Questions 1 and 2 are based on this passage.?

Arts

Malvin Johnson / Brightwood / interpretative thinking / Paul Cezanne

約翰遜的畫(huà)

①African American painter Malvin Gray Johnson (1896-1934) grew up in urban environments, including?New York City, but in 1934 visited and painted scenes from the small town of Brightwood, Virginia. ②Some critics?have celebrated the Brightwood paintings, which depict a vibrant natural landscape and close-knit Black community, as Johnson’s discovery of an “authentic” African American life in the rural South.?③This view, which reflects a common tendency to regard African American artists’ imagery as unmediated documentation of direct experience, overlooks Johnson’s interpretative thinking. ④In truth, Johnson’s conceptualization of the South was largely formed before he left New York, where he had studied the French expressionist Paul Cezanne. ⑤Johnson’s Brightwood paintings reflect Cezanne’s stylistic influence and tendency to present rural life as an?idyllic alternative to modern industrialism.

非裔美國(guó)畫(huà)家馬爾文·格雷·約翰遜（Malvin Gray Johnson，1896-1934 年）在包括紐約市在內(nèi)的城市環(huán)境中長(zhǎng)大，但在 1934 年訪問(wèn)并繪制了弗吉尼亞州布萊伍德小鎮(zhèn)的場(chǎng)景。 一些評(píng)論家稱(chēng)贊布賴(lài)特伍德的畫(huà)作，描繪了充滿(mǎn)活力的自然景觀和緊密聯(lián)系的黑人社區(qū)，因?yàn)榧s翰遜在南部鄉(xiāng)村發(fā)現(xiàn)了“真實(shí)的”非裔美國(guó)人生活。這種觀點(diǎn)反映了將非裔美國(guó)藝術(shù)家的畫(huà)作視為直接經(jīng)驗(yàn)的無(wú)媒介記錄的普遍趨勢(shì)，忽視了約翰遜的解讀性思維。 事實(shí)上，約翰遜對(duì)南方的概念很大程度上是在他離開(kāi)紐約之前形成的，他在那里學(xué)習(xí)了法國(guó)表現(xiàn)主義畫(huà)家保羅·塞尚。 約翰遜的布萊特伍德畫(huà)作反映了塞尚的風(fēng)格影響和將鄉(xiāng)村生活呈現(xiàn)為現(xiàn)代工業(yè)主義的田園詩(shī)般的替代品的傾向。

1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

功能題 主旨題 易

文章是個(gè)觀點(diǎn)點(diǎn)評(píng)類(lèi)文章。一些評(píng)論家的觀點(diǎn)被否定。

A

A. contest a particular interpretation of Johnson’s Brightwood paintings 符合

B. compare Johnson’s Brightwood paintings to French Expressionist art 無(wú)關(guān)

C. use information about Johnson’s historical context 無(wú)關(guān)

D. explain why the work of African American painters is sometimes misunderstood 沒(méi)有解釋原因

E. call attention to an aspect of Johnson’s technique that has been?largely overlooked 并未文章主旨

2. The author suggests which of the following about “some critics” mentioned in the passage?

細(xì)節(jié)題 推斷題 易

這些評(píng)論家的觀點(diǎn)作者并不認(rèn)同。

D

A. They mistakenly tend to regard Johnson’s Brightwood paintings as more artistically sophisticated than?Johnson’s earlier work 沒(méi)有比較的證據(jù)

B. They overlook certain parallels between Johnson’s Brightwood paintings and paintings produced?during the same period by other African American artists 沒(méi)有其他藝術(shù)家的證據(jù)

C. They hold a view of Johnson’s Brightwood paintings that most scholars find unpersuasive 沒(méi)有后面that的證據(jù)

D. Their view of Johnson’s Brightwood paintings overlooks the extent to which Johnson imposes a?particular conception of rural life on the scenes he painted. 符合

E. Their interpretation of Johnson’s Brightwood paintings helped illuminate Johnson’s feelings about?the South 沒(méi)有feelings的證據(jù)

背景拓展：

Questions 3 to 6 are based on this passage.

