[考研类试卷]考研英语（一）模拟试卷65及答案与解析.doc

《[考研类试卷]考研英语（一）模拟试卷65及答案与解析.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《[考研类试卷]考研英语（一）模拟试卷65及答案与解析.doc（32页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、考研英语（一）模拟试卷 65 及答案与解析一、Section I Use of EnglishDirections: Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D. (10 points) 0 If youre looking for a creative solution to some problem at work, dont retreat into a chamber of solitude to ponder your dilemma in

2、 silence.【C1】_, head to the nearest cafehopefully, one【C2】_people are chatting and the waiters are busily moving about making cappuccinos and【C3】_making some noise. A clever and creative new study suggests that moderate background noise is a better【C4】_to innovative thinking than the sound of silenc

3、e.Its been a bit【C5】_why people sometimes get their most creative work done while sitting in a crowded, bustling cafe. It【C6】_that the effect is not【C7 】_the result of the sudden infusion of caffeine. Ravi Mehta, a business administration professor at the University of Illinois, and two colleagues【C

4、8】_explore the effect of moderate surrounding noise on creative problem solving. In a series of experiments, the researchers found that a certain level of noise【C9】_made it easier for experimental subjects to【C10】_clever new ideas.Isnt all that noise a bit【C11】_? Actually, yesand thats the【C12】_, as

5、 Mehta and his colleagues explain in a new paper published in the Journal of Consumer Research.【C13】_a relatively quiet environment may make it easier to【C14 】_a book, a noisy environment can【 C15】_a certain degree of “disfluency“ or “processing difficulty,“ which can disrupt your【C16】_way of thinki

6、ng in such a way that it actually【C17】_the sort of abstract thinking that can encourage real creativity.But its not as simple as noise【C18】_creativity. Too much noise really can make it hard to hear yourself think. The solution is to find a happy【C19】_- a place that is pleasantly noisy【C20】_jarringl

7、y loud.1 【C1 】（A）Indeed（B） Nevertheless（C） Instead（D）Furthermore2 【C2 】（A）which（B） when（C） that（D）where3 【C3 】（A）generally（B） irritatingly（C） presently（D）intentionally4 【C4 】（A）challenge（B） spur（C） witness（D）supplement5 【C5 】（A）puzzling（B） controversial（C） misleading（D）paradoxical6 【C6 】（A）refers to

8、（B） puts forward（C） brings up（D）turns out7 【C7 】（A）partially（B） temporarily（C） entirely（D）initially8 【C8 】（A）set out to（B） stand up to（C） get down to（D）lead up to9 【C9 】（A）predictably（B） actually（C） similarly（D）conversely10 【C10 】（A）take up with（B） come up with（C） keep up with（D）catch up with11 【C11

9、 】（A）annoying（B） distracting（C） encouraging（D）enlightening12 【C12 】（A）case（B） point（C） deal（D）question13 【C13 】（A）Given（B） Provided（C） While（D）Unless14 【C14 】（A）see through（B） break through（C） sit through（D）plow through15 【C15 】（A）reduce（B） display（C） induce（D）conceal16 【C16 】（A）critical（B） practica

10、l（C） focused（D）normal17 【C17 】（A）interrupts（B） enhances（C） prevents（D）restores18 【C18 】（A）reflects（B） replaces（C） proves（D）equals19 【C19 】（A）medium（B） ending（C） heart（D）hour20 【C20 】（A）other than（B） or rather（C） rather than（D）but ratherPart ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the ques

11、tions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)20 A piece by Cambridge philosopher Simon Blackburn in the current issue of the Society of Authors journal addresses the difficult question of whether philosophy ought to be accessible to the general reader. “The great philosophical writers

12、of the past wrote for humanity,“ Blackburn begins, enumerating Plato, Aristotle etc. The rot set in, according to him, during the 20th century, with the academicising of the discipline.It seems a reckless bet at best to portray Plato as “writing for humanity“, when the philosophers in his ideal stat

13、e are to be kingsthat is, not just good at what they do, but rulers over the rest in a hierarchically ordered, rigidly unified polity.But is “writing for humanity“ such an obviously helpful ideal? Most people dont expect to be able to understand other kinds of specialist discourse. The lay person wo

14、uld understand little or nothing of micro-electronic engineering, has no interest in doing so, and is content to leave it to the initiated. But philosophy is about the world we live in, and our lives in it, Blackburn objects, waving the flag for the enriching humanities against the sterilities of te

