Section I Use of English Part A Directions: Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A,B,C or D on ANSWER SHEET 1.(10 points) The basic function of money is the enable buying to be separated from selling, thus permitting trade to take place without the so?called double coincidence of barter. If a person has something to sell and wants something else 1 return, it is not necessary to search for someone able and 2to make the desired exchange of items. The person can sell the 3 item for general purchasing power—that is, “money”—to anyone who wants to buy it and then use the proceeds to buy the desired item from anyone who wants to sell it. The importance of this function of money is 4 illustrated by the experience of Germany just after World War Ⅱ, 5 paper money was 6 largely useless because, despite inflationary conditions, price controls were effectively 7 by the American, French, and British armies of occupation. People had to8 to barter or to inefficient money substitutes. The result was to cut total output of the economy in half. The German “economic miracle” just after 1948 reflected partly a currency reform by the occupation authorities, 9 some economists hold that it stemmed primarily from the German government’s 10 of all price controls, 11 permitting a money economy to 12 a barter economy. 13 of the act of sale from the act of purchase 14 the existence of something that will be generally accepted in payment—this is the “15 of exchange” function of money. But there must also be something that can serve as a 16 abode of purchasing power, in which the seller holds the proceeds in the interim 17 the first sale and the 18 purchase, or from which the buyer can 19the general purchasing power with which to pay 20 what is bought. This is the “asset” function of money. 1. ［A］ on ［B］ in ［C］ by ［D］ for 2. ［A］ capable ［B］ likely ［C］ desirable ［D］ willing 3. ［A］ excess ［B］ extra ［C］ surplus ［D］ ample 4. ［A］ dramatically ［B］ urgently ［C］ faithfully ［D］ incidentally 5. ［A］ when ［B］ before ［C］ since ［D］ until 6. ［A］ developed ［B］ reserved ［C］ rendered ［D］ imagined 7. ［A］ encouraged ［B］ enlarged ［C］ endured ［D］ enforced 8. ［A］ conform ［B］ resort ［C］ commit ［D］ gear 9. ［A］ and ［B］ but ［C］ therefore ［D］ however 10. ［A］ deprivation ［B］ stimulation ［C］ elimination ［D］ restriction 11. ［A］ thereby ［B］ therefore ［C］ then ［D］ while 12. ［A］ alternate ［B］ establish ［C］ substitute ［D］ replace 13. ［A］ Introduction ［B］ Specification ［C］ Representation ［D］ Separation 14. ［A］ assumes ［B］ requires ［C］ focuses ［D］ undertakes 15. ［A］ medium ［B］ function ［C］ role ［D］ nature 16. ［A］ fashionable ［B］ favorable ［C］ temporary ［D］ token 17. ［A］ both ［B］ for ［C］ between ［D］ after 18. ［A］ consequent ［B］ relevant ［C］ inadequate ［D］ subsequent 19. ［A］ execute ［B］ extract ［C］ exceed ［D］ exchange 20. ［A］ for ［B］ off ［C］ back ［D］ in 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 ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points) Text 1 Two related paradoxes also emerge from the same basic conception of the aesthetic experience. The first was given extended consideration by Hegel, who argued roughly as follows: our sensuous attention and that gives to the work of art its peculiar individuality. Because it addresses itself to our sensory appreciation, the work of art is essentially concrete, to be understood by an act of perception rather than by a process of discursive thought. At the same time, our understanding of the work of art is in part intellectual; we seek in it a conceptual content, which it presents to us in the form of an idea. One purpose of critical interpretation is to expound this idea in discursive form—to give the equivalent of the content of the work of art in another, nonsensuous idiom. But criticism can never succeed in this task, for, by separating the content from the particular form, it abolishes its individuality. The content presented then ceases to be the exact content of that work of art. In losing its individuality, the content loses its aesthetic reality; it thus ceases to be a reason for attending to the particular work and that first attracted our critical attention. It cannot be this that we saw in the original work and that explained its power over us. For this content, displayed in the discursive idiom of the critical intellect, is no more than a husk, a discarded relic of a meaning that eluded us in the act of seizing it. If the content is to be the true object of aesthetic interest, it must remain wedded to its individuality: it cannot be detached from its “sensuous embodiment” without being detached from itself. Content is, therefore, inseparable from form and form in turn inseparable from content. (It is the form that it is only by virtue of the content that it embodies.) Hegel’s argument is the archetype of many, all aimed at showing that it is both necessary to distinguish form from content and also impossible to do so. This paradox may be resolved by rejecting either of its premises, but, as with