Arts

Bill of Rights / original meaning / originalism

不要尋求權(quán)利法案的原始意義來(lái)解決現(xiàn)在的問(wèn)題

①The importance of the Bill of Rights in twentieth-century United States law and politics has led some?historians to search for the "original meaning" of its most controversial clauses. ②This approach, known as "originalism, " presumes that each right codified in the Bill of Rights had an independent history that can be studied in isolation from the histories of other rights, and its proponents ask how formulations of the Bill of Rights in 1791 reflected developments in specific areas of legal thinking at that time. ③Legal and Constitutional historians, for example, have found originalism especially useful in the study of provisions of the Bill of Rights that were innovative by eighteenth-century standards, such as the Fourth Amendment`s broadly termed protection against "unreasonable searches and seizures." ④Recent calls in the legal and political arena for a return to a "jurisprudence of original intention. " however, have made it a matter of much more than purely scholarly interest when originalists insist that a clause's true meaning was fixed at the moment of its adoption, or maintain that only those rights explicitly mentioned in the United States Constitution deserve Constitutional recognition and protection. ⑤These two claims seemingly lend support to the notion that an interpreter must apply fixed definitions of a fixed number of rights to contemporary issues, for the claims imply that the central problem of rights in the Revolutionary era was to precisely identify, enumerate, and define those rights that Americans?felt were crucial to protecting their liberty.

①Both claims, however, are questionable from the perspective of a strictly historical inquiry, however sensible?they may seem from the vantage point of contemporary jurisprudence. ②Even though originalists are correct in claiming that the search for original meaning is inherently historical, historians would not normally seek to determine exactly what a specific clause or right meant when the Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791, because historians would not normally feel compelled to support attempts to make that "original meaning" binding today. ③The strictly historical purpose for an inquiry into the original meaning of specific rights would be to determine why a particular clause was adopted and to establish a baseline from which its subsequent evolution?could be traced and evaluated.

①Because of its proponents' pressing need to find determinate meaning at a fixed historical moment,?originalism cannot capture everything that was dynamic and creative-thus uncertain and problematic-in Revolutionary Constitutionalism, nor can it easily accommodate the diversity of views that explains why the debates of the Revolutionary era were so lively. ②A strictly historical approach, on the other hand,?makes it clear that the framers and ratifiers of the Bill of Rights were struggling with complex questions, the novelty of which had carried them away from the received wisdom of their time and was forcing their ideas about rights and the?protection of those rights to continually evolve.

《權(quán)利法案》在?20?世紀(jì)美國(guó)法律和政治中的重要性導(dǎo)致一些歷史學(xué)家尋找其最具爭(zhēng)議性條款的“原意”。這種被稱(chēng)為“原旨主義”的方法假定每項(xiàng)被編入法案的權(quán)利都有一段獨(dú)立的歷史，都可以與其他權(quán)利的歷史隔離開(kāi)來(lái)進(jìn)行研究，其支持者想了解?1791?年權(quán)利法案的制定如何反映了當(dāng)時(shí)法律思想特定領(lǐng)域的發(fā)展。例如，法律和憲法史學(xué)家發(fā)現(xiàn)“原旨主義“在研究權(quán)利法案中在18世紀(jì)非常革新的條文時(shí)尤其有用，比如第四修正案寬泛定義的對(duì)于公民免于“不合理的搜查與扣押”的權(quán)利。然而，最近這種回歸原始意圖的呼聲已經(jīng)超出純粹學(xué)術(shù)興趣的范疇，原旨主義者堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為一個(gè)條款的真正含義在其通過(guò)時(shí)就已經(jīng)確定，或者堅(jiān)持只有美國(guó)憲法中明確提到的那些權(quán)利才受到憲法承認(rèn)和保護(hù)。?這兩個(gè)主張似乎支持了法案的解釋者必須將特定的權(quán)利的特定定義應(yīng)用于當(dāng)代問(wèn)題的觀念，因?yàn)檫@些主張表明獨(dú)立戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)期間關(guān)于權(quán)利的核心問(wèn)題是準(zhǔn)確定義、列舉和定義那些美國(guó)人認(rèn)為對(duì)于保護(hù)他們的自由至關(guān)重要的權(quán)利。

