(完整word版)2012年考研英語一真題及答案完整解析(1),推薦文檔

1、2012年全國碩士研究生入學(xué)統(tǒng)一考試英語（一）2012年全國碩士研究生入學(xué)統(tǒng)一考試英語（一）The ethical judgments of the Supreme Court justices have become an important issue recently. The court cannot _1_ its legitimacy as guardian of the rule of law _2_justices behave like politicians. Yet, in several instances, justices acted in ways that 3

2、the court ' s reputation for being independent and impartial.Justice Antonin Scalia, for example, appeared at political events. That kind of activity makes it less likely that the court' s decisions, wsllibepartial judgments. Part of the problem is that the justicesare not 5 by an ethics cod

3、e. At the very least, the court should make itself 060to the code of conduct that 070to the rest of the federal judiciary.This and other similar cases 080the question of whether there is still a _9_between the court and politics.The framers of the Constitution envisioned law lOhaving authority apart

4、 from politics. They gave justices permanent positions 011=they would be free to 0I20 those in power and have no need to 一伯一 political support. Our legal system was designed to set law apart from politics precisely because they are so closely 0I40.Constitutional law is political because it results f

5、rom choices rooted in fundamental social 0I50 like liberty and property. When the court deals with social policy decisions, the law it 0160-is-inescapably political-which is why decisions split along ideological lines are so easily 0170 as unjust.The justices must 一伯一doubts about the court ' s l

6、egitimacy by making themis9dves the code of conduct. That would make rulings more likely to be seen as separate from politics and, 0200,_convincing as law.1. AemphasizeBmaintainCmodifyD recognize2. AwhenBlestCbeforeD unless3. ArestoredBweakenedCestablishedD eliminated4. AchallengedBcompromisedCsuspe

7、ctedD accepted5. AadvancedBcaughtCboundDfounded6. AresistantBsubjectCimmuneDprone7. AresortsBsticksCloadsDapplies8. AevadeBraiseCdenyDsettle9. AlineBbarrierCsimilarityDconflict10.AbyBasCthoughDtowards11.AsoBsinceCprovidedDthough12.AserveBsatisfyCupsetDreplace13.AconfirmBexpressCcultivateDoffer14.Agu

8、ardedBfollowedCstudiedDtied15.AconceptsBtheoriesCdivisionsDconceptions16. AexcludesBquestionsCshapesDcontrols17.AdismissedBreleasedCrankedDdistorted18.AsuppressBexploitCaddressDignore19. AaccessibleBamiableCagreeableDaccountable20. Aby all mesnsBatall costsCin a wordDas a resultCome on Everybody 

9、9; s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and hal f forcing, is what most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good-drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenberg contends that peer pressure can also be a positive

10、 force through what she calls the social cure, in which organizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their lives and possibly the word.Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of example of the social cure in action: In South Carolina, a

11、state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze sets out to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as LoveLife recruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.The idea seems promising , and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her crit

12、ique of the lameness of many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits, and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology . " Dare to be different, please don'pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teen

13、agers-teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-health advocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Club is filled

14、with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it' s presenwork very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed once state funding was cut. Evidence that the Lo

15、veLife program produces lasting changes is limited and mixed.There ' s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our behavior. An emerging body of research shows that positive health habits-as well as negative ones-spread through networks of friends via social communication. This

16、 is a subtle form of peer pressure: we unconsciously imitate the behavior we see every day.Far less certain, however, is how successfully experts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer their activities in virtuous directions. Ite the teacher whokDreaks up the troublemakers in the back

17、row by pairing themwith better- behaved classmates. The tactic never really works. And that' s the problem with a social cure engfrom the outside: in the real world, as in school, we insist on choosing our own friends.21. According to the first paragraph, peer pressure often emerges asA a supple

18、ment to the social cureB a stimulus to group dynamicsC an obstacle to school progressD a cause of undesirable behaviors22. Rosenberg holds that public advocates shouldA recruit professional advertisersB learn from advertisers' experienceC stay away from commercial advertisersD recognize the limi

19、tations of advertisements23. In the author ' s view, Rosenberg ' s book fails toA adequately probe social and biological factorsB effectively evade the flaws of the social cureC illustrate the functions of state fundingDproduce a long-lasting social effect24. Paragraph 5shows that our imitat

20、ion of behaviorsA is harmful to our networks of friendsB will mislead behavioral studiesC occurs without our realizing itD can produce negative health habits25. The author suggests in the last paragraph that the effect of peer pressure isA harmfulB desirableC profoundD questionableA deal is a deal-e

21、xcept, apparently ,when Entergy is involved. The company, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in Vermont last week when it announced it was reneging_on a longstanding commitment to abide by the strict nuclear regulations.Instead, the company has done precisely what it

22、had long promised it would not challenge the constitutionality ofVermont ' rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to keep its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant running. It ' s a stunning move.The conflict has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermont&

23、#39; s only nuclearaging reactor in Vernon. As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek permission from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plant ' s license be subject to Vermo

24、nt legislature' s approval. Then, too, the company went along.32012年全國碩士研究生入學(xué)統(tǒng)一考試英語(一)Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or it simply didn' t foresee whanext. A string of accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 207 and the discovery of

25、an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermont Yankee ' safety and Entergy ' management - especially after the company made misleading statements about the pipe. Enraged by Entergy' s bSenate voted 26 to 4 last year against allowing an extension.Now the c

26、ompany is suddenly claiming that the 2002 agreement is invalid because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory power over nuclear issues. The legal issues in the case are obscure: whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority o

