摘要:以下是希赛网给大家分享考研201英语(一)在线题库每日一练,希望通过刷题可以帮助大家巩固重要知识点,对知识点查漏补缺,祝愿大家能顺利通过考试!
本文提供考研201英语(一)在线题库每日一练,以下为具体内容
1、In order to “change lives for the better” and reduce “dependency,” George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the “upfront work search” scheme. Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV, register for online job search, and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit—and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly. What could be more reasonable?More apparent reasonableness followed. There will now be a seven-day wait for the jobseeker's allowance. “Those first few days should be spent looking for work, not looking to sign on,” he claimed. “We’re doing these things because we know they help people stay off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster.” Help? Really? On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with “reforms” to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidises laziness. What motivated him, we were to understand, was his zeal for “fundamental fairness”—protecting the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most deserving claimants received their benefits.Losing a job is hurting: you don't skip down to the jobcentre with a song in your heart, delighted at the prospect of doubling your income from the generous state. It is financially terrifying, psychologically embarrassing and you know that support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. You are now not wanted; you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life. Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared. Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always: a job.But in Osbomeland, your first instinct is to fall into dependency—permanent dependency if you can get it—supported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood. It is as though 20 years of ever tougher reforms of the job search and benefit administration system never happened. The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and receive unconditional payments if the disaster happens. Even the very phrase “jobseeker's allowance” is about redefining the unemployed as a “jobseeker” who had no fundamental right to a benefit he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions. Instead, the claimant receives a time-limited “allowance,” conditional on actively seeking a job; no entitlement and no insurance, at $71.70 a week, one of the least generous in the EU. 1.George Osborne's scheme was intended to( ).2.The phrase “to sign on”(Paragraph 2) most probably means ( ). 3.What prompted the chancellor to develop his scheme?4.According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one feel ( ). 5.To which of the following would the author most probably agree?
问题1
A、motivate the unemployed to report voluntarily
B、provide the unemployed with easier access to benefits
C、encourage jobseekers, active engagement in job seeking
D、guarantee jobseekers' legitimate right to benefits
问题2
A、to register for an allowance from the government
B、to accept the government's restrictions on the allowance
C、to check on the availability of jobs at the jobcentre
D、to attend a governmental job-training program
问题3
A、A desire to secure a better life for all.
B、An eagerness to protect the unemployed.
C、An urge to be generous to the claimants.
D、A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayers.
问题4
A、insulted
B、uneasy
C、enraged
D、guilty
问题5
A、Unemployment benefits should not be made conditional.
B、The British welfare system indulges jobseekers' laziness.
C、The jobseekers' allowance has met their actual needs.
D、Osborne's reforms will reduce the risk of unemployment.
2、Though not biologically related, friends are as “related” as fourth cousins, sharing about 1% of genes. That is(1)a study, published from the University of California and Yale University in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, has (2). The study is a genome-wide analysis conducted (3) 1,932 unique subjects which (4) pairs of unrelated friends and unrelated strangers. The same people were used in both (5). While 1% may seem (6), it is not so to a geneticist. As James Fowler, professor of medical genetics at UC San Diego, says, “Most people do not even (7) their fourth cousins but somehow manage to select as friends the people who (8) our kin.” The team also developed a "friendship score" which can predict who will be your friend based on their genes.The study (9) found that the genes for smell were something shared in friends but not genes for immunity. Why this similarity exists in smell genes is difficult to explain, for now, (10), as the team suggests, it draws us to similar environments but there is more (11) it. There could be many mechanisms working together that (12) us in choosing genetically similar friends (13) “functional kinship” of being friends with (14)! One of the remarkable findings of the study was the similar genes seem to be evolving (15) than other genes. Studying this could help (16) why human evolution picked pace in the last 30,000 years, with social environment being a major (17) factor. The findings do not simply explain people's (18) to befriend those of similar (19) backgrounds, say the researchers. Though all the subjects were drawn from a population of European extraction, care was taken to (20) that all subjects, friends and strangers, were taken from the same population.
