前 言

      在考研英语真题试卷中，一百分里有五十分是阅读理解，这个题型可以考察考生在一定词汇基础上的查找信息能力，理解能力以及推理能力。

    因此，测试时如果出现错误，应综合分析错误原因，然后制定出有针对性的复习计划。

    为了尽量做到客观评估，我从2011,2012,2013和2014连续四年的考研真题中各选一篇难度适中的阅读真题给同学进行测试，请测试同学在72分钟内(每篇阅读18分钟)，且不查字典和工具书的前提下，完成下列阅读题。好了，大家准备好以后就可以开始测试了。

Reading Comprehension

Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answer on answer sheet.（40 points）

Text 1(2011)

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 hops to attract.

1. We learn from Para.1 that Gilbert’s appointment has _______.

[A]incurred criticism.

[B]raised suspicion.

[C]received acclaim.

[D]aroused curiosity.

2. Tommasini regards Gilbert as an artist who is _______.

[A]influential.

[B]modest.

[C]respectable.

[D]talented.

3. The author believes that the devoted concertgoers _______.

[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.

4. According to the text, which of the following is true of recordings?

[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.

5. Regarding Gilbert’s role in revitalizing the Philharmonic, the author feels _______.

[A]doubtful.

[B]enthusiastic.

[C]confident.

[D]puzzled.

 

Text 2(2012)

　　A deal is a deal-except, apparently, when Entergy is involved. The company, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in Vermont last week when it announced it was reneging on a longstanding commitment to abide by the strict nuclear regulations.

　　Instead, the company has done precisely what it had long promised it would not challenge the constitutionality of Vermont’s rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to keep its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant running. It’s a stunning move.

　　The conflict has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermont’s only nuclear power plant, an aging reactor in Vernon. As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek permission from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plant’s license be subject to Vermont legislature’s approval. Then, too, the company went along.

　　Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or it simply didn’t foresee what would happen next. A string of accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 207 and the discovery of an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermont Yankee’s safety and Entergy’s management– especially after the company made misleading statements about the pipe. Enraged by Entergy’s behavior, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 last year against allowing an extension.

　　Now the company is suddenly claiming that the 2002 agreement is invalid because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory power over nuclear issues. The legal issues in the case are obscure: whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will offer a precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid concerns about the patchwork regulations that could result if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word, that debate would be beside the point.

　　The company seems to have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is already so damaged that it has nothing left to lose by going to war with the state. But there should be consequences. Permission to run a nuclear plant is a public trust. Entergy runs 11 other reactors in the United States, including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep it open for another 20 years. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the company’s application, it should keep it mind what promises from Entergy are worth.

6. The phrase “reneging on”(Line 3.para.1) is closest in meaning to _______.

　　[A] condemning.

　　[B] reaffirming.

　　[C] dishonoring.

　　[D] securing.

7. By entering into the 2002 agreement, Entergy intended to _______.

　　[A] obtain protection from Vermont regulators.

　　[B] seek favor from the federal legislature.

　　[C] acquire an extension of its business license .

　　[D] get permission to purchase a power plant.

8. According to Paragraph 4, Entergy seems to have problems with its _______.

　　[A] managerial practices.

　　[B] technical innovativeness.

　　[C] financial goals.

　　[D] business vision

9. In the author’s view, the Vermont case will test _______.

　　[A] Entergy’s capacity to fulfill all its promises.

　　[B] the mature of states’ patchwork regulations.

　　[C] the federal authority over nuclear issues .

　　[D] the limits of states’ power over nuclear issues.

10. It can be inferred from the last paragraph that _______.

　　[A] Entergy’s business elsewhere might be affected.

　　[B] the authority of the NRC will be defied.

　　[C] Entergy will withdraw its Plymouth application.

　　[D] Vermont’s reputation might be damaged.

 

Text 3(2013)

　　An old saw has it that half of all advertising budgets are wasted—the trouble is, no one knows which half. In the internet age, at least in theory, this fraction can be much reduced. By watching what people search for, click on and say online, companies can aim “behavioural” ads at those most likely to buy.

