p9、筆記410月5日-2017考研英語(yǔ)真題閱讀5夜10篇精讀直播隨堂

Text①TheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceisindeedaninterestingexperiment,asAlexanderPolyakovsaidwhenheacceptedthisyear’sawardinMarch.正如 在今年三月接受今年的基礎(chǔ)物理學(xué)獎(jiǎng)的時(shí)候所說(shuō)的那樣，額達(dá)到300的基礎(chǔ)物理學(xué)獎(jiǎng)的確是個(gè)有趣的嘗試質(zhì)測(cè) 初相 人都 ②Anditisfarfromtheonlyoneofitsfarfromisfarfrombeingaworldeconomy③AsaNewsFeaturearticleinNaturediscusses,astringoflucrative forresearchershavejoinedtheNobelPrizesinrecentyears.入到了獎(jiǎng)的行列。④Many,liketheFundamentalPhysicsPrize,arefundedfromtheephones-number-sizedbankaccountsofInternetentrepreneurs.像基礎(chǔ)物理學(xué)獎(jiǎng)一樣，很多獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)的經(jīng)費(fèi)來(lái)自互聯(lián)網(wǎng)企業(yè)家的銀行賬戶⑤Thesebenefactorshavesucceededintheirchosenfields,theysay,andtheywanttousetheirwealthtodrawattentiontothosewhohavesucceededinscience.①What’snottolike?Quitealot,accordingtoahandfulofscientistsquotedintheNews有什么不妥呢？就專題的少數(shù)科學(xué)家的話來(lái)講，有很多②Youcannotbuyclass,astheoldsayinggoes,andtheseupstartentrepreneurscannotbuytheirprizestheprestigeoftheNobels. 望③Thenewareanexerciseinself-promotionforthosebehindthem,say科學(xué)家們說(shuō)，這些獎(jiǎng)只不過(guò)是設(shè)立這些獎(jiǎng)的人的自我而已這些獎(jiǎng)是背后的企業(yè)家們?yōu)榱俗晕倚麄鞫O(shè)置的他們會(huì)以成果為基礎(chǔ)，以評(píng)審為引導(dǎo)的體系⑤Theycouldcementthestatusquoofpeer-reviewed他們會(huì)使評(píng)審研究的現(xiàn)狀不前⑥Theydonotfundpeer-reviewed他們不會(huì)資助評(píng)審研究⑦TheyperpetuatethemythofthelonePerpetuate:使…mythofthelonegenius①Thegoalsoftheprize-giversseemasscatteredasthecriticism.AseemasscatteredasBABAareasdiversifiedas和批評(píng)一樣，獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)設(shè)立者的目標(biāo)也不盡相同②Somewanttoshock,otherstodrawpeopleintoscience,ortobetterrewardthosewhohavemadetheircareersinresearch.有的人是為了想世界，其他人是為了吸引人才從事科學(xué)研究，有些人想更好地回報(bào)那havemadetheircareersinresearch.Hehasmadehiscareerinteaching.①AsNaturehaspointedoutbefore,therearesomelegitimateconcernsabouthowscienceprize—bothnewandold—aredistributed.Legitimacy（，合理性）地位就如自然以往過(guò)的那樣，科學(xué)獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)（無(wú)論新舊，其分配方式確有值得擔(dān)心處②TheBreakthroughPrizeinLifeSciences,launchedthisyear,takesanviewofwhatthelifescience今年新設(shè)立的生命科學(xué)突破獎(jiǎng)在就生命科學(xué)包括哪些（內(nèi)涵）這件事上采用了一種不具備代表性的觀點(diǎn)。③ButtheNobelFoundation’slimitofthreerecipientsperprize,eachofwhommuststillbeliving,haslongbeenoutgrownbythecollaborativenatureofmodernresearch–aswillbedemonstratedbytheinevitablerowoverwhoisignoredwhenitcomestoacknowledgingthediscoveryoftheHiggsAoutgrowB：ABABhasbeenoutgrownbyA但是，獎(jiǎng)在設(shè)立時(shí)規(guī)定每個(gè)獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)最多有三名獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)?，而且每個(gè)人必須依然活著；這種理念早就不適應(yīng)現(xiàn)代研究的大規(guī)模協(xié)作這一事實(shí)了。就如談到希玻色子的發(fā)現(xiàn)頒獎(jiǎng)時(shí)，都會(huì)不可避免地爭(zhēng)論誰(shuí)被忽略了，這點(diǎn)也證明了現(xiàn)代研究的大規(guī)模協(xié)作這一事實(shí)。ThecollaborativenatureofmodernresearchwillbedemonstratedbytheinevitablerowoverwhoisignoredwhenitcomestoacknowledgingthediscoveryoftheHiggsboson.acknowledge:承認(rèn)，表彰，頒獎(jiǎng)，認(rèn)可④TheNobelswere,ofcourse,themselvessetupbyaveryrichindividualwhohaddecidedwhathewantedtodowithhisownmoney.