然而，從嚴(yán)格的歷史調(diào)查的角度來(lái)看，這兩種說(shuō)法都是值得懷疑的，無(wú)論從當(dāng)代法理學(xué)的角度它們看起來(lái)多么合理。?盡管原旨主義者認(rèn)為尋找原始意義本質(zhì)上是歷史性的這一觀點(diǎn)正確，但歷史學(xué)家通常不會(huì)試圖確定在?1791?年通過(guò)《權(quán)利法案》時(shí)特定條款或權(quán)利的確切含義，因?yàn)闅v史學(xué)家通常不會(huì)感到必須支持那些將條款原始含義與今天相結(jié)合的嘗試。追尋特定權(quán)利的原始意義的嚴(yán)格歷史目的只是為了探尋一個(gè)特定條款為什么被采用，以及確立一個(gè)用來(lái)追蹤和評(píng)估條款后續(xù)演化的準(zhǔn)則。

由于其支持者迫切需要找一個(gè)固定的歷史時(shí)刻的確定含義，原旨主義不能捕捉到革命憲政主義中充滿(mǎn)活力和創(chuàng)造性的一切，也不能輕易適應(yīng)對(duì)于獨(dú)立戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)時(shí)期的辯論生動(dòng)性的多樣解釋。 另一方面，一個(gè)嚴(yán)格的歷史方法清楚地表明，《權(quán)利法案》的制定者和批準(zhǔn)者正在努力解決復(fù)雜的問(wèn)題，這些問(wèn)題的新穎性使他們遠(yuǎn)離了當(dāng)時(shí)公認(rèn)的智慧，并迫使他們關(guān)于權(quán)利和保護(hù)這些權(quán)利的觀念不斷發(fā)展。

3. It can be inferred that the author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which of the?following statements about the Bill of Rights?

態(tài)度題 難

作者在文中表達(dá)了沒(méi)有必要尋求權(quán)利法案的原始意義，更不要用那些原始意義來(lái)解決當(dāng)代問(wèn)題。

B

A. The Bill of Rights’ importance in twentieth-century United States law and politics has been?overemphasized by some scholars. 沒(méi)有overemphasized證據(jù)

B. The diversity of views among the Bill of Rights’ framers and ratifiers makes the search for any right’s?original meaning inherently problematic. 符合三段首句

C. The omission of certain rights by the framers and ratifiers should limit the number of?Constitutionally recognized and protected rights today. 沒(méi)有omission的證據(jù)

D. Establishing the original meaning of each clause will enable controversial issues to be settled?according to the intentions of its framers. 沒(méi)有settled的證據(jù)

E. Originalists have exaggerated the contributions of certain framers and ratifiers of the Bill of Rights?while downplaying the contributions of others. 沒(méi)有比較的證據(jù)

4. It can be inferred from the passage that a jurisprudence of original intention is based on which of?the following assumptions about the Bill of Rights?

細(xì)節(jié)題 推斷題 難

從文章中可以推斷出，關(guān)于原始意圖的法理學(xué)是基于以下關(guān)于權(quán)利法案的哪個(gè)假設(shè)? 對(duì)應(yīng)一段最后一句。

C

A. Its framers and ratifiers sought to protect individual rights in as many situations as possible by?describing each right in broad terms. 沒(méi)有證據(jù)

B. Its framers and ratifiers originally intended the rights enumerated in the various individual clauses to?be interpreted in relation to one another 沒(méi)有in relation的證據(jù)

C. Each clause has a meaning that can be determined by studying its history and can be applied to?contemporary issues. 符合。

D. Each right reflects the diversity of views that its framers held about individual rights.?每一項(xiàng)權(quán)利都反映了其制定者對(duì)個(gè)人權(quán)利的不同看法。 沒(méi)有證據(jù)?

