摘要:以下是希賽網(wǎng)給大家分享考研201英語(一)在線題庫每日一練,希望通過刷題可以幫助大家鞏固重要知識(shí)點(diǎn),對(duì)知識(shí)點(diǎn)查漏補(bǔ)缺,祝愿大家能順利通過考試!
本文提供考研201英語(一)在線題庫每日一練,以下為具體內(nèi)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(chǎn) 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?
問題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
問題2
A、free themes
B、casual style
C、elaborate layout
D、radical viewpoints
問題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.
問題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.
問題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、Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its “one-click” online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known , is “a very big deal”, says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of Law. It “has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents.”Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging Internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment firms armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should “reconsider” its State Street Bank ruling.The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the Supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for “inventions” that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are “reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court”, says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.1.Business-method patents have recently aroused concern because of( ). 2.Which of the following is true of the Bilski case?3.The word “about-face” (Line 1, Para 3) most probably means ( ). 4.We learn from the last two paragraphs that business-method patents ( ). 5.Which of the following would be the subject of the text?
問題1
A、their limited value to businesses
B、their connection with asset allocation
C、the possible restriction on their granting
D、the controversy over their authorization
問題2
A、Its ruling complies with the court decisions.
B、It involves a very big business transaction.
C、It has been dismissed by the Federal Circuit.
D、It may change the legal practices in the U.S.
問題3
A、loss of good will
B、increase of hostility
C、change of attitude
D、enhancement of dignity
問題4
A、are immune to legal challenges
B、are often unnecessarily issued
C、lower the esteem for patent holders
D、increase the incidence of risks
問題5
A、A looming threat to business-method patents.
B、Protection for business-method patent holders.
C、A legal case regarding business-method patents.
D、A prevailing trend against business-method patents.
3、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.
問題1
A、emphasize
B、maintain
C、modify
D、recognize
問題2
A、when
B、lest
C、before
D、unless
問題3
A、restored
B、weakened
C、established
D、eliminated
問題4
A、challenged
B、compromised
C、suspected
D、accepted
問題5
A、advanced
B、caught
C、bound
D、founded
問題6
A、resistant
B、subject
C、immune
D、prone
問題7
A、resorts
B、sticks
C、loads
D、applies
問題8
A、evade
B、raise
C、deny
D、settle
問題9
A、line
B、barrier
C、similarity
D、conflict
問題10
A、by
B、as
C、though
D、towards
問題11
A、so
B、since
C、provided
D、though
問題12
A、serve
B、satisfy
C、upset
D、replace
問題13
A、confirm
B、express
C、cultivate
D、offer
問題14
A、guarded
B、followed
C、studied
D、tied
問題15
A、concepts
B、theories
C、divisions
D、conventions
問題16
A、excludes
B、questions
C、shapes
D、controls
問題17
A、dismissed
B、released
C、ranked
D、distorted
問題18
A、suppress
B、exploit
C、address
D、ignore
問題19
A、accessible
B、amiable
C、agreeable
D、accountable
問題20
A、by all means
B、at all costs
C、in a word
D、as a result
4、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?
問題1
A、uncertainty and complexity
B、misconception and deceptiveness
C、logicality and objectivity
D、systematicness and regularity
問題2
A、strict inspection
B、shared efforts
C、individual wisdom
D、persistent innovation
問題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
問題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
問題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.
5、All around the world, lawyers generate more hostility than the members of any other profession— with the possible exception of journalism. But there are few places where clients have more grounds for complaint than America.During the decade before the economic crisis, spending on legal services in America grew twice as fast as inflation. The best lawyers made skyscrapers-full of money, tempting ever more students to pile into law schools. But most law graduates never get a big-firm job. Many of them instead become the kind of nuisance-lawsuit filer that makes the tort system a costly nightmare.There are many reasons for this. One is the excessive costs of a legal education. There is just one path for a lawyer in most American states: a four-year undergraduate degree in some unrelated subject, then a three-year law degree at one of 200 law schools authorized by the American Bar Association and an expensive preparation for the bar exam. This leaves today's average law-school graduate with $100,000 of debt on top of undergraduate debts. Law-school debt means that they have to work fearsomely hard.Reforming the system would help both lawyers and their customers. Sensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them. One idea is to allow people to study law as an undergraduate degree. Another is to let students sit for the bar after only two years of law school. If the bar exam is truly a stern enough test for a would-be lawyer, those who can sit it earlier should be allowed to do so. Students who do not need the extra training could cut their debt mountain by a third.The other reason why costs are so high is the restrictive guild-like ownership structure of the business. Except in the District of Columbia, non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm. This keeps fees high and innovation slow. There is pressure for change from within the profession, but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.In fact, allowing non-lawyers to own shares in law firms would reduce costs and improve services to customers, by encouraging law firms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus on improving firms' efficiency. After all, other countries, such as Australia and Britain, have started liberalizing their legal professions. America should follow. 1.A lot of students take up law as their profession due to( ).2.Which of the following adds to the costs of legal education in most American states?3.Hindrance to the reform of the legal system originates from ( ). 4.The guild-like ownership structure is considered “restrictive” partly because it ( ). 5.In this text, the author mainly discusses( ).
問題1
A、the growing demand from clients
B、the increasing pressure of inflation
C、the prospect of working in big firms
D、the attraction of financial rewards
問題2
A、Higher tuition fees for undergraduate studies.
B、Pursuing a bachelor's degree in another major.
C、Admissions approval from the bar association.
D、Receiving training by professional associations.
問題3
A、non-professionals' sharp criticism
B、lawyers' and clients' strong resistance
C、the rigid bodies governing the profession
D、the stem exam for would-be lawyers
問題4
A、prevents lawyers from gaining due profits
B、keeps lawyers from holding law-firm shares
C、aggravates the ethical situation in the trade
D、bans outsiders' involvement in the profession
問題5
A、flawed ownership of America's law firms and its causes
B、the factors that help make a successful lawyer in America
C、a problem in America's legal profession and solutions to it
D、the role of undergraduate studies in America's legal education
點(diǎn)擊查看【完整】試卷>>考研備考資料免費(fèi)領(lǐng)取
去領(lǐng)取
共收錄117.93萬道題
已有25.02萬小伙伴參與做題