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、Bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles in public. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone else: the accounting standard-setters. Their rules, moan the banks, have forced them to report enormous losses, and it's just not fair. These rules say they must value some assets at the price a third party would pay, not the price managers and regulators would like them to fetch.Unfortunately, banks' lobbying now seems to be working. The details may be unknowable, but the independence of standard-setters, essential to the proper functioning of capital markets, is being compromised. And, unless banks carry toxic assets at prices that attract buyers, reviving the banking system will be difficult.After a bruising encounter with Congress, America's Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rushed through rule changes. These gave banks more freedom to use models to value illiquid assets and more flexibility in recognizing losses on long-term assets in their income statements. Bob Herz, the FASB's chairman, cried out against those who “question our motives.” Yet bank shares rose and the changes enhance what one lobbying group politely calls “the use of judgment by management.”European ministers instantly demanded that the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) do likewise. The IASB says it does not want to act without overall planning, but the pressure to fold when it completes its reconstruction of rules later this year is strong. Charlie McCreevy, a European commissioner, warned the IASB that it did “not live in a political vacuum” but “in the real world” and that Europe could yet develop different rules.It was banks that were on the wrong planet, with accounts that vastly overvalued assets. Today they argue that market prices overstate losses, because they largely reflect the temporary illiquidity of markets, not the likely extent of bad debts. The truth will not be known for years. But banks' shares trade below their book value, suggesting that investors are skeptical. And dead markets partly reflect the paralysis of banks which will not sell assets for fear of booking losses, yet are reluctant to buy all those supposed bargains.To get the system working again, losses must be recognized and dealt with. America's new plan to buy up toxic assets will not work unless banks mark assets to levels which buyers find attractive. Successful markets require independent and even combative standard-setters. The FASB and IASB have been exactly that, cleaning up rules on stock options and pensions, for example, against hostility from special interests. But by giving in to critics now they are inviting pressure to make more concessions.1.Bankers complained that they were forced to( ).2.According to the author, the rule changes of the FASB may result in ( ). 3.According to Paragraph 4, McCreevy objects to the IASB's attempt to ( ). 4.The author thinks the banks were “on the wrong planet” in that they ( ). 5.The author's attitude towards standard-setters is one of( ).
问题1
A、follow unfavorable asset evaluation rules
B、collect payments from third parties
C、cooperate with the price managers
D、reevaluate some of their assets
问题2
A、the diminishing role of management
B、the revival of the banking system
C、the banks' long-term asset losses
D、the weakening of its independence
问题3
A、keep away from political influences
B、evade the pressure from their peers
C、act on their own in rule-setting
D、take gradual measures in reform
问题4
A、misinterpreted market price indicators
B、exaggerated the real value of their assets
C、neglected the likely existence of bad debts
D、denied booking losses in their sale of assets
问题5
A、satisfaction
B、skepticism
C、objectiveness
D、sympathy
3、The decision of the New York Philharmonic to hire Alan Gilbert as its next music director has been the talk of the classical-music world ever since the sudden announcement of his appointment in 2009. For the most part, the response has been favorable, to say the least. “Hooray! At last!” wrote Anthony Tommasini, a sober-sided classical-music critic. One of the reasons why the appointment came as such a surprise, however, is that Gilbert is comparatively little known. Even Tommasini, who had advocated Gilbert's appointment in the Times, calls him “an unpretentious musician with no air of the formidable conductor about him.” As a description of the next music director of an orchestra that has hitherto been led by musicians like Gustav Mahler and Pierre Boulez, that seems likely to have struck at least some Times readers as faint praise. For my part, I have no idea whether Gilbert is a great conductor or even a good one. To be sure, he performs an impressive variety of interesting compositions, but it is not necessary for me to visit Avery Fisher Hall, or anywhere else, to hear interesting orchestral music. All I have to do is to go to my CD shelf, or boot up my computer and download still more recorded music from iTunes. Devoted concertgoers who reply that recordings are no substitute for live performance are missing the point. For the time, attention, and money of the art-loving public, classical instrumentalists must compete not only with opera houses, dance troupes, theater companies, and museums, but also with the recorded performances of the great classical musicians of the 20th century. There recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today's live performances; moreover, they can be “consumed” at a time and place of the listener's choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert. One possible response is for classical performers to program attractive new music that is not yet available on record. Gilbert's own interest in new music has been widely noted: Alex Ross, a classical-music critic, has described him as a man who is capable of turning the Philharmonic into “a markedly different, more vibrant organization.” But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra's repertoire will not be enough. If Gilbert and the Philharmonic are to succeed, they must first change the relationship between America's oldest orchestra and the new audience it hopes to attract. 1.We learn from Para.1 that Gilbert's appointment has( ).2.Tommasini regards Gilbert as an artist who is ( ). 3.The author believes that the devoted concertgoers ( ). 4.According to the text, which of the following is true of recordings? 5.Regarding Gilbert's role in revitalizing the Philharmonic, the author feels( ).