　　In the past couple of weeks three deals and a quarrel have illustrated the value to advertisers (and their suppliers of software) of such fine-grained information. Should advertisers assume that people are happy to be tracked and sent behavioural ads? Or should they have explicit permission?

　　In December 2010 America's Federal Trade Commission proposed adding a “do not track” (DNT) option to internet browsers, so that users could tell advertisers that they did not want to be followed. Microsoft's Internet Explorer and Apple's Safari both offer DNT; Google's Chrome is due to do so this year. In February the FTC and the Digital Advertising Alliance (DAA) agreed that the industry would get cracking on responding to DNT requests.

　　On May 31st Microsoft set off the row. It said that Internet Explorer 10, the version due to appear with Windows 8, a new incarnation of the software firm's operating system, would have DNT as a default.

　　Advertisers are horrified. Human nature being what it is, most people stick with default settings. Few switch DNT on now, but if tracking is off it will stay off. Bob Liodice, the chief executive of the Association of National Advertisers, one of the groups in the DAA, says consumers will be worse off if the industry cannot collect information about their preferences. People will not get fewer ads, he says. “They'll get less meaningful, less targeted ads.”

　　It is not yet clear how advertisers will respond. Getting a DNT signal does not oblige anyone to stop tracking, although some companies (including Twitter) have promised to do so. Unable to tell whether someone really objects to behavioural ads or whether they are sticking with Microsoft's default, some may ignore a DNT signal and press on anyway.

　　Also unclear is why Microsoft has gone it alone. After all, it has an ad business too, which it says will comply with DNT requests, though it is still working out how. If it is trying to rile Google, which relies almost wholly on advertising, it has chosen an indirect method: there is no guarantee that DNT by default will become the norm. DNT does not seem an obviously huge selling point for Windows 8—though the firm has compared some of its other products favourably with Google's on that count before. Brendon Lynch, Microsoft's chief privacy officer, blogged: “We believe consumers should have more control.” Could it really be that simple?

11. It is suggested in paragraph 1 that “behavioural” ads help advertisers to _______.

　　[A] ease competition among themselves

　　[B] lower their operational costs

　　[C] avoid complaints from consumers

　　[D]provide better online services

12. “The industry” (Line 6,Para.3) refers to _______.

　　[A] online advertisers

　　[B] e-commerce conductors

　　[C] digital information analysis

　　[D]internet browser developers

13. Bob Liodice holds that setting DNT as a default _______.

　　[A] may cut the number of junk ads

　　[B] fails to affect the ad industry

　　[C] will not benefit consumers

　　[D]goes against human nature

14. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph. 6 ?

　　[A] DNT may not serve its intended purpose

　　[B] Advertisers are willing to implement DNT

　　[C] DNT is losing its popularity among consumers

　　[D] Advertisers are obliged to offer behavioural ads

15. The author's attitude towards what Brendon Lynch said in his blog is one of_______.

　　[A] indulgence

　　[B] understanding

　　[C] appreciation

　　[D] skepticism

 

Text 4(2014)

    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 many cannot afford to go into government or non-profit work, and 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.

16. A lot of students take up law as their profession due to _______.

[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.

17. Which of the following adds to the costs of legal education in most American states?

[A] Higher tuition fees for undergraduate studies.

[B] Admissions approval from the bar association.

[C] Pursuing a bachelor's degree in another major.

[D] Receiving training by professional associations.

18. Hindrance to the reform of the legal system originates from _______.

[A] lawyers' and clients' strong resistance.

[B] the rigid bodies governing the profession.

[C] the stern exam for would-be lawyers.

[D] non-professionals' sharp criticism.

19. The guild-like ownership structure is considered “restrictive” partly because it_______.

[A] bans outsiders' involvement in the profession.

[B] keeps lawyers from holding law-firm shares.

[C] aggravates the ethical situation in the trade.

[D] prevents lawyers from gaining due profits.

20. In this text, the author mainly discusses_______.

[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.

以上是关于“龙腾计划入学测评试题（邵宁老师编）”的相关资讯，想要更详细了解更多考研培训机构的相关情况，可以咨询咱们在线客服老师！