xx非全日制硕士研究生考试英语1.-精心整理
-
2018
年
非全日制研究生
全国统一初试考试英语一真题及参考答案
(
完整
版
)
，具体内如如下：
Section I Use of English
Directions:
Read
the
following
text.
Choose
the
best
word
(s)
for
each
numbered
blank and mark A, B, C or D on the
ANSWER SHEET. (10 points)
Trust is a tricky business.
On the one hand, it's a necessary condition 1 many
worthwhile things: child care,
friendships, etc. On the other hand, putting your
2 ,
in the wrong place often carries a
high 3.
4, why
do we trust at all? Well, because it feels good. 5
people place their
trust in an
individual or an institution, their brains release
oxytocin, a hormone
that 6 pleasurable
feelings and triggers the herding instruct that
prompts humans
to 7 with one another.
Scientists have found that exposure 8 this hormone
puts us
in a trusting 9: In a Swiss
study, researchers sprayed oxytocin into the noses
of
half the subjects; those subjects
were ready to lend significantly higher amounts
of money to strangers than were their
10 who inhaled something else.
11
for
us,
we
also
have
a
sixth
sense
for
dishonesty
that
may
12
us.
A
Canadian study found that
children as young as 14 months can differentiate
13 a
credible
person
and
a
dishonest
one.
Sixty
toddlers
were
each
14
to
an
adult
tester
holding a p
lastic container. The tester
would ask, “What’s in here?” before
looking
into
the
container,
smiling,
and
exclaiming,
“Wow!”
Each
subject
was
then
invited to look 15. Half of them found a toy; the
other half 16 the container
was empty-
and realized the tester had 17 them.
Among
the
children
who
had
not
been
tricked,
the
majority
were
18
to
cooperate
with the tester in learning a new skill,
demonstrating that they trusted
his
leadership.
19,
only
five
of
the
30
children
paired
with
the
“20”tester
participated in a
follow-up activity.
努力
Section II Reading
Comprehension
Part A
Directions:
Read the
following four texts. Answer the questions below
each text by
choosing
A,
B,
C
or
D.
Mark
your
answers
on
the
ANSWER
SHEET.
(40
points)
Text 1
Among
the
annoying
challenges
facing
the
middle
class
is
one
that
will
probably go unmentioned
in the next presidential campaign: What happens
when
the robots come for their jobs?
Don't
dismiss
that possibility
entirely.
About
half
of
U.S.
jobs
are
at
high
risk
of
being
automated,
according
to
a
University
of
Oxford
study,
with
the
middle
class disproportionately squeezed. Lower-income
jobs like gardening or
day
care
don't
appeal
to
robots.
But
many
middle-class
occupations-trucking,
financial advice, software engineering
—
have aroused their
interest, or soon will.
The rich own
the robots, so they will be fine.
努力
This isn't to be alarmist.
Optimists point out that technological upheaval
has
benefited
workers
in
the
past.
The
Industrial
Revolution
didn't
go
so
well
for
Luddites
whose
jobs
were
displaced
by
mechanized
looms,
but
it
eventually
raised
living
standards
and
created
more
jobs
than
it
destroyed.
Likewise,
automation
should
eventually
boost
productivity,
stimulate
demand
by
driving
down prices, and free workers from
hard, boring work. But in the medium term,
middle-class workers may need a lot of
help adjusting.
The
first
step,
as
Erik
Brynjolfsson
and
Andrew
McAfee
argue
in
The
Second
Machine
Age,
should
be
rethinking
education
and
job
training.
Curriculums
—
from
grammar school to college- should evolve to focus
less on
memorizing
facts
and
more
on
creativity
and
complex
communication.
Vocational schools should do a better
job of fostering problem-solving skills and
helping
students
work
alongside
robots.
Online
education
can
supplement
the
traditional
kind.
It
could
make
extra
training
and
instruction
affordable.
Professionals
trying to acquire new skills will be able to do so
without going into
debt.
The challenge of coping
with automation underlines the need for the U.S.
to
revive
its
fading
business
dynamism:
Starting
new
companies
must
be
made
easier. In previous eras of drastic
technological change, entrepreneurs smoothed
the transition by dreaming up ways to
combine labor and machines. The best uses
of 3D printers and virtual reality
haven't been invented yet. The U.S. needs the
new companies that will invent them.
Finally,
because
automation
threatens
to
widen
the
gap
between
capital
income
and
labor
income,
taxes
and
the
safety
net
will
have
to
be
rethought.
Taxes on low-wage labor need to be cut,
and wage subsidies such as the earned
income
tax
credit
should
be
expanded:
This
would
boost
incomes,
encourage
work, reward companies for job
creation, and reduce inequality.
Technology will improve
society in ways big and small over the next few
years,
yet
this
will
be
little
comfort
to
those
who
find
their
lives
and
careers
upended by automation.
Destroying
the
machines
that
are
coming
for
our
jobs
would
be
nuts.