當(dāng)然，獎(jiǎng)本身就是一個(gè)富人處置財(cái)產(chǎn)的結(jié)果⑤Time,ratherthanintention,hasgiventhem時(shí)間，而不是初衷成就了獎(jiǎng)的地位①Asmuchassomescientistsmaycominaboutthenew ,twothingsseemclear.Asmuchas=muchasMuchasIhatetogo,it'snowor雖然我很討厭去，但也就此一回了雖然一些科學(xué)家對(duì)于這些新的獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)有這樣那樣的抱怨，但是有兩個(gè)事實(shí)是清晰的②First,mostresearcherswouldacceptsuchaprizeiftheywereoffered第一，如果頒獎(jiǎng)，大多數(shù)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)叨紩?huì)接受獎(jiǎng)③Second,itissurelyagoodthingthatthemoneyandattentioncometoscienceratherthangoelsewhere.第二，金錢和關(guān)注匯聚到科學(xué)領(lǐng)域而不是其他領(lǐng)域是件好事④Itisfairtocriticizeandquestionthemechanism-thatisthecultureofresearch,afterall-butitistheprize-givers’moneytodowithastheyplease.⑤Itiswisetotakesuchgiftswithgratitudeand明智的做法是以感恩的心優(yōu)雅地接受獎(jiǎng)金TheFundamentalPhysicsPrizeisseen［A］asymboloftheentrepreneurs’［B］ahandsomerewardfor［C］apossiblerecementoftheNobel［D］anexampleofbankers’Thecriticsthinkthatthe willmost［C］thefoundersofthe［D］peer-review-ledThediscoveryoftheHiggsbosonisatypicalcasewhich［A］legitimateconcernsoverthenew［C］thejointeffortofmodern［D］thedemonstrationofresearchAccordingtoParagraph4,whichofthefollowingistrueoftheNobels［A］Historyhasnevercastdoubton［B］Theirendurancehasdonejusticeto［C］Theyarethemostrepresentative［D］TheirlegitimacyhaslongbeeninTheauthorbelievesthatthe ［A］unworthyofpublic［B］subjecttoundesirable［C］harmfultothecultureof①Intheidealizedversionofhowscienceisdone,factsabouttheworldarewaitingtobeobservedandcollectedbyobjectiveresearcherswhousethescientificmethodtocarryouttheirwork.在科學(xué)研究的理想狀態(tài)下，關(guān)于世界的事實(shí)正在等待著那些客觀的研究者去觀察和收集，研究者們會(huì)用科學(xué)的方法來(lái)開展他們的研究工作。②Butintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.但是在每天的科學(xué)實(shí)踐中，發(fā)現(xiàn)通常遵循一條模糊且復(fù)雜的路徑③Weaimtobeobjective,butwecannotescapethecontextofouruniquelife我們的目標(biāo)是做到客觀，但我們卻無(wú)法逃離我們獨(dú)特的人生體驗(yàn)這樣一個(gè)環(huán)境。④Priorknowledgeandinterestinfluencewhatweexperience,whatwethinkourexperiencesmean,andthesubsequentactionswetake.之前的知識(shí)和會(huì)影響到我們的經(jīng)歷，影響到我們對(duì)于經(jīng)歷意義的思考，以及影響到我這里充滿著，錯(cuò)誤和自我的可能性①Consequently,discoveryclaimsshouldbethoughtofas所以，發(fā)現(xiàn)的應(yīng)該被作為科學(xué)的原型②Similartonewlystakedminingclaims,theyarefullof這些類似于新礦勘探的，都充滿著可能性③Butittakescollectivescrutinyandacceptancetotransformadiscoveryclaimintoamature但是把發(fā)現(xiàn)的變成成發(fā)現(xiàn)需要集體的和接受④Thisisthecredibilityprocess,throughwhichtheindividualresearcher’sme,here,nowesthecommunity’sanyone,anywhere,anytime.⑤Objectiveknowledgeisthegoal,notthestarting客觀的知識(shí)不應(yīng)該是起點(diǎn)而是目標(biāo)①Onceadiscovery espublic,thediscovererreceives lectual一旦發(fā)現(xiàn)的變成“public”,這個(gè)發(fā)現(xiàn)就獲得了學(xué)術(shù)的認(rèn)可②But,unlikewithminingclaims,thecommunitytakescontrolofwhathappens但是和采礦不同的是，科學(xué)界會(huì)接管接下來(lái)發(fā)生的事情③Withinthecomplexsocialstructureofthescientificcommunity,researchersmakediscoveries;editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuittheirownpurposes;andfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）receivesthenewdiscoveryandpossibly panyingtechnology.