E. A study of interpretations of Bill of Rights suggests that the Bill can legitimately be read in more?than one way. 沒(méi)有多種解讀的證據(jù)

5. The passage suggests that a historian conducting a strictly historical inquiry would make which of?the following assumptions when studying the Bill of Rights?

細(xì)節(jié)題 推斷題 中

對(duì)應(yīng)第二段最后一句。

D

A. The framers of the Bill of Rights sought to define each right in strict and narrow terms. 沒(méi)有strict and narrow的證據(jù)

B. The results of historical inquiry into the true meaning of its clauses must be applied to contemporary?issues. 相反

C. Developments in thinking about individual rights ended after the codification of those rights. 文章最后一句也說(shuō)仍在evolve

D. It is possible to determine why a particular clause was included in the Bill of Rights. 符合

E. Legislators of the Revolutionary era were preoccupied with defining and enumerating those rights?that were crucial to individual liberty.? 不是assumption. 選項(xiàng)內(nèi)容定位原文一段最后：因?yàn)檫@些主張發(fā)現(xiàn)了關(guān)于權(quán)力的核心問(wèn)題，所以對(duì)于當(dāng)代問(wèn)題也適用。仍然是和B更接近。

6. Which of the following historical documents, if they existed, would most strengthen the author’s?characterization of Revolutionary Constitutionalism??

細(xì)節(jié)題 加強(qiáng)題

作者的態(tài)度與原旨主義者相反。找新證據(jù)支持。

B

A. Placards from 1791 urging people to ratify the Bill of Rights because it explicitly mentions all rights?deserving of Constitutional protection 無(wú)關(guān)

B. Personal letters of a framer of the Bill of Rights complaining about his colleagues’ failure to reach?consensus about which rights protect and how to protect item 立法者自己都沒(méi)達(dá)成共識(shí)?？梢约訌?qiáng)作者觀點(diǎn)。

C. Minutes of a meeting during which the precise wording of a right was worked out in order to ensure?that the right had a single meaning 發(fā)現(xiàn)一份會(huì)議記錄，會(huì)議期間制定了一項(xiàng)權(quán)利的確切措辭，以確保該權(quán)利具有單一的含義。相反。

D. The diary of a framer of the Bill of Rights that details a discussion concerning why one particular?clause should be included in the Bill of Rights?

E. Newspaper editorials asserting that the framers of the Bill of Rights failed to develop creative or?innovative ideas 相反

生詞摘錄：

placard /?pl?kɑ?rd/ 海報(bào)，布告，標(biāo)語(yǔ)

minutes 會(huì)議記錄 /?m?n?ts/ （熟詞僻義）

Question 7 is based on this passage.

S02S1Q7姊妹篇

Arts/archeology

Maya / carving / cutting tool?

瑪雅人使用石器

Centuries ago, the Maya of Central America produced elaborate, deeply cut carvings in stone. The carvings?would have required a cutting tool of hard stone or metal. Deposits of iron ore exist throughout Central America, but apparently the Maya never developed the technology to use them and the metals the Maya are known to have used, copper and gold, would not have been hard enough. Therefore, the Maya must have used?stone tools to make these carvings.

