commit murder. David Buss of the University of Texas asked his students if they had ever thought seriously about killing someone, and if so, to write out their homicidal fantasies in an essay. He was astonished to find that 91 percent of the men and 84 percent of the women had detailed, vivid homi

44、cidal fantasies. He was even more astonished to learn how many steps some of his students had taken toward carrying them out. One woman invited an abusive ex-boyfriend to dinner with thoughts of stabbing him in the chest. A young man in a fit of road rage pulled a baseball bat out of his trunk and w

45、ould have pummeled his opponent if he hadnt run away. Another young man planned the progression of his murder crushing a former friends fingers, puncturing his lungs, then killing him. These thoughts do not arise from playing violent video games, Buss argues. They occur because we are descended from

46、 creatures who killed to thrive and survive. Were natural-born killers and the real question is not what makes people kill but what prevents them from doing so. People who murder often live in situations that weaken sympathy and restraint. People who commit massacres, for example, often live with wh

47、at the researchers call “forward panic.“ After having endured a long period of fear, they find their enemies in a moment of vulnerability. Their fear turns to rage, and, as Steven Pinker writes in “The Better Angels of Our Nature,“ they “explode in a savage frenzy.“ Serial killers are often charming

48、, but have a high opinion of themselves that is not shared by the wider world. They are often extremely conscious of class and status and they develop venomous feelings toward people who do not pay them sufficient respect. In centuries past most people would have been less shocked by the homicidal e

49、ruptions of formerly good men. Thats because people in those centuries grew up with a worldview that put sinfulness at the center of the human personality. John Calvin believed that babies come out depraved. G. K. Chesterton wrote that the doctrine of original sin is the only part of Christian theology that can be proved. This worldview held that people are a problem to themselves. The inner world is a battlefield between light and dark, and life is a struggle against the destructive forces inside. The worst thing you can do