[外语类试卷]专业英语八级（阅读）练习试卷2及答案与解析.doc

《[外语类试卷]专业英语八级（阅读）练习试卷2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（阅读）练习试卷2及答案与解析.doc（9页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、专业英语八级（阅读）练习试卷 2及答案与解析 0 The scientific name is the Holocene Age, but climatologists like to call our current climatic phase the Long Summer. The history of Earths climate has rarely been smooth. From the moment life began on the planet billions of years ago, the climate has swung drastically and of

2、ten abruptly from one state to another from tropical swamp to frozen ice age. Over the past 10,000 years, however, the climate has remained remarkably stable by historical standards: not too warm and not too cold, or Goldilocks weather. That stability has allowed Homo sapiens, numbering perhaps just

3、 a few million at the dawn of the Holocene, to thrive; farming has taken hold and civilizations have arisen. Without the Long Summer, that never would have been possible. But as human population has exploded over the past few thousand years, the delicate ecological balance that kept the Long Summer

4、going has become threatened. The rise of industrialized agriculture has thrown off Earths natural nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, leading to pollution on land and water, while our fossil-fuel addiction has moved billions of tons of carbon from the land into the atmosphere, heating the climate ever m

5、ore. Now a new article in the Sept. 24 issue of Nature says the safe climatic limits in which humanity has blossomed are more vulnerable than ever and that unless we recognize our planetary boundaries and stay within them, we risk total catastrophe. “Human activities have reached a level that could

6、damage the systems that keep Earth in the desirable Holocene state,“ writes Johan Rockstrom, executive director of the Stockholm Environmental Institute and the author of the article. “The result could be irreversible and, in some cases, abrupt environmental change, leading to a state less conducive

7、 to human development.“ Regarding climate change, for instance, Rockstrom proposes an atmospheric-carbon-concentration limit of no more than 350 parts per million (p.p.m.) meaning no more than 350 atoms of carbon for every million atoms of air. (Before the industrial age, levels were at 280 p.p.m.;

8、currently theyre at 387 p.p.m, and rising.) That, scientists believe, should be enough to keep global temperatures from rising more than 2 above pre- industrial levels, which should be safely below a climatic tipping point that could lead to the Wide-scale melting of polar ice sheets, swamping coast

9、al cities. “Transgressing these boundaries will increase the risk of irreversible climate change,“ writes Rockstrom. Thats the impact of breaching only one of nine planetary boundaries that Rockstrom identifies in the paper. Other boundaries involve freshwater overuse, the global agricultural cycle

10、and ozone loss. In each case, he scans the state of science to find ecological limits that we cant violate, lest we risk passing a tipping point that could throw the planet out of whack for human beings. Its based on a theory that ecological change occurs not so much cumulatively, but suddenly, afte

11、r invisible thresholds have been reached. Stay within the lines, and we might just be all right. In three of the nine cases Rockstrom has pointed out, however climate change, the nitrogen cycle and species loss weve already passed his threshold limits. In the case of global warming, we havent yet fe

12、lt the full effects, Rockstrom says, because carbon acts gradually on the climate but once warming starts, it may prove hard to stop unless we reduce emissions sharply. Ditto for the nitrogen cycle, where industrialized agriculture already has humanity pouring more chemicals into the land and oceans

13、 than the planet can process, and for wildlife loss, where we risk biological collapse. “We can say with some confidence that Earth cannot sustain the current rate of loss without significant erosion of ecosystem resilience,“ says Rockstrom. The paper offers a useful way of looking at the environmen

14、t, especially for global policy makers. As the world grapples with climate change this week at the U.N. andG-20 summit, some clearly posted speed limits from scientists could help politicians craft global deals on carbon and other shared environmental threats. Its tough for negotiators to hammer out

15、 a new climate-change treaty unless they know just how much carbon needs to be cut to keep people safe. Rockstroms work delineates the limits to human growth economically, demographically, ecologically that we transgress at our peril. The problem is that identifying those limits is a fuzzy science a

16、nd even trickier to translate into policy. Rockstroms atmospheric-carbon target of 350 p.p.m. has scientific support, but the truth is that scientists still arent certain as to how sensitive the climate will be to warm over the long-term its possible that the atmosphere will be able to handle more c