幾個(gè)世紀(jì)以前，中美洲的瑪雅人制作了精美的、深度切割的石雕。 雕刻需要硬石或金屬的切割工具。 整個(gè)中美洲都有鐵礦，但顯然瑪雅人從未開(kāi)發(fā)出使用它們的技術(shù)，而瑪雅人已知使用過(guò)的金屬銅和金也不夠堅(jiān)硬。 因此，瑪雅人必然使用的石器來(lái)制作這些雕刻品。

7. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

邏輯單題 邏輯反對(duì) 中

找他因。

A

A. In various parts of the world, civilizations that could not make iron from ore fashioned tools out of?fragments of iron from meteorites. 算是補(bǔ)充新證據(jù)，勉強(qiáng)算他因

B. All the metallic Mayan artifacts that have been found by archaeologists are made of metals that are?too soft for carving stone. 考古學(xué)家發(fā)現(xiàn)的所有瑪雅金屬制品都是由金屬制成的，這些金屬對(duì)于雕刻石頭來(lái)說(shuō)太軟了。SO？不能削弱，反而加強(qiáng)

C. The stone out of which these carvings were made is harder than the stone used by other Central?American peoples. 那不就更得用更硬的石頭嘛。不能削弱。

D. The techniques that the Maya used to smelt gold and some other metals could not have been easily?applied to the task of extracting iron from iron ore. 不能削弱。

E. Archaeologists disagree about how certain stone tools that have been found among Mayan ruins?were used.?關(guān)于石制工具如何使用考古學(xué)家沒(méi)達(dá)成共識(shí)。不能削弱。

Questions 8 to 10 are based on this passage.

Sciences

pure science / practical value / technology / engineering / applied science

純科學(xué)和應(yīng)用科學(xué)不用分那么清楚

This passage is adapted from an essay published in 2010.

①As I write, the Large Hadron Collider, the world's biggest atom-smasher at CERN in Geneva, has switched?on with almost unprecedented media jamboree. ②Asked about the practical value of it all, Stephen Hawking has said that "modern society is based on advances in pure science that were not foreseen to have practical applications." ③It's a common claim, and it subtly reinforces the hierarchy that Medawar identified: technology?and engineering are the humble offspring of pure science, the casual cast-offs of a more elevated pursuit.?

①I(mǎi) don't believe that such pronouncements are intended to denigrate applied science as an intellectual activity;?they merely speak into a culture in which that has already happened. ②Pure science undoubtedly does lead to applied spin- offs, but this is not the norm. ③Rather, most of our technology has come from explicit and painstaking efforts to develop it. ④And this is simply a part of the scientific enterprise. ⑤A dividing line between pure and applied science makes no sense at all, running as it does in a convoluted path through disciplines, departments, even individual scientific papers and careers. ⑥Research aimed at applications fills the pages of the leading journals in physics, chemistry, and the life and Earth sciences; curiosity-driven research with no real practical value is abundant in the "applied" literature of the materials, biotechnological, and engineering sciences. ⑦The fact that "pure" and "applied" science are useful and meaningful terms seduces us sometimes into?thinking that they are real, absolute, and distinct categories.

在我寫(xiě)這篇文章的時(shí)候，位于日內(nèi)瓦的歐洲核子研究中心世界上最大的原子粉碎機(jī)——大型高能強(qiáng)子對(duì)撞機(jī)已經(jīng)開(kāi)啟了幾乎前所未有的媒體盛會(huì)。當(dāng)被問(wèn)及這一切的實(shí)際價(jià)值時(shí)，斯蒂芬·霍金說(shuō)：“現(xiàn)代社會(huì)建立在純科學(xué)的進(jìn)步之上，而這些進(jìn)步之前都并未預(yù)見(jiàn)到會(huì)有實(shí)際應(yīng)用?！?這是一個(gè)普遍的說(shuō)法，它巧妙地強(qiáng)化了梅達(dá)沃所確定的等級(jí)制度：技術(shù)和工程是純科學(xué)的卑微后代，是更高尚的追求的隨意拋棄（細(xì)枝末節(jié)）。