在科學(xué)界復(fù)雜的社會(huì)結(jié)構(gòu)中，研究者做出發(fā)現(xiàn)，編輯和審稿人充當(dāng)看門人控制著的過(guò)現(xiàn)以及可能隨之而來(lái)的新技術(shù)。Note:adiscoveryclaim espublic=editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuittheirownpurposes;andfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）receivesthenewdiscoveryandpossibly panyingtechnology.(被④Asadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity,theinctionandbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnologyinvolvedtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscovery.A=theinctionandbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology支持某一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念與這一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念會(huì)產(chǎn)生互動(dòng)和沖突，當(dāng)一個(gè)發(fā)現(xiàn)的最終通過(guò)了科學(xué)界的逐級(jí)之后，支持某一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念與這一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念會(huì)產(chǎn)生互動(dòng)和，這樣過(guò)后就將個(gè)人的發(fā)現(xiàn)變成了集體的可信的發(fā)現(xiàn)。①Twoparadoxesexistthroughoutthiscredibility整個(gè)取得信任的過(guò)程中，存在著兩種的情況②First,scientificworktendstofocusonsomeaspectofprevailingknowledgethatisviewedaspleteorincorrect.第一，科學(xué)研究工作傾向于關(guān)注流行知識(shí)中被認(rèn)為不完整和不正確的方面。③Little 重復(fù)并確認(rèn)已經(jīng)為人所知以及可信的知識(shí)幾乎不會(huì)帶④Thegoalisnew-search,notre-參考譯文：研究的目標(biāo)是新的“尋找”而不是⑤Notsurprisingly,newlypublisheddiscoveryclaimsandcrediblediscoveriesthatappeartobefutureresearchers.不足為奇的是新發(fā)布的發(fā)現(xiàn)以及那些看起來(lái)重要和有說(shuō)服力的取得了可信度的發(fā)現(xiàn)，總要將究質(zhì)可修至。⑥Second,noveltyitselffrequentlyprovokes.⑦NobelLaureateandphysiologistAlbertAzent-Gyorgyioncedescribeddiscoveryas“seeingwhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought.”⑧Butthinkingwhatnobodyelsehasthoughtandlingotherswhattheyhavemissedmaynotchangetheirviews.但是想無(wú)人所想，并且告訴其他人他們的紕漏未必能改變這些人的看法。真正新的發(fā)現(xiàn)需要很多年才能被接受和認(rèn)可①Intheend,credibility“happens”toadiscoveryclaim–aprocessthatcorrespondstowhatphilosopherAnnetteBaierhasdescribedasthecommonsofthemind.AnnetteBaier所描述的心靈的②“Wereasontogether,challenge,revise,andcompleteeachother’sreasoningandeachother’sconceptionsofreason.”“Tohatetolovetothink,tofeeltoseeallthisisnothingbuttoperceive.”恨也罷，愛也罷，思想、感覺、觀察也罷，無(wú)非都是在領(lǐng)悟David人或事物如果能夠增進(jìn)他人的快樂，我們也會(huì)對(duì)其有好感，盡管對(duì)于沒有任何利害關(guān)系。這就是為什么我們對(duì)于那些有益于公益事業(yè)的事情采取贊賞態(tài)度的原因，這的二是比較。比較的方向與同情相反，當(dāng)我們把他人的痛苦或快樂與自己進(jìn)行比較時(shí)，Accordingtothefirstparagraph,theprocessofdiscoveryischaracterizedby［ essandItcanbeinferredfromParagraph2thatcredibilityprocess［C］individual［D］persistentParagraph3showsthatadiscovery escredibleafter［A］hasattractedtheattentionofthegeneral［B］hasbeenexaminedbythescientificcommunity.