17、arbon or that catastrophe could be triggered at lower levels. And by setting a boundary, it might make policymakers believe that we can pollute up to that limit and still be safe. Thats not the case pollution causes cumulative damage, even below the tipping point. By focusing too much on the upper l

18、imits, we still risk harming Earth. “Ongoing changes in global chemistry should alarm us about threats to the persistence of life on Earth, whether or not we cross a catastrophic threshold any time soon,“ writes William Schlesinger, president of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, in a commenta

19、ry accompanying the Nature paper. But as the world attempts to break the carbon addiction that already has it well on the way to climate catastrophe, more clearly defined limits will be useful. But climate diplomats should remember that while they can negotiate with one another, ultimately, they can

20、t negotiate with the planet. Unless we manage our presence on Earth better, we may soon be in the last days of our Long Summer. 1 According to the passage, which of the following is NOT the result of the Long Summer? （ A） It is possible to grow crops. （ B） Human beings have appeared. （ C） Cultures h

21、ave come into being. （ D） It is possible for modem men to increase quickly. 2 The following are the threats to the Long Summer EXCEPT _. （ A） Industry. （ B） Agriculture. （ C） Human population. （ D） Environmental change. 3 Which of the following is NOT true about the new article in Nature? （ A） The c

22、urrent loss rate of wild species has threatened the ecosystem. （ B） We will be safe within the nine planetary boundaries identified in the article. （ C） The limits identified in the article can help policy makers to make a new global treaty. （ D） We are now in a dangerous situation unless we take st

23、rict measures to prevent climate change. 4 The purpose in writing the passage is _. （ A） to analyze the situation we are in. （ B） to warn us of the danger Earth faces. （ C） to identify nine planetary boundaries. （ D） to delineate the limits to human growth. 5 Which of the following is the best title

24、 for this passage? （ A） G-20 Summit （ B） The Long Summer （ C） The Climatic Tipping Point （ D） How Much Human Activity Can Earth Handle? 5 Google may be valued at more than $185 billion and boast millions of users, but that doesnt mean the Internet giant is any match for the diminutive French Preside

25、nt Nicolas Sarkozy. On Dec. 8, Sarkozy warned Google he would not allow France to be “stripped“ of its literary heritage, an apparent reference to Googles enormous book-digitizing project. “We wont let ourselves be stripped of our heritage to the benefit of a big company, no matter how friendly, big

26、 or American it is,“ Sarkozy said during a round-table discussion in eastern France. “We are not going to be stripped of what generations and generations have produced in the French language, just because we werent capable of funding our own digitization project.“ Sarkozys oratorical histrionics are

27、 becoming a regular occurrence. But the French President isnt the only European David ready to stand up to the Internet Goliath and its formidable archiving project. Last October, German Chancellor Angela Merkel reiterated concerns held by many German publishers. The German government, she said, rej

28、ected “the scanning of books without any copyright protection like Googles doing. We refuse to permit simple scanning of books without full protection of intellectual-property rights.“ The French and German complaints are part of a growing move in the European Union to head off Googles mass digitiza

29、tion of literature. “It is not up to any individual organization to determine policy on a matter as important as the digitization of our global heritage,“ French Culture Minister Frdric Mitterrand told the Journal du Dimanche following a meeting of his E.U. peers in late November to discuss a united

30、, state-led approach to the matter. “Im not going to leave this issue up to simple laissez-faire.“ Google has already digitized some 10 million books most of them “public domain” works that are out of print, or books whose copyright owners are unknown. Googles strategy thus far appears to have been

31、to scan first, and deal with any copyright issues later a method that worries authors and publishers. Justice authorities in the U.S. and in Europe have warned Google that it should not secure a monopoly position that would allow it to single-handedly dictate how much the public must pay to access m

32、any of the worlds great books. Google and its backers which include industrial partner Sony as well as libraries in the U.S. and Europe argue that the company brings rare books often only obtainable by students, scholars and researchers to the general public online for free. It says its also setting

33、 aside funding to pay to unknown copyright owners who step up and ask for remuneration, or remove works by those who dont want to be in Googles archive. Opponents these include several European governments and publishers, and the Open Access Alliance formed by authors and Google rivals like Yahoo! a

34、nd Microsoftdescribe that as a kind of massive, literary land grab which ignores copyright concerns until owners demand they be paid or their books removed. They also fear Googles initially free search-and-access service will give way to a pay scheme. Confusing matters further, libraries, publishers