我認(rèn)為這樣的聲明并不是為了貶低應(yīng)用科學(xué)，這只是在描述已經(jīng)形成的現(xiàn)狀。純科學(xué)無(wú)疑會(huì)產(chǎn)生應(yīng)用的衍生品，但這不是常態(tài)。相反，我們的大部分技術(shù)都來(lái)自于開(kāi)發(fā)它的明確和艱苦的努力。這只是科學(xué)事業(yè)的一部分。純科學(xué)和應(yīng)用科學(xué)之間的分界線毫無(wú)意義，盡管在學(xué)科、部門(mén)、甚至個(gè)人發(fā)表的科學(xué)論文和職業(yè)生涯上都區(qū)分的涇渭分明。針對(duì)應(yīng)用的研究占據(jù)了物理學(xué)、化學(xué)、生命和地球科學(xué)領(lǐng)域的主要期刊的頁(yè)面；材料、生物技術(shù)和工程科學(xué)的“應(yīng)用”文獻(xiàn)中充斥著一些純好奇心驅(qū)動(dòng)而無(wú)使用價(jià)值的研究。 認(rèn)為“純研究”和“應(yīng)用”科學(xué)這兩個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ)是有用且有意義，這有時(shí)會(huì)誘使我們將兩者割裂開(kāi)來(lái)。

生詞摘錄：

jamboree 盛典?/?d??mb??ri?/?

8. In the context of the passage, the mention of the Large Hadron Collider primarily serves to

功能題 目的題 易

給出一個(gè)純科學(xué)看起來(lái)沒(méi)什么應(yīng)用價(jià)值的例子。

A

A. demonstrate the attention that is paid to what some consider pure science 符合

B. introduce a change in the prevailing attitude toward science 沒(méi)有態(tài)度變化的證據(jù)

C. call into question the currently existing priorities for scientific research 沒(méi)有質(zhì)疑

D. illustrate the contributions that applied science has made to pure science 沒(méi)有contributions的證據(jù)

E. cast doubt on the hierarchy identified by Medawar 無(wú)關(guān)

9. According to the passage, the "explicit and painstaking efforts" are

細(xì)節(jié)題 中

來(lái)自二段3句：相反，我們的大部分技術(shù)都來(lái)自于開(kāi)發(fā)它的明確和艱苦的努力。也就是說(shuō)，應(yīng)用技術(shù)不一定是純科學(xué)的衍生品，人們也是專(zhuān)門(mén)花功夫開(kāi)發(fā)應(yīng)用技術(shù)的。

A

A. part of the same overall endeavor as pure science research 符合。不太容易看的出來(lái)，可以結(jié)合排除法，打好錯(cuò)誤標(biāo)簽。

B. the foundation of the techniques that allow advances in pure science 沒(méi)有foundation的證據(jù)

C. needed before the findings of pure science have practical benefit 跟pure science就沒(méi)關(guān)系

D. in danger of dying out because of the attractions of pure science 沒(méi)有danger的證據(jù)

E. ultimately of greater importance than the great majority of work in pure science 沒(méi)有比較的證據(jù)

10. The passage implies that the statement made by Stephen Hawking has which shortcoming?

細(xì)節(jié)題 推斷題 易

霍金說(shuō)：“現(xiàn)代社會(huì)建立在純科學(xué)的進(jìn)步之上，而這些進(jìn)步之前都并未預(yù)見(jiàn)到會(huì)有實(shí)際應(yīng)用?！钡闹斜磉_(dá)了沒(méi)必要區(qū)分二者的觀點(diǎn)。

D

A. It overstates the importance of technology for modern society 沒(méi)有overstates的證據(jù)

B. It fails to recognize the distinct goals of pure and applied science. 沒(méi)有distinct goals的證據(jù)

C. It ignores the work involved in turning initial insight into useful technology. 沒(méi)有證據(jù)

D. It treats somewhat unusual cases as if they were the general rule. 符合二段2句

E. It inappropriately understates the value of pure science. 相反。