But
policies to help workers adapt will be
indispensable.
努力
Text 2
A new survey by Harvard
University finds more than two-thirds of young
Americans
disapprove
of
President
Trump’s
use
of
Twitter.
The
implication
is
that Millennials prefer news from the
White House to be filtered through
other
source, Not a
president’s social media platform.
Most
Americans
rely
on
social
media
to
check
daily
headlines.
Yet
as
distrust has risen toward all media,
people may be starting to beef up their media
literacy
skills.
Such
a
trend
is
badly
needed.
During
the
2016
presidential
campaign,
nearly
a
quarter
of
web
content
shared
by
Twitter
users
in
the
politically critical state of Michigan
was fake news, according to the University
of
Oxford.
And
a
survey
conducted
for
BuzzFeed
News
found
44
percent
of
Facebook users rarely or
never trust news from the media giant.
努力
Young people who are
digital natives are indeed becoming more skillful
at
separating
fact
from
fiction
in
cyberspace.
A
Knight
Foundation
focus-group
survey of young
people between ages 14an
d24 found they
use “distributed trust”
to
verify
stories.
They
cross-check
sources
and
prefer
news
from
different
perspectives
—especially
those that are open about any bias. “Many young
people
assume
a
great
deal
of
personal
responsibility
for
educating
themselves
and
actively seeking out opposing
viewpoints,” the survey concluded.
Such active
research can have another effect. A 2014 survey
conducted in
Australia, Britain, and
the United States by the University of Wisconsin-
Madison
found
that
young
peopl
e’s
reliance
on
social
media
led
to
greater
political
engagement.
Social
media
allows
users
to
experience
news
events
more
intimately
and
immediately while also permitting them
to re-share news as a projection of their
values
and
interests.
This
forces
users
to
be
more
conscious
of
their
role
in
passing
along
information.
A
survey
by
Barna
research
group
found
the
top
reason
given
by
Americans
for
the
fake
news
phenomenon
is
“reader
error,”
more so than made-up stories or factual
mistakes in reporting. About a third say
the
problem
of
fake
news
lies
in
“misinterpretation
or
exaggeration
of
actual
news”
via social media. In other words, the choice to
share news on social media
may
be
the
heart
of
the
issue.
“This
indicates
there
is
a
real
personal
responsib
ility in
counteracting this problem,” says Roxanne Stone,
editor in chief
at Barna Group.
So when young
people are critical of an over-tweeting president,
they reveal
a mental discipline in
thinking skills
–
and in
their choices on when to share on
social media.
努力
Text 3
Any
fair-minded
assessment
of
the
dangers
of
the
deal
between
Britain's
National Health
Service (NHS) and DeepMind must start by
acknowledging that
both sides mean
well. DeepMind is one of the leading artificial
intelligence (AI)
companies in the
world. The potential of this work applied to
healthcare is very
great, but it could
also lead to further concentration of power in the
tech giants. It
Is against that
background that the information commissioner,
Elizabeth Denham,
has
issued
her
damning
verdict
against
the
Royal
Free
hospital
trust
under
the
NHS,
which
handed
over
to
DeepMind
the
records
of
1.6
million
patients
In
2015 on the basis of a
vague agreement which took far too little account
of the
patients' rights and their
expectations of privacy.
DeepMind
has
almost
apologized.
The
NHS
trust
has
mended
its
ways.
Further arrangements-
and there may be many-between the NHS and DeepMind
努力
will be carefully scrutinised to
ensure that all necessary permissions
have been
asked
of
patients
and
all
unnecessary
data
has
been
cleaned.
There
are
lessons
about
informed patient consent to learn. But privacy is
not the only angle in this
case
and
not
even
the
most
important.
Ms
Denham
chose
to
concentrate
the
blame
on
the
NHS
trust,
since
under
e
xisting
law
it
“controlled”
the
data
and
DeepMind
merely “processed
processing and
aggregation, not the mere possession of bits, that
gives the data
value.
The
great
question
is
who
should benefit from
the analysis of all
the data
that our lives now generate.
Privacy law builds on the concept of damage to an
individual
from
identifiable
knowledge
about
them.
That
misses
the
way
the
surveillance economy
works. The data of an individual there gains its
value only
when it is compared with the
data of countless millions more.
The use of privacy law to
curb the tech giants in this instance feels
slightly
maladapted. This practice does
not address the real worry. It is not enough to
say
that the algorithms DeepMind
develops will benefit patients and save lives.
What
matters
is
that
they
will
belong
to
a
private
monopoly
which
developed
them
using public resources.
If software promises to save lives on the scale
that dugs
now can, big data may be
expected to behave as a big pharm has done. We are
still at
the beginning of
this revolution
and small
choices now may turn
out
to
have
gigantic
consequences
later.
A
long
struggle
will
be
needed
to
avoid
a
future of digital feudalism. Ms
Denham's report is a welcome start.
努力