问题1
A、incurred criticism
B、raised suspicion
C、received acclaim
D、aroused curiosity
问题2
A、influential
B、modest
C、respectable
D、talented
问题3
A、ignore the expenses of live performances
B、reject most kinds of recorded performances
C、exaggerate the variety of live performances
D、overestimate the value of live performances
问题4
A、They are often inferior to live concerts in quality.
B、They are easily accessible to the general public.
C、They help improve the quality of music.
D、They have only covered masterpieces.
问题5
A、doubtful
B、enthusiastic
C、confident
D、puzzled
4、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) 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 will be(4)as impartial judgments. Part of the problem is that the justices are not(5) by an ethics code. At the very least, the court should make itself (6) to the code of conduct that (7) to the rest of the federal judiciary. This and other similar cases (8) the question of whether there is still a (9) between the court and politics. The framers of the Constitution envisioned law (10) having authority apart from politics. They gave justices permanent positions (11) they would be free to (12 )those in power and have no need to (13)political support. Our legal system was designed to set law apart from politics precisely because they are so closely (14) . Constitutional law is political because it results from choices rooted in fundamental social (15) like liberty and property. When the court deals with social policy decisions, the law it (16)is inescapably political—which is why decisions split along ideological lines are so easily (17) as unjust. The justices must (18) doubts about the court's legitimacy by making themselves (19) to the code of conduct. That would make rulings more likely to be seen as separate from politics and, (20), convincing as law.
问题1
A、emphasize
B、maintain
C、modify
D、recognize
问题2
A、when
B、lest
C、before
D、unless
问题3
A、restored
B、weakened
C、established
D、eliminated
问题4
A、challenged
B、compromised
C、suspected
D、accepted
问题5
A、advanced
B、caught
C、bound
D、founded
问题6
A、resistant
B、subject
C、immune
D、prone
问题7
A、resorts
B、sticks
C、loads
D、applies
问题8
A、evade
B、raise
C、deny
D、settle
问题9
A、line
B、barrier
C、similarity
D、conflict
问题10
A、by
B、as
C、though
D、towards
问题11
A、so
B、since
C、provided
D、though
问题12
A、serve
B、satisfy
C、upset
D、replace
问题13
A、confirm
B、express
C、cultivate
D、offer
问题14
A、guarded
B、followed
C、studied
D、tied
问题15
A、concepts
B、theories
C、divisions
D、conventions
问题16
A、excludes
B、questions
C、shapes
D、controls
问题17
A、dismissed
B、released
C、ranked
D、distorted
问题18
A、suppress
B、exploit
C、address
D、ignore
问题19
A、accessible
B、amiable
C、agreeable
D、accountable
问题20
A、by all means
B、at all costs
C、in a word
D、as a result
5、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.
点击查看【完整】试卷>>考研备考资料免费领取
去领取