英语阅读与写作8

模拟试题四Part 1 Translation （30%）Section ADirections: Translate the following sentences from English to Chinese. (10%) 1．Passing students who have not mastered the work cheats them and the employers who expect graduates to have basic skills.2．Meanwhile, my two sisters and I, who lived in three different cities, were united once again in a hospital waiting room.3．Each executive raised his right hand and solemnly swore to tell the whole truth about his business.4．Perhaps each individual contribution is small, but the scale of the internet multiplies all efforts dramatically.5．It seems that the Enlightenment brought forth unparalleled liberty in economic, social and political life, but we are now undergoing a midlife crisis.Section BDirections: Translate the following sentences from Chinese to English. (10%)1.各个年龄的人都能克服他们的问题，可他们需要一个这样做的理由。

2.一个沉闷的秋天早晨，大雨无情地倾泻在西雅图市，妈妈被收进瑞典肿瘤研究所。

3.既然大家都知道香烟在一定程度上有危害，抽烟与否从根本上说是个人的选择和责任问题，责任不在烟草公司。

4.这是因为成百上千的编程员通过电子邮件或网络就一项目全力协作相对来说要容易些。

5.人们身心的健康与快乐，并非财富，才是我们社会进步的标志。

Section CDirections: Translate the following passage from English to Chinese. (5%) As I teach, I learn a lot about our schools. Early in each session I ask my students to write about an unpleasant experience they had in school. No writers' block here! "I wish someone would have had made me stop doing drugs and made me study." "I liked to party and no one seemed to care." "I was a good kid and didn't cause any trouble, so they just passed me along even though I didn't read and couldn't write." And so on.Section DDirections: Translate the following passage from Chinese to English. (5%)制定恰当的规章制度是指创设激励机制并排除障碍来重建整个社会体系，这样，社会的各个层面都能依此做出适当选择。