被之后［C］hasreceivedrecognitionfromeditorsand［D］hasbeenfrequentlyquotedbypeerAlbertSzent-Gy?rgyiwouldmostlikelyagree［C］effortstomakediscoveriesare［D］scientificworkcallsforacriticalWhichofthefollowingwouldbethebesttitleofthe［A］NoveltyasanEngineofScientific［C］EvolutionofCredibilityinng［D］ChallengetoCredibilityattheGateto第三篇科學(xué)研究1)Intheidealizedversion（理想狀態(tài)）ofhowscienceis2)factsabouttheworldarewaitingtobeobservedandcollectedbyobjectiveresearchers/（主動(dòng)）3）whousethescientificmethodtocarryouttheirButintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.Weaimtobeobjectivebutwecannotescapethecontext（環(huán)境）ofouruniquelifePriorknowledgeandinterestinfluence1）whatweexperience,2）whatwethinkourexperiencesmean,and3）thesubsequentactionswetake.Opportunitiesformisinterpretationerrorandself-deceptionabound.Aabound.ThisideaAccordingtothefirstparagraph,theprocessofdiscoveryischaracterizedbyButintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.［A］uncertaintyandcomplexity.ambiguousand［ essand1.Consequently,discoveryclaimsshouldbethoughtofas2.Similartonewlystakedminingclaims,theyarefullof3ButittakescollectivescrutinyandacceptancetotransformadiscoveryclaimintoamaturecollectivescrutinyandThisisthecredibilityprocess（取得信任的過(guò)程）,throughwhichtheindividualresearcher’sme,here,now esthecommunity’sanyone,anywhere,anytime.（后Objectiveknowledgeisthegoal,notthestartingItcanbeinferredfromParagraph2thatcredibilityprocessrequirescollectivescrutinyand［B］shared=collective；efforts=scrutinyandacceptance.Best［C］individual［D］persistentButittakescollectivescrutinyandacceptancetotransformadiscoveryclaimintoamaturediscovery.collectivescrutinyand三1.Onceadiscoveryclaim espublic?,thediscovererreceivesinlectualcredit. Butunlikewithminingclaims,thecommunity(科學(xué)界takescontrolofwhathappens Withinthecomplexsocialstructureofthescientificcommunity,researchersmakediscoveries;editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;Candfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuit（滿足）theirownpurposes;Dreceivesthenewdiscoveryand panying(隨之)technology.SuitsbtodoAsadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity,theinctionbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnologyinvolvedtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscovery.1）Asadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity，theinctionand transformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscoverybetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology主干識(shí)別：Atransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scredibleA=theinctionand betweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology支持某一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念與這一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念會(huì)產(chǎn)生互動(dòng)和沖突，當(dāng)一個(gè)發(fā)現(xiàn)的最終通過(guò)了科學(xué)界的逐級(jí)之后，支持某一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念與這一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念會(huì)產(chǎn)生互動(dòng)和，這樣過(guò)后就將個(gè)人的發(fā)現(xiàn)變成了集體的可信的發(fā)現(xiàn)。