15、chnology. Therefore everybody should be able to understand it. On this view, what differentiates philosophy from science is the fact that it poses questions about the world we live in and our perceptions of it, and even makes suggestions as to what we ought to do in our lives. Neither of those appro

16、aches is absent from theoretical science, though. What would be the point of researches into the causes of obesity or the effects of climate change if they didnt tell us, or at least strive to tell us, what we ought to do about such matters?The point is that philosophy is as much a technical discipl

17、ine as these other sciences are, and as little capable of being diluted down to words of one syllable. One of the reasons for this is that philosophy isnt necessarily just a set of conclusions. To many of the most recent western thinkers, it is first and foremost a methodology, rather than an attemp

18、t to arrive at a fixed theory. The Frankfurt School philosopher Theodor Adorno declared, “The crux is what happens in it, not a thesis or a position. . . Essentially, therefore, philosophy is not expoundable. If it were, it would be superfluous; the fact that most of it can be expounded speaks again

19、st it. “In a final somersault, Blackburn states that making philosophy accessible should not be a question of simplifying it but of bringing people up to its level. So the problem turns out to lie after all not with the attempt to interpret the world, but with the faculties of those who want to hear

20、 it interpreted.21 By citing the journal Society of Authors , the author intends to .（A）analyze the adverse effect of academicising on philosophy（B） describe the degeneration of philosophical writing（C） discuss the approachability of philosophy to the ordinary（D）exemplify the writing principle of gr

21、eat philosophers22 The second paragraph suggests that Plato wrote for_.（A）the general reader（B） an elite audience（C） the rulers of his times（D）his ideal philosophers23 Simon Blackburn holds that philosophy exceeds other sciences in_.（A）interestingness（B） technicality（C） accessibility（D）usefulness24

22、Theodor Adornos attitude towards the idea of “writing for humanity“ is one of_.（A）strong disapproval（B） reserved consent（C） slight contempt（D）enthusiastic support25 The last paragraph implies that Blackburns final suggestion is_.（A）indirect（B） infeasible（C） insightful（D）illogical25 Wild elephants ro

23、am across the crowded plains of India; forested river banks wind through cattle ranches in Brazil; a ribbon of green stretches across Europe where the Iron Curtain used to be. Using such wildlife corridors to link up larger but isolated protected areas are the most widely adopted strategy for haltin

24、g biodiversity decline, with millions of dollars spent creating and protecting them every year. But has enthusiasm for a neat idea got ahead of the science?The principle is simple. As wildlife habitat is broken into isolated fragments by farms, roads, and settlements, we need to link them up with co

25、rridors of green. Then even if the entire habitat cannot be re-created, old migration patterns can be revived, escape routes created ahead of climate change andperhaps most cruciallyisolated populations can interbreed, enhancing their genetic diversity and their resilience to encroaching threats.Rec

26、ently, Paul Beier, a veteran conservation biologist from Northern Arizona University, and his colleague Andrew Gregory, warned that “despite much research, there is little evidence that conservation corridors work as intended. “ There is, they say, plenty of evidence that wild animals will move thro

27、ugh corridors. But advocates of the corridors want, and claim, much more than this. They say that animals dont just go for a walk in their conservation woods, but that they move permanently and interbreed with neighboring populations. In this way corridors supposedly unite isolated, threatened popul

28、ations into an interbreeding and much more resilientwhole.Such claims sometimes hold up. In the United Kingdom, the expansion of Kielder Forest in the 1960s provided a link between isolated populations of threatened red squirrel. Genes from isolated populations have now “leapfrogged through hundreds

29、 of forest fragments“ across 100 kilometers and more. But the Kielder Forest is much wider than a conventional corridor. Few studies have looked for gene flow in genuine corridors; even fewer have found it. One study investigated the genetic diversity of small marsupials in a narrow forest corridor

30、traversing 4. 5 kilometers of grasslands in Queensland, Australia. It found that genetically distinct populations had persisted at either end. Mixing was a myth.Other studies have shown that conservation corridors work. But most have looked at short corridors of 100 meters through largely natural la

31、ndscape. “That species can travel a-long short corridors in a natural setting does not mean that they will be successful dispersing along much longer corridors embedded in a heavily impacted landscape,“ says Gregory. “Still less that such movements occur frequently enough to allow enough gene flow t