以环境为例，人人都认为当地更洁净的环境会有助于改善人们的身心健康。

通过订立为碳付出代价并鼓励环保创新改革这样的规章制度，政府就能帮助人们做出更好的选择。

Part 2 Reading Comprehension (20%)Section AFast reading (10%)Directions: Go over the passage quickly and answer the questions.The essence of education is the teaching of facts and reasoning skills to our children, so that they learn to think.Yet almost a century, our schools have been under assault by an approach to education that elevates feelings over facts. Under the influence of Progressive Education –It is now more important than getting him in touch with the facts of history, mathematics or geography.―Creative spelling‖- in which students are encouraged to spell words in whatever way they feel is correct –is more important than the rules of language. Urging children to ―feel good‖ about themselves is more important than ensuring that they acquire the knowledge necessary for livingsuccessfully.This emotion-centered, anti-reason assault on education has found a new ally; those who believe the literal words of the Bible. The Kansas Board of Education has just excised the theory of evolution from the states official science standards. Several other states have enacted similar anti-evolution policies, thereby elevating the feeling of religious fundamentalists over the accumulated evidence of the entire science of biologyThese policies do not actually ban the teaching of evolution, nor do they mandate the t eaching of ―Creationism‖-the biblical claim that the Earth and all life on it were created in six days .They simply drop evolution from the required curriculum .The goal of the religious activities is to keep students ignorant of the theory of evolution, or to encourage the teaching of evolution and Creationism side-by-side, as two ―competing‖ theories.Consider what this latter would mean in the classroom. On the one side, teachers would present the theory of evolution, supported by countless observations, all integrated into a comprehensive explanation of virtually every fact in its field.On the other side, teachers would present --- what? All that the Creationist view offers is the assertion by would-be authorities that an ancient religious text reveals that 10,000 years ago God created the world in six days.Some of these religious activists claim that they reject the teaching of evolution because it is ―unproven,‖ since it lacks ―sufficient evidence.‖Yet their arguments systematically reject the need for proof and evidence. Scientists can point to a billion-year-long fossil record of continuous changes across all species as they develop from more-primitive to present-day forms. They can point to the natural variations among members of a species, variations that change from one climate to another as species adapt to their environment. But the Creationist categorically dismisses the evidence—because it contradicts biblical dogma. For questions1-4, markY（for yes) if the statement agrees with the information given in the passage.N（for no）if the statement contradicts the information given in the passage.NG（for NOT GIVEN）if the information is not given in the passage.For questions5-10 complete the sentences with the information given in the passage.1．Our schools have never been under assault by an approach to education that elevates feelings over facts.2．―Creative spelling‖--- in which students are encouraged to spell words in whatever way they feel is correct --- is more important than the rules of language.3．Some of the religious activists claim that they reject the teaching of evolution because it is a harm to their belief.4．―The essence of education is the teaching of facts and reasoning skills to our children, so that they learn to think.‖ This idea is firstly put forward by a British educator.5．Urging children to ―feel good‖ about themselves is more important than ensuring that they acquire the knowledge ___________________________________.6．The Kansas Board of Education has just excised__________________________from the states official science standards.7．The biblical claim that the Earth and all life on it were created in _____ days.8．Some of these religious activists claim that they reject the teaching of evolution, because it lacks _______________.9．Scientists can point to the continuous changes across all species by _____________________. 10．The Creationist categorically dismisses the evidence as it is a contradiction to____________.Section BTask-based reading (10%)Directions: Read the article and fill out the following table.(4 words at most for each blank) .It made headlines several weeks ago: Researchers at Stanford University's SIQSS (Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society) conducted a national survey of Web users that led the researchers to the following conclusions:"The more hours people use the Internet, the less time they spend with real human beings. ... The Internet could be the ultimate isolating technology that reduces our participation in communities e ven more than television did. … This is an early trend that, as a society, we really need to monitor carefully."The study was conducted at the end of last year and used information provided by 2,689 households that were enlisted by a random telephone survey and given a free Web TV and free Internet access. In an effort to fi1ter out "contamination" caused by the fact that the survey was itself Web-based, the final results were drawn only from among those participants who already had some form of Internet access at home or work prior to the survey.The study has all the normal trappings of objectivity and statistical validity, but to me, it appears the researchers' interpretation of the results is rooted in a subt1e, but distinct anti-Web/anti-tech bias. This is especially disturbing