27、ver nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will offer a precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid concerns about the patchwork regulations that could result if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word, that debate would be bes

28、ide the point.The company seems to have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is already so damaged that it has noting left to lose by going to war with the state. But there should be consequences. Permission to run a nuclear plant is a poblic trust. Entergy runs 11 other reactors in the United S

29、tates, including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep it open for another 20 years. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the company ' s application, it should keep it mind what promises from

30、 Entergy are worth.26. The phrase “ reneging on ” (Line 3.para.1) is closest inomeaning t A condemning.B reaffirming.。dishonoring.D securing.27. By entering into the 2002 agreement, Entergy intended toA obtain protection from Vermont regulators.B seek favor from the federal legislature.C acquire an

31、extension of its business license .D get permission to purchase a power plant.28. According to Paragraph 4, Entergy seems to have problems with its A managerial practices. B technical innovativeness.C financial goals.D business vision29. In the auth or ' s view, the Vermont case will testA Enter

32、gy ' s capacity to fulfill all its promises.B the mature of states' patchwork regulations.C the federal authority over nuclear issues .D the limits of states' power over nuclear issues.30. It can be inferred from the last paragraph thatA Entergy ' s business elsewhere might be affect

33、ed.B the authority of the NRC will be defied.C Entergy will withdraw its Plymouth application. D Vermont ' s reputation might be damaged.In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific

34、 method to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experience. Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think

35、our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and

36、 acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher mes here, now becomes the community ' anyone, anywhere, anytime . Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.Once a discovery claim becomes pu

37、blic, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication

38、process; other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes; and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works it through the community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and co

39、mpeting beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individual' s discovery claim into the community' s credible discovery.Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing Knowledge that is vie

40、wed as incomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search. Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appear to be important and convincing will always be o

41、pen to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Azent- Gyorgyi once described discovery as“ seeing what everybody has seen and thinking vnobody has thought. " But thinki

42、ng what nobody else has thoiuglhtelling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.In the end, credibility“ happens " to a discoveryrokaess that corresponds to what philosopher AnnetteBaie

43、r has described as the commons of the mind . " Weeason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other ' s reasoning and each other ' s conceptions of reason.”31. According to the first paragraph, the process of discovery is characterized by its A uncertainty and complexity.B misco

44、nception and deceptiveness.C logicality and objectivity.D systematicness and regularity.32. It can be inferred from Paragraph 2 that credibility process requires52012年全國碩士研究生入學(xué)統(tǒng)一考試英語(一)A strict inspection.Bshared efforts.C individual wisdom.Dpersistent innovation.33.Paragraph 3 shows that a discover

45、y claim becomes credible after itA has attracted the attention of the general public.Bhas been examined by the scientific community.C has received recognition from editors and reviewers.Dhas been frequently quoted by peer scientists.34. Albert Szent-Gy? rgyi would most likely agree thatA scientific

46、claims will survive challenges.Bdiscoveries today inspire future research.C efforts to make discoveries are justified.Dscientific work calls for a critical mind.35.Which of the following would be the best title of the test?A Novelty as an Engine of Scientific Development.BCollective Scrutiny in Scie

47、ntific Discovery.C Evolution of Credibility in Doing Science.DChallenge to Credibility at the Gate to Science.If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today, he would probably represent civil servant. When Hoffa ' s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960, onlone in ten American government wor

48、kers belonged to a union; now 36% do. In 2009 the number of unionists in America' s public sector pasfellow members in the private sector. In Britain, more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15% of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public- sector un

49、ions ' thriving. First, they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences. Second, they are mostly bright and well-educated. A quarter of A merica ' s pubsector workers have a university degree. Third, they now dominate left-of- centre politics. Some of their ties g

50、o back a long way. Britain' s Labor Party, a long been associated with trade unionism. Its current leader, Ed Miliband, owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome. Mark Baldassare of the Public PolicyInstitute of California p

51、oints out that much of the state' s budget is patrolled by unions.unions keep an eye on schools, the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one. But the pay deals, keeping the pay incre

52、ases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.real gains come in benefits and work prac tices. Politicians have repeatedlybackeoadedpiReform has been vigorously opposed, perhaps most egregiously in education, where charter schools, academies and merit pay all f

53、aced drawn-out battles. Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable, teachers' unions have fought abad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer, politicians have begun to clamp down. In Wisconsin the

54、unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker, the hardline Republican governor. But many within the public sector suffer under the current system, too.John Donahue at Harvard ' s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want

55、 to stay put but is bad for high achievers. The only American public-sector workers who earn well above $250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States. Bankers ' fat pay packets have attracted much criticism, but -sectolrcsystem that does not reward high ach

56、ievers may be a much bigger problem for America.36. It can be learned from the first paragraph thatA Teamsters still have a large body of members.B Jimmy Hoffa used to work as a civil servant.C unions have enlarged their public-sector membership.Dthe government has improved its relationship with uni

57、onists.37. Which of the following is true of Paragraph 2?A Public-sector unions are prudent in taking actions.B Education is required for public-sector union membership.C Labor Party has long been fighting against public-sector unions. DPublic-sector unions seldom get in trouble for their actions.38

58、. It can be learned from Paragraph 4 that the income in the state sector isA illegally secured.B indirectly augmented.C excessively increased.Dfairly adjusted.39. The example of the unions in Wisconsin shows that unions Aoften run against the current political system.Bcan change people ' s political attitudes.Cmay be a barrier to pub