Paragraph3showsthatadiscovery escredibleafter Onceadiscovery espublic?,thediscovererreceives ［A］hasattractedtheattentionofthegeneral［B］hasbeenexaminedbythescientific［C］hasreceivedrecognitionfromeditorsand［D］hasbeenfrequentlyquotedbypeer模糊替換四1.Twoparadoxes（的地方）existthroughoutthiscredibilityviewedas pleteorincorrect.Littlereward paniesduplicationandconfirmationofwhatisalreadyknownandThegoalisnew-search,notre-Notsurprisingly,1)newlypublisheddiscoveryclaimsand/2)crediblediscoveries3)thatappeartobeimportantandconvincing/willalwaysbeopentochallengeandpotentialSecond,noveltyitselffrequentlyprovokeswhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought.”Butthinkingwhatnobodyelsehasthoughtand lingotherswhattheyhavemissedmaynotchangetheirviews.Sometimesyearsarerequiredfortrulynoveldiscoveryclaimstobeacceptedand2）新發(fā)現(xiàn)需要時(shí)間才能被認(rèn)可AlbertSzent-Gy?rgyiwouldmostlikelyagreewhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought”［C］effortstomakediscoveriesare［D］scientificworkcallsforacriticalmind.thinkingwhatnobodyhasthoughtcriticalmind=creativemind!五1. Intheend,credibility“happens”toadiscoveryclaim–aprocessthatcorrespondstowhatphilosopherAnnetteBaierhasdescribedasthecommonsofthemind.2.“Wereasontogether,challenge,revise,andcompleteeachother’sreasoningandeachother’sconceptionsofreason.”David Whichofthefollowingwouldbethebesttitleofthe［A］NoveltyasanEngineofScientific［C］Evolution（過(guò)程，演變）process ofCredibilityinngItakeatriptothetoilet.Revolution=change［D］ChallengetoCredibilityattheGateto第九篇科學(xué)研究Text一1.TheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceisindeedaninterestingexperimentasAlexanderPolyakovsaidwhenheacceptedthisyear’sawardinMarch.AnditisfarfromtheonlyoneofitsAsaNewsFeaturearticleinNaturediscusses,astringoflucrative havejoinedtheNobelPrizesinrecentyears.Many,liketheFundamentalPhysicsPrize,arefundedfromtheephones-number-sizedbankaccountsofInternetentrepreneurs.arefundedephones-number-sizedbankaccounts賬Thesebenefactors（金主，出資人，恩客）havesucceededintheirchosenfields,theysay,andtheywanttousetheirwealthtodrawattentionto（使人們關(guān)注到）thosewhohavesucceededinscience.TheFundamentalPhysicsPrizeisseenTheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceastringoflucrativeMany,liketheFundamentalPhysics［A］asymboloftheentrepreneurs’［B］ahandsomerewardfor［C］apossiblerecementoftheNobel［D］anexampleof二1.What’snottoQuitealot,accordingtoahandfulofscientistsquotedintheNewsYoucannotbuyclass,astheoldsayinggoes,andtheseupstartentrepreneurscannotbuytheirprizestheprestigeoftheNobels.TheareanTheareanexerciseinself-promotionforthosebehindthem,sayTheycoulddistorttheachievement-basedsystemofpeer-review-ledresearch.peer-review-ledresearch.Theycouldcementthestatusquoofpeer-reviewed使…不前現(xiàn)狀Theydonotfundpeer-reviewedTheyperpetuatethemythofthelone使…長(zhǎng)久ThecriticsthinkthatthenewwillmostbenefitCritics=scientists.以利潤(rùn)為導(dǎo)向的科學(xué).Theareanexercisein.Theareanexerciseinself-promotionforthosebehindthem,say［D］peer-review-led三1.Thegoalsoftheprize-giversseemasscatteredastheAseemasscatteredas2.Somewanttoshock,otherstodrawpeopleintoscience,ortobetterrewardthosewhohavemadetheircareersinresearch.Hehasmadehiscareerinteaching四.1.AsNaturehaspointedoutbefore,therearesomelegitimateconcernsabouthowscienceprize—bothnewandold—aredis