问题1
A、what
B、why
C、how
D、when
问题2
A、defended
B、concluded
C、withdrawn
D、advised
问题3
A、for
B、with
C、by
D、on
问题4
A、separated
B、sought
C、compared
D、connected
问题5
A、tests
B、objects
C、samples
D、examples
问题6
A、insignificant
B、unexpected
C、unreliable
D、incredible
问题7
A、visit
B、miss
C、know
D、seek
问题8
A、surpass
B、influence
C、favor
D、resemble
问题9
A、again
B、also
C、instead
D、thus
问题10
A、Meanwhile
B、Furthermore
C、Likewise
D、Perhaps
问题11
A、about
B、to
C、from
D、like
问题12
A、limit
B、observe
C、confuse
D、drive
问题13
A、according to
B、rather than
C、regardless of
D、along with
问题14
A、chances
B、responses
C、benefits
D、missions
问题15
A、faster
B、slower
C、later
D、earlier
问题16
A、forecast
B、remember
C、express
D、understand
问题17
A、unpredictable
B、contributory
C、controllable
D、disruptive
问题18
A、tendency
B、decision
C、arrangement
D、endeavor
问题19
A、political
B、religious
C、ethnic
D、economic
问题20
A、see
B、show
C、prove
D、tell
3、France, which prides itself as the global innovator of fashion, has decided its fashion industry has lost an absolute right to define physical beauty for women. Its lawmakers gave preliminary approval last week to a law that would make it a crime to employ ultra-thin models on runways. The parliament also agreed to ban websites that “incite excessive thinness” by promoting extreme dieting. Such measures have a couple of uplifting motives. They suggest beauty should not be defined by looks that end up impinging on health. That's a start. And the ban on ultra-thin models seems to go beyond protecting models from starving themselves to death—as some have done. It tells the fashion industry that it must take responsibility for the signal it sends women, especially teenage girls, about the social tape-measure they must use to determine their individual worth. The bans, if fully enforced, would suggest to women (and many men) that they should not let others be arbiters of their beauty. And perhaps faintly, they hint that people should look to intangible qualities like character and intellect rather than dieting their way to size zero or wasp-waist physiques. The French measures, however, rely too much on severe punishment to change a culture that still regards beauty as skin-deep—and bone-showing. Under the law, using a fashion model that does not meet a government-defined index of body mass could result in a $85,000 fine and six months in prison. The fashion industry knows it has an inherent problem in focusing on material adornment and idealized body types. In Denmark, the United States, and a few other countries, it is trying to set voluntary standards for models and fashion images that rely more on peer pressure for enforcement. In contrast to France's actions, Denmark's fashion industry agreed last month on rules and sanctions regarding the age, health, and other characteristics of models. The newly revised Danish Fashion Ethical Charter clearly states: “We are aware of and take responsibility for the impact the fashion industry has on body ideals, especially on young people.” The charter's main tool of enforcement is to deny access for designers and modeling agencies to Copenhagen Fashion Week (CFW), which is run by the Danish Fashion Institute. But in general it relies on a name-and-shame method of compliance. Relying on ethical persuasion rather than law to address the misuse of body ideals may be the best step. Even better would be to help elevate notions of beauty beyond the material standards of a particular industry. 1.According to the first paragraph, what would happen in France?2.The phrase “impinging on” (Paragraph 2) is closest in meaning to( ).3.Which of the following is true of the fashion industry?4.A designer is most likely to be rejected by CFW for( ). 5.Which of the following may be the best title of the text?
问题1
A、Physical beauty would be redefined.
B、New runways would be constructed.
C、Websites about dieting would thrive.
D、The fashion industry would decline.
问题2
A、indicating the state of
B、heightening the value of
C、losing faith in
D、doing harm to
问题3
A、The French measures have already failed.
B、New standards are being set in Denmark.
C、Models are no longer under peer pressure.
D、Its inherent problems are getting worse.
问题4
A、pursuing perfect physical conditions
B、caring too much about models' character
C、showing little concern for health factors
D、setting a high age threshold for models
问题5
A、A Challenge to the Fashion Industry's Body Ideals.
B、A Dilemma for the Starving Models in France.
C、Just Another Round of Struggle for Beauty.
D、The Great Threats to the Fashion Industry.
