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、Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage. It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared. In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered. Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. “So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,” Newman wrote, “that I am tempted to define ‘journalism’ as ‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are’.”Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored. Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote. Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized. Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.1.It is indicated in Paragraphs 1 and 2 that( ).2.Newspaper reviews in England before World War II were characterized by ( ). 3.Which of the following would Shaw and Newman most probably agree on?4.What can be learned about Cardus according to the last two paragraphs?5.What would be the best title for the text?
问题1
A、arts criticism has disappeared from big-city newspapers
B、English-language newspapers used to carry more arts reviews
C、high-quality newspapers retain a large body of readers
D、young readers doubt the suitability of criticism on dailies
问题2
A、free themes
B、casual style
C、elaborate layout
D、radical viewpoints
问题3
A、It is writers' duty to fulfill journalistic goals.
B、It is contemptible for writers to be journalists.
C、Writers are likely to be tempted into journalism.
D、Not all writers are capable of journalistic writing.
问题4
A、His music criticism may not appeal to readers today.
B、His reputation as a music critic has long been in dispute.
C、His style caters largely to modern specialists.
D、His writings fail to follow the amateur tradition.
问题5
A、Newspapers of the Good Old Days
B、The Lost Horizon in Newspapers
C、Mournful Decline of Journalism
D、Prominent Critics in Memory
2、It's no surprise that Jennifer Senior's insightful, provocative magazine cover story, “I love My Children, I Hate My Life,” is arousing much chatter—nothing gets people talking like the suggestion that child rearing is anything less than a completely fulfilling, life-enriching experience. Rather than concluding that children make parents either happy or miserable, Senior suggests we need to redefine happiness: instead of thinking of it as something that can be measured by moment-to-moment joy, we should consider being happy as a past-tense condition. Even though the day-to-day experience of raising kids can be soul-crushingly hard, Senior writes that “the very things that in the moment dampen our moods can later be sources of intense gratification and delight.” The magazine cover showing an attractive mother holding a cute baby is hardly the only Madonna-and-child image on newsstands this week. There are also stories about newly adoptive—and newly single—mom Sandra Bullock, as well as the usual “Jennifer Aniston is pregnant” news. Practically every week features at least one celebrity mom, or mom-to-be, smiling on the newsstands. In a society that so persistently celebrates procreation, is it any wonder that admitting you regret having children is equivalent to admitting you support kitten-killing? It doesn't seem quite fair, then, to compare the regrets of parents to the regrets of the children. Unhappy parents rarely are provoked to wonder if they shouldn't have had kids, but unhappy childless folks are bothered with the message that children are the single most important thing in the world: obviously their misery must be a direct result of the gaping baby-size holes in their lives. Of course, the image of parenthood that celebrity magazines like Us Weekly and People present is hugely unrealistic, especially when the parents are single mothers like Bullock. According to several studies concluding that parents are less happy than childless couples, single parents are the least happy of all. No shock there, considering how much work it is to raise a kid without a partner to lean on; yet to hear Sandra and Britney tell it, raising a kid on their “own” (read: with round-the-clock help) is a piece of cake. It's hard to imagine that many people are dumb enough to want children just because Reese and Angelina make it look so glamorous: most adults understand that a baby is not a haircut. But it's interesting to wonder if the images we see every week of stress-free, happiness-enhancing parenthood aren't in some small, subconscious way contributing to our own dissatisfactions with the actual experience, in the same way that a small part of us hoped getting “the Rachel” might make us look just a little bit like Jennifer Aniston. 1.Jennifer Senior suggests in her article that raising a child can bring ( ). 2.We learn from Paragraph 2 that( ).3.It is suggested in Paragraph 3 that childless folks ( ). 4.According to Paragraph 4, the message conveyed by celebrity magazines is ( ). 5.Which of the following can be inferred from the last paragraph?