in light of the wide play the survey got in the national media.Let me pick one glaring example: the study trumpets that 26 percent of Internet users report they spend less time talking with family and friends on the phone -- clearly, a symptom of increasing social isolation, right?But the same study shows that by far the most common Internet activity is sending and receiving e-mail. Amazingly, nowhere in the study did I find anything that recognized what is, to me, the obvious causal link: E-mail simply has replaced the phone for many routine types of communication. The interpersonal interaction still takes place; it's just shifted from one medium to another.But the researchers seem to have missed that. Worse，they appear to regard e-mail as a socially inferior medium. For example, in a press release about the study, one researcher says, ―E-mail is a way to stay in touch, but you can't share a coffee or a beer with somebody on e-mail or give them a hug.‖OK. But you can't share a coffee or a beer or a hug by telephone, either. So, wouldn't it stand to reason that the more time we spend on the phone, the more socially isolated we are? And you know, you also can't share a coffee or a beer or a hug by snail mail, so every time you send someone a card or a letter, you're merely increasing your social isolation, right?What’s wrong with this thinking?Clearly, there’s something wrong with this thinking, and I think the clue to what the flaw is can be found in the same press where one of the researchers says, ―For the most past, the Internet is an individual activity.‖But the study says that e-mail is the No.1 Internet activity. That’s ―individual‖ only if you see one end of the connection, or only if you somehow come to believe that in communicating online, you’re interacting with your computer rather than your correspondents.By the same logic, if you talk on the phone, you’re really just interacting with a speaker and microphone and some wires, right? Oh wait, that can’t be right ——as w e saw above,‖ talking with family and friends on the phone‖ is a good thing, the loss of which represents increasing social isolation. So, by the weird logic of this research paper, communication by older technologylike the phone is socially connecting, but communication by a newer technology——e-mail——is socially isolating.I believe that strange distinction makes sense only when you view this subject through the strong, distorting lens of personal bias: Some people are inherently ―touchy-feely‖ and simply can’t connect unless they can at least hear another’s voice. To these people, e-mail will always come up short.I’ll be the first to admit that there are times when there’s no substitute for the touch or voice of a friend or a loved one. But many people, especially those comfortable with the written word, have no trouble maintaining social connections by e-mail.In fact, I think e-mail can be the very antithesis of isolating. If a friend sends me, say, a small joke by e-mail - a joke too small to warrant a phone call or a face-to-face meeting --I can smile and feel good at being thought of. It's communication that otherwise would not have happened, and adds to the totality of social connectedness rather than detracts from it.This seems obvious to me. People gravitate to the medium that works best for their needs. For touchy-feely people, e-mail is lousy. But for others, e-mail actually increases and enhances communication and connectedness. The fact that e-mail is the No. 1 online activity is concrete evidence that there is a huge number of people who feel like wise.Yes, e-mail is different from face-to-face communication or the telephone or other media. As a neutral statement, that's fine. But it gets scary when a social scientist engaged in the "Quantitative Study of Society" assigns qualitative value judgments to communication media. In effect: "Lots of phone calls mean you're socially interconnected; lots of e-mail means you're socially isolated, and part of a trend that society must monitor carefully."Connectedness vs. IsolationSocially speaking, "connectedness" and "isolation" are both relative and subjective terms.Amazingly, the researchers never asked the survey participants if they themselves felt more or less connected. They never asked if participants felt more or less isolated or if their lives had improved or deteriorated or if other family members or friends had complained or even commented on the users' supposed isolation or connectedness. Instead, the researchers asked ostensibly neutral questions and then inferred the degree of connectedness or isolation according to an unspecified, and in my opinion, biased scale.That flaw in the study can't be rectified, but perhaps it can be illuminated. Consider: Byte' readers have been online longer than almost any other group I know, stretching back to the early days of ARPAnet2. A decade ago, before most people had even heard of the Internet, Byte's commercial online system (BIX) was among the very first to have full interconnectivity between its e-mail system and standard Internet e-mail.Surely, if social isolation and unconnectedness is a problem, it would have shown up in this Sample - Byte readers - sooner and stronger than in the public at large.So, in an admittedly anecdotal and nonscientific way, let me ask you: Has the Internet and Web enhanced or detracted from the social connectedness of your life? Does the online world make you feel more isolated, or less? Does it strengthen the social fabric of your life, or weaken it? Do you have e-mail friends whom you never (or rarely) meet in person? If so, are these friendships inferior to ones that rely more on face-to-face meetings?Lead-in The author introduce ideas to