4、For the first time in history more people live in towns than in the country. In Britain this has had a curious result. While polls show Britons rate “the countryside” alongside the royal family, Shakespeare and the National Health Service (NHS) as what makes them proudest of their country, this has limited political support.A century ago Octavia Hill launched the National Trust not to rescue stylish houses but to save “the beauty of natural places for everyone forever.” It was specifically to provide city dwellers with spaces for leisure where they could experience “a refreshing air.” Hill's pressure later led to the creation of national parks and green belts. They don't make countryside any more, and every year concrete consumes more of it. It needs constant guardianship.At the next election none of the big parties seem likely to endorse this sentiment. The Conservatives' planning reform explicitly gives rural development priority over conservation, even authorising “off-plan” building where local people might object. The concept of sustainable development has been defined as profitable. Labour likewise wants to discontinue local planning where councils oppose development. The Liberal Democrats are silent. Only Ukip, sensing its chance, has sided with those pleading for a more considered approach to using green land. Its Campaign to Protect Rural England struck terror into many local Conservative parties.The sensible place to build new houses, factories and offices is where people are, in cities and towns where infrastructure is in place. The London agents Stirling Ackroyd recently identified enough sites for half a million houses in the London area alone, with no intrusion on green belt. What is true of London is even truer of the provinces. The idea that “housing crisis” equals “concreted meadows” is pure lobby talk. The issue is not the need for more houses but, as always, where to put them. Under lobby pressure, George Osborne favours rural new-build against urban renovation and renewal. He favours out-of-town shopping sites against high streets. This is not a free market but a biased one. Rural towns and villages have grown and will always grow. They do so best where building sticks to their edges and respects their character. We do not ruin urban conservation areas. Why ruin rural ones?Development should be planned, not let rip. After the Netherlands, Britain is Europe's most crowded country. Half a century of town and country planning has enabled it to retain an enviable rural coherence, while still permitting low-density urban living. There is no doubt of the alternative—the corrupted landscapes of southern Portugal, Spain or Ireland. Avoiding this rather than promoting it should unite the left and right of the political spectrum.1.Britain's public sentiment about the countryside( ).2.According to Paragraph 2, the achievements of the National Trust are now being ( ). 3.Which of the following can be inferred from Paragraph 3?4.The author holds that George Osborne's preference ( ). 5.In the last paragraph, the author shows his appreciation of( ).
问题1
A、has brought much benefit to the NHS
B、didn't start till the Shakespearean age
C、is fully backed by the royal family
D、is not well reflected in politics
问题2
A、gradually destroyed
B、effectively reinforced
C、properly protected
D、largely overshadowed
问题3
A、Labour is under attack for opposing development.
B、The Conservatives may abandon “off-plan” building.
C、Ukip may gain from its support for rural conservation.
D、The Liberal Democrats are losing political influence.
问题4
A、reveals a strong prejudice against urban areas
B、shows his disregard for the character of rural areas
C、stresses the necessity of easing the housing crisis
D、highlights his firm stand against lobby pressure
问题5
A、the size of population in Britain
B、the enviable urban lifestyle in Britain
C、the town-and-country planning in Britain
D、the political life in today's Britain
5、“There is one and only one social responsibility of business,” wrote Milton Friedman, a Nobel prize-winning economist,“ That is, to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits.’’ But even if you accept Friedman's premise and regard corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies as a waste of shareholders' money, things may not be absolutely clear-cut. New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies—at least when they are prosecuted for corruption.The largest firms in America and Britain together spend more than $15 billion a year on CSR, according to an estimate by EPG, a consulting firm. This could add value to their businesses in three ways. First, consumers may take CSR spending as a “signal” that a company's products are of high quality. Second, customers may be willing to buy a company's products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes it helps. And third, through a more diffuse “halo effect,” whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others.Previous studies on CSR have had trouble differentiating these effects because consumers can be affected by all three. A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions under America's Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company's products as part of their investigations, they could be influenced only by the halo effect.The study found that, among prosecuted firms, those with the most comprehensive CSR programmes tended to get more lenient penalties. Their analysis ruled out the possibility that it was firms' political influence, rather than their CSR stand, that accounted for the leniency: Companies that contributed more to political campaigns did not receive lower fines.In all, the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits, they do seem to be influenced by a company's record in CSR. “We estimate that either eliminating a substantial lab our-rights concern, such as child labour, or increasing corporate giving by about 20% results in fines that generally are 40% lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials,” says one researcher.Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR. Nor does it reveal how much companies are banking on the halo effect, rather than the other possible benefits, when they decide their do-gooding policies. But at least they have demonstrated that when companies get into trouble with the law, evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment.1.The author views Milton Friedman's statement about CSR with( ).2.According to Paragraph 2, CSR helps a company by ( ). 3.The expression “more lenient”(Paragraph 4) is closest in meaning to ( ). 4.When prosecutors evaluate a case, a company's CSR record ( ). 5.Which of the following is true of CSR, according to the last paragraph?
问题1
A、uncertainty
B、skepticism
C、approval
D、tolerance
问题2
A、guarding it against malpractices
B、protecting it from being defamed
C、winning trust from consumers
D、raising the quality of its products
问题3
A、less controversial
B、more lasting
C、more effective
D、less severe
问题4
A、comes across as reliable evidence
B、has an impact on their decision
C、increases the chance of being penalized
D、constitutes part of the investigation
问题5
A、The necessary amount of companies' spending on it is unknown.
B、Companies' financial capacity for it has been overestimated.
C、Its negative effects on businesses are often overlooked.
D、It has brought much benefit to the banking industry.
考研备考资料免费领取
去领取