35、 and writers in both the U.S. and Europe are split in pro-and anti-Google Book camps. The California-based giant has already made some concessions to publishers. Under a pending settlement reached with U.S. publishers groups, Google has agreed to limit its archiving to works that have been registere

36、d in the U.S., or come from the U.K., Australia, and Canada English-speaking countries whose authors are present in American libraries. That agreement would nominally exclude books from countries like France and Germany, and from China, which has also objected to the digitization project on copyrigh

37、t grounds. Still, the accord must be approved by a U.S. federal court review in February not a slam-dunk affair, given the American Justice Departments concerns that the agreement still breaks “fundamental copyright principles“. Google has another court date it is preparing for. Paris publishing gro

38、up La Martinire took Google to court after it discovered the firm had scanned and archived books on which La Martinire holds the copyright. Its asking for $15 million in damages for the violation. If it wins a ruling is expected on Dec. 18 the case will help set an important legal precedent on Googl

39、es approach. Google France declined to comment on the court case, but noted its scanning work with 30 libraries and 30,000 private publishers has provoked little legal challenge. Could that change soon? “We feel confident well win on the most important legal points in this case, which is important t

40、o establish precedent awaiting the U.S. hearing in February,“ notes Tessa Destais, an adviser to La Martinire. “Were not anti-Google its a wonderful company. Were simply insisting it obey copyright laws, and start negotiating with publishers as partners.“ 6 What does “remuneration“ mean in Paragraph

41、 4? （ A） approval （ B） payment （ C） apology （ D） copyright 7 Which of the following is NOT an opponent of Google? （ A） China （ B） Yahoo! （ C） European publishers （ D） The Open Access Alliance 8 Which of the following is to be feared by the opponents of Google? （ A） Google may ignore copyright laws.

42、（ B） Google may win the court case in Paris. （ C） Google may charge users for reading books. （ D） Google may digitize books without authors consent. 9 According to the author, what can be inferred from paragraph 6? （ A） The agreement will not settle the issue in essence. （ B） The agreement is favora

43、ble to France and Germany. （ C） The agreement will prevent Google from digitizing books from China. （ D） The agreement will permit Google to digitize books from English-speaking countries. 10 What can be inferred from the passage? （ A） Writers in Europe object to the digitizing project. （ B） Googles

44、 digitizing project is popular in the U.S. （ C） Google will change its approach and pay for the copyright. （ D） Not all the people concerned object to the digitizing project. 专业英语八级（阅读）练习试卷 2答案与解析 【知识模块】 阅读 1 【正确答案】 B 【试题解析】 此题是事实题。由第一段可知。 【知识模块】 阅读 2 【正确答案】 D 【试题解析】 此题是事实题。由第二段可知。 【知识模块】 阅读 3 【正确答案

45、】 B 【试题解析】 此题是推断题。由第八段可知，地球变化是渐进的，即使现在在界限之内，也不能保证安全。 【知识模块】 阅读 4 【正确答案】 B 【试题解析】 此题是推理概括题。文章的目的旨在引起人们对地球所面临的危险的警惕。 【知识模块】 阅读 5 【正确答案】 D 【试题解析】 此题是推理概括题。文章告诫人们地球是有界限的，一旦超越界限，人类将面临毁灭。 【知识模块】 阅读 【知识模块】 阅读 6 【正确答案】 B 【试题解析】 此题是词义理解题。结合上下文及句中 pay一词可知， B为正确答案。 【知识模块】 阅读 7 【正确答案】 C 【试题解析】 此题是事实 题。由第五段可知，选项 C不是谷歌公司的反对者。 【知识模块】 阅读 8 【正确答案】 C 【试题解析】 此题是事实题。由第五段可知，谷歌公司的反对者担心谷歌会对网上阅读由免费改为收费。 【知识模块】 阅读 9 【正确答案】 A 【试题解析】 此题是推断题。由第六段可知，即使协议通过，谷歌的做法仍然违背了根本的版权原则，所以该协议不能从实质上解决问题。 【知识模块】 阅读 10 【正确答案】 D 【试题解析】 此题是推断题。由最后一段可知，人们并不是反对谷 歌公司的数字化工程，而是希望其遵守版权法，保护作者的合法权益。 【知识模块】 阅读