be discussed through (1)View1 TheSIQSS If people spend more hours on Web will (2) , and this is an early trend need us to (3).View2 TheAuthor’s The author believes that this research is imperfect, perhaps to some extent; to spend more time on the computer will (4).Proof1 TheSIQSS Researchers choose their research subjects by (5) , and come to such a conclusion the more time we spend on Web they will fell (6).Proof2 TheAuthor’s The author believes that the network's main function is (7)and will not isolate people. He explains his views by analogy with (8).Conclusions If social isolation and unconnectedness is a problem, it would haveshown up in (9) first.In the last paragraph the author uses a series of rhetorical questionsin order to stress (10) .Part 3 Careful Reading (10%)Directions:In the following text, these paragraphs have been in incorrect order. Put the 6 paragraphs in the correct order. The first and the fifth paragraphs have been given.① The 1930s were a period when many Americans began smoking and the most significant health effects had not yet developed. As a result, the scientific studies of the era often failed to find clear evidence of serious pathology and had the perverse effect of exonerating the cigarette.② Many advertising campaigns from the 1930s through the 1950s extolled the healthy virtues of cigarettes. Full-color magazine ads depicted kindly doctors clad in white coats proudly lighting up or puffing away, with slogans like ―More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.‖③ The years after World War II, however, were a time of major breakthroughs in epidemiological thought. In 1947, Richard Doll and A. Bradford Hill of the British Medical Research Council created a sophisticated statistical technique to document the association between rising rates of lung cancer and increasing numbers of smokers.④ Predictably, the tobacco companies — and their expert surrogates — derided these and other studies as mere statistical arguments or anecdotes rather than definitions of causality.⑤ The prominent surgeon Evarts A. Graham and a medical student, Ernst L. Wynder, published a landmark article in 1950 comparing the incidence of lung cancer in their nonsmoking and smoking patients at Barnes Hospital in St. Louis. They concluded that ―cigarette smoking, over a long period, is at least one important factor in th e striking increase in bronchogenic cancer.‖⑥ Early in the 20th century, opposition to cigarettes took a moral rather than a health-conscious tone, especially for women who wanted to smoke, although even then many doctors were concerned that smoking was a health risk.A②→B →C →D →E⑤→FPart 4 P roof Reading and Error Correction (10%)Ultimately, society's happiness require us all to play our part. 1._________Indeed, playing our part is part of being happy. That is what we need a revolution in responsibility. 2.__________ Corporate responsibility means businesses taking a provocative role, and then taking account of their employees' lives. 3.__________Civic responsibility means giving power back to local government, community organizations and social enterprises so they can formulate local solutions on 4.__________local problems.And personal responsibility means we all do our bit in cleaning our local environment or participating in local politics. 5.__________ Neil Browne, professor of economics at Bowling Green State University, recently wrote an article: "If Markets Are So Wonderfully, Why Can't I Find Friends 6.__________at the Store?"It is not that markets are bad or that we are all doomed to a life of instant unhappiness.7.__________ Rather, given our advances in terms of political freedom, economic enterprise and cultural ingenuity, life could, and should, be less satisfying. 8.__________ That is why focusing on general well-being could be the big, defined political concept of the 21st century. 9. __________And by recognizing the responsibility every section of society has, we also have to the means to enhance it. 10.__Part 5 Reading in-depth (30%)Direction: Read the article and finish the following questions.What will the world be like in fifty years?This week some top scientists, including Nobel Prize winners, gave their vision of how the world will look in 2056, from gas-powered cars to extraordinary health advances, John Ingham reports on what the world’s finest minds believe our futures will be.For those of us lucky enough to live that long, 2056 will be a world of almost perpetual youth, where obesity is a remote memory and robots become our companions.We will be rubbing shoulders with aliens and colonizing outer space. Better still, our descendants might at last live in a world at peace with itself.The prediction is that we will have found a source of inexhaustible, safe, green energy, and that science will have killed off religion. If they are right we will have removed two of the main causes of war-our dependence on oil and religious prejudice.Will we really, as today’s scientist’s claim, be able to live for ever or at least cheat the ageing process so that the average person lives to 150?Of course, all these predictions come with a scientific health warning. Harvard professor Steven Pinker says: ―This is an invitation to look foolish, as with the predictions of domed cities and nuclear-powered vacuum cleaners that were made 50 year ago.