问题1
A、temporary delight
B、enjoyment in progress
C、happiness in retrospect
D、lasting reward
问题2
A、celebrity moms are a permanent source for gossip
B、single mothers with babies deserve greater attention
C、news about pregnant celebrities is entertaining
D、having children is highly valued by the public
问题3
A、are constantly exposed to criticism
B、are largely ignored by the media
C、fail to fulfill their social responsibilities
D、are less likely to be satisfied with their life
问题4
A、soothing
B、ambiguous
C、compensatory
D、misleading
问题5
A、Having children contributes little to the glamour of celebrity moms.
B、Celebrity moms have influenced our attitude towards child rearing.
C、Having children intensifies our dissatisfaction with life.
D、We sometimes neglect the happiness from child rearing.
3、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 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 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 acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher's me, here, now becomes the community's anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point. Once a discovery claim becomes public, 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 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 competing 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 viewed 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 open 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 what nobody has thought.” But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling 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 discovery claim—a process that corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind. “We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other's reasoning and each other's conceptions of reason.” 1.According to the first paragraph, the process of discovery is characterized by its( ).2.It can be inferred from Paragraph 2 that credibility process requires ( ). 3.Paragraph 3 shows that a discovery claim becomes credible after it ( ). 4.Albert Szent-Gyorgyi would most likely agree that ( ). 5.Which of the following would be the best title of the test?
问题1
A、uncertainty and complexity
B、misconception and deceptiveness
C、logicality and objectivity
D、systematicness and regularity
问题2
A、strict inspection
B、shared efforts
C、individual wisdom
D、persistent innovation
问题3
A、has attracted the attention of the general public
B、has been examined by the scientific community
C、has received recognition from editors and reviewers
D、has been frequently quoted by peer scientists
问题4
A、scientific claims will survive challenges
B、discoveries today inspire future research
C、efforts to make discoveries are justified
D、scientific work calls for a critical mind
问题5
A、Novelty as an Engine of Scientific Development.
B、Collective Scrutiny in Scientific Discovery.
C、Evolution of Credibility in Doing Science.
D、Challenge to Credibility at the Gate to Science.
4、Up until a few decades ago, our visions of the future were largely — though by no means uniformly — glowingly positive. Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity, leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.Now utopia has grown unfashionable, as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us, from asteroid strike to epidemic flu to climate change. You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.But such gloominess is misplaced. The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years — so why shouldn't we? Take a broader look at our species' place in the universe, and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years. Look up Homo sapiens in the “Red List” of threatened species of the International Union for the Conversation of Nature (IUCN), and you will read: “Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed, adaptable, currently increasing, and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline.”So what does our deep future hold? A growing number of researchers and organisations are now thinking seriously about that question. For example, the Long Now Foundation has as its flagship project a mechanical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.Perhaps willfully, it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future. The potential evolution of today's technology, and its social consequences, is dazzlingly complicated, and it's perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage. That's one reason why we have launched Arc, a new publication dedicated to the near future.But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance. As so often, the past holds the key to the future: we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet, and our species, to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad. To be sure, the future is not all rosy. But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans, and to improve the lot of those to come.1.Our vision of the future used to be inspired by( ).2.The IUCN's “Red List” suggests that human beings are ( ). 3.Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 5?4.To ensure the future of mankind, it is crucial to ( ). 5.Which of the following would be the best title for the text?
问题1
A、our desire for lives of fulfillment
B、our faith in science and technology
C、our awareness of potential risks
D、our belief in equal opportunity
问题2
A、a sustained species
B、a threat to the environment
C、the world's dominant power
D、a misplaced race
问题3
A、Arc helps limit the scope of futurological studies.
B、Technology offers solutions to social problem.
C、The interest in science fiction is on the rise.
D、Our immediate future is hard to conceive.
问题4
A、explore our planet's abundant resources
B、adopt an optimistic view of the world
C、draw on our experience from the past
D、curb our ambition to reshape history
问题5
A、Uncertainty about Our Future
B、Evolution of the Human Species
C、The Ever-bright Prospects of Mankind
D、Science, Technology and Humanity
5、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.
点击查看【完整】试卷>>考研备考资料免费领取
去领取