32、o occur so that the connected habitat blocks function as one population. “Perhaps we should not make the perfect the enemy of the good. Surely any corridor is better than none? But consider this. The edges of wild areas are known danger zones for wildlife, where predators and diseases may invade. Li

33、nking two existing protected areas with a long narrow corridor may expose it to greater danger along these edges. Unless the benefit exceeds the threat, then there is serious potential to do harm.26 The last sentence of Paragraph 1 implies that people might_.（A）be overenthusiastic about biodiversity

34、（B） be too idealistic about conservation corridors（C） have given too much protection to wildlife（D）be adopting wrong ways to protect wildlife27 Wildlife corridors probably start with the idea that ecosystems may be threatened by_.（A）their isolation（B） human behaviors（C） climate change（D）aggressive a

35、nimals28 Kielder Forest is mentioned in paragraph 4 as an example of_.（A）primitive corridors（B） unsuccessful corridors（C） conventional corridors（D）non-typical corridors29 According to paragraph 4 and 5, corridors supposed to be effective are_.（A）wide and set in natural landscape（B） narrow and set in

36、 impacted landscape（C） long and set in natural landscape（D）short and set in impacted landscape30 To which of the following would Beier and Gregory most likely agree?（A）We should dismiss wildlife corridors for its threat to wildlife.（B） We should gather information to work out how corridors can work.

37、（C） We can minimize the impact of development by creating corridors.（D）We can make the benefit outweigh the threat by designing corridors properly.30 Forty years ago Walter Mischel, an American psychologist, conducted a famous experiment. He left a series of four-year-olds alone in a room with a mar

38、shmallow on the table. He told them that they could eat the marshmallow at once, or wait until he came back and get two marshmallows. Researchers was astonished that the way that the four-year-olds ability to defer gratification was reflected over time in their lives. Those who waited longest scored

39、 higher in academic tests at school, were much less likely to drop out of university and earned sub stantially higher incomes than those who gobbled up the sweet straight away. Those who could not wait at all were far more likely, in later life, to have problems with drugs or alcohol.In his fascinat

40、ing study of the unconscious mind and its impact on our lives, David Brooks, a columnist on the New York Times, uses this story to illustrate how the conscious mind learns to subdue the unconscious. This is not a question of iron will, but about developing habits and strategies that trigger helpful

41、processes in the unconscious, rather than unproductive ones. What matters is to learn to perceive property, people or situations in ways that reduce the temptation to lie, to steal or behave in a self-destructive way.The authors aim is to show how recent research has illuminated the complex processe

42、s of the brain. “We have inherited an obsolete, shallow model of human nature,“ he argues. Stud y after study show that people take decisions in ways that involve a complex interaction between the conscious and the unconscious mind. The most important decisions begin in the realm of the unconscious,

43、 although they are often influenced by the conscious.The shaping of this delicate balance begins early in life: the children who were best at leaving their marshmallow on the plate tended to come from stable, organised homes. Culture and the community in which a child is raised help to build the way

44、 the conscious and unconscious intertwine. Mr Brooks recounts a survey of diplomats who failed to pay parking fines in New York. By far the worst non-payers came from countries where corruption is endemic. “Thousands of miles away from home,“ Mr Brooks writes, “diplomats still carried their domestic

45、 cultural norms inside their heads. “What does all this mean for public policy? Mr Brooks complains that policies too frequently rely on an overly simplistic, rationalist view of human nature. That may be true, but all too many daft policies rely on the collective reluctance of the voters to leave m

46、arshmallows uneaten on the table. More to the point, how can a country curb crime, create true equality and reduce the social and economic costs of bad decisions? Education systems exist mainly to build the rational mind, and yet the decisions that are most important in making people happy are the o

47、nes in which reason plays little or no part: the development of friendships and the choice of a spouse. Public policy has largely ignored this.31 Mischels experiment is cited to show .（A）the difference in childrens ability to defer gratification（B） the strategies used by children to defer gratificat

48、ion（C） the influence of ones ability to resist temptation over their life（D）the impact of will power on school and work performance32 To which of the following would Brooks most probably agree?（A）It requires strong will to control the unconscious mind.（B） The formation of habits can alter our mental

49、 processes.（C） The conscious mind enables us to perceive things properly.（D）The unconscious mind typically gives rise to misbehaviour.33 We can know from paragraph 3 and 4 that_.（A）the conscious mind plays a major role in making big decisions（B） the complex process of the brain is an inherited advantage of human（C） community influence is more obvious on adults behaviour than on kids（D）kids from organized homes are mor