‖Living longerAnthony Attala, director of the Wake Forest Institute in North Carolina, believes failing organs will be repaired by injecting cells into the body. They will naturally go straight to the injury and help heal it. A system of injections without needles could also slow the ageing process by using the same process to ―tune‖ cel ls.Bruce Lehn, professor of human genetics at the University of Chicago, anticipates the ability to produce ―unlimited supplies‖ of transplantable human organs without the need for human donors, the surgeon would contact a commercial organ producer, give him the patient’s immune-logical profile and would then be sent a kidney with the correct tissue type.These organs would be entirely composed of human cells, grown by introducing them into animal hosts, and allowing them to develop into an organ in plac e of the animal’s own. But Prof. Lehn believes that farmed brains would be ―off limits.‖ He says: ―Very few people would want to have their brains replaced by someone else’s and we probably don’t want to put a human brain in an animal body.‖Richard Miller, a professor at the University of Michigan, thinks scientist could develop ―authentic anti-ageing drugs‖ by working out how cells in larger animals such as whales and human resist many forms of injuries. He says:―It is now routine, in laboratory mammals, to extend lifespan by about 40%. Turning on the same protective systems in people should, by 2056, create the first class of 100-year-olds who are as vigorous and productive as today’s people in their 60s‖AliensConlin Pillinger, professor of planetary sciences at the Open University, says that I fancy that at least we will be able to show that life did start to evolve on Mars as well as Earth.‖ Within 50 years he hopes scientists will prove that alien life came here in Martian meteorites(陨石).Chris McKay, a planetary scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center, believes that in 50 years we may find evidence of alien life in ancient permanent frost of Mars or on other planets.He adds that there is even a chance we will find alien life forms here on Earth. It might be as different as English is to Chinese.Princeton professor Freeman Dyson thinks it ―likely‖ that life form outer space will be discovered before 2056 because the tools for finding it, such as optical and radio detection and data processing, are improving.He says that as soon as the first evidence is found, we will know what to look for and additional discoveries are likely to follow quickly. Such discoveries are likely to have revolutionary consequences for biology, astronomy and philosophy. They may change the way we look at ourselves and our place in the universe.Colonies in spaceRichard Gott, professor of astrophysics at Princeton, hopes man will set up a self-sufficient colony on Mars, which would be a ―life insurance policy against whatever catastrophes, natural or otherwise, might occur on Earth.‖―The real space race is whether we will colonize off Earth on to other worlds before money for the space program runs out.‖Spinal injuriesEllen Heber-Katz, a professor at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, foresees cures for injuries causing paralysis such as the one that afflicted Superman star Christopher Reeve.She says that I believe that the day is not far off when we will be able to prescribe drugs that cause severed(断裂的) spinal cords to heal, hearts to regenerate and lost limbs to regrow.―People will come to expect that injured or diseased organs are meant to be repaired fr om within, in much the same way that we fix an appliance or automobile: by replacing the damaged part with a manufacturer-certified new part.‖ She predicts that within 5 to 10 years fingers and toes will be regrown and limbs will start to be regrown a few years later. Repairs to the nervous system will start with optic nerves and, in time, the spinal cord.‖ Within 50years whole body replacement will be routine,‖ Prof. Heber-Katz adds.ObesitySydney Brenner, senior distinguished fellow of the Crick-Jacobs Center in California, won the 2002 Nobel Prize for Medicine and says that if there is a global disaster some humans will survive-and evolution will favor small people with bodies large enough to support the required amount of brain power.‖ Obesity,‖ he sa ys will have been solved.RobotsRodney Brooks, professor of robotice at MIT, says the problems of developing artificial intelligence for robots will be at least partly overcome .As a result,‖ the possibilities for robots working with people will open up immensely‖EnergyBill Joy, green technology expert in California, says that the most significant breakthrough would be to have an inexhaustible source of safe, green energy that is substantially cheaper than any existing energy source.‖Ideally, such a source would be safe in that it could not be made into weapons and would not make hazardous or toxic waste or carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas blamed for global warming.SocietyGeoffrey Miller, evolutionary psychologist at the University of New Mexico, says that The US will follow the UK in realizing that religion is not a prerequisite (前提)for ordinary human decency.―Thus, science will kill religion-not by reason challenging faith but by offering a more practical, universal and rewarding mora l framework for human interaction.‖He also predicts that ―absurdly wasteful‖ displays of wealth will become unfashionable while the importance of close-knit communities and families will become clearer.These three changes, he says, will help make us a ll brighter, wiser, happier and kinder‖.1.Write an abstract of the article and some key words as well.(three-five ). Directions: You are required to write an abstract of the article with at least 100 words and three to five key words or expressions.2.Analyze the structure of this article.Directions: divide this article into several parts and summarize the main idea for each part.3.Write out your comments on the article.Directions: What is your understanding about the theme of this article? Please write out your view points.。