Kant’s antinomy, neither premise seems dispensable. To suppose that content and form are inseparable is, in effect, to dismiss both ideas as illusory, since no two works of art can then share either a content or a form-the form being definitive of each work’s individuality. In this case, no one could ever justify his interest in a work of art by reference to its meaning. The intensity of aesthetic interest becomes a puzzling, and ultimately inexplicable, feature of our mental life. If, on the other hand, we insist that content and form are separable, we shall never be able to find, through a study of content, the reason for attending to the particular work of art that intrigues us. Every work of art stands proxy for its paraphrase. An impassable gap then opens between aesthetic experience and its ground, and the claim that aesthetic experience is intrinsically valuable is thrown in doubt. 21. Hegel argued that . ［A］ it is our sensuous appreciation that gives peculiar individuality to the work of art ［B］ it is the content of the work of art that holds our attention ［C］ the work of art cannot be understood without a process of logical thinking ［D］ the form of the work of art is what our sensuous appreciation concentrates on 22. It can be inferred from this passage that . ［A］ the paradox that it is both necessary to distinguish form content and also impossible to do so cannot be resolved by rejecting its premises ［B］ both content and form of the work of art are illusory ［C］ the content and form of the work of art are separable ［D］ aesthetic experience is not intrinsically valuable 23. Which of the following is NOT what Hegel believed? ［A］ The content and form of the work of art cannot be separated from each other. ［B］ The content of the work of art is always the true object of aesthetic interest. ［C］ The content presented without any individuality is not the content of the work of art. ［D］ The content understood by means of a process of discursive thought is no more than a husk. 24. Premises that are related to each other seems to be dispensable because . ［A］ Kant thinks they are indispensable ［B］ either of them can resolve the paradox ［C］ the premises are separated ［D］ the premises can account for the theory 25. This passage is mainly about . ［A］ the sensuous appreciation of art ［B］ the basic conception of the aesthetic experience ［C］ how to appreciate the work of art ［D］ the relationship between form and content of the work of art Text 2 Every country with a monetary system of its own has to have some kind of market in which dealers in bills, notes, and other forms of short term credit can buy and sell. The“money market” is a set of institutions or arrangements for handling what might be called wholesale transactions in money and short term credit. The need for such facilities arises in much the same way that a similar need does in connection with the distribution of any of the products of a diversified economy to their final users at the retail level. If the retailer is to provide reasonably adequate service to his customers, he must have active contacts with others who specialize in making or handling bulk quantities of whatever is his stock in trade. The money market is made up of specialized facilities of exactly this kind. It exists for the purpose of improving the ability of the retailers of financial services—commercial banks, savings institutions, investment houses, lending agencies, and even governments—to do their job. It has little if any contact with the individuals or firms who maintain accounts with these various retailers or purchase their securities or borrow from them. The elemental functions of a money market must be performed in any kind of modern economy, even one that is largely planned or socialist, but the arrangements in socialist countries do not ordinarily take the form of a market. Money markets exist in countries that use market processes rather than planned allocations to distribute most of their primary resources among alternative uses. The general distinguishing feature of a money market is that it relies upon open competition among those who are bulk suppliers of funds at any particular time and among those seeking bulk funds, to work out the best practicable distribution of the existing total volume of such funds. In their market transactions, those with bulk supplies of funds or demands for them, rely on groups of intermediaries who act as brokers or dealers. The characteristics of these middlemen, the services they perform, and their relationship to other parts of the financial vary widely from country to country. In many countries there is no single meeting place where the middlemen get together, yet in most countries the contacts among all participants are sufficiently open and free to assure each supplier or user of funds that he will get or pay a price that fairly reflects all of the influences (including his own) that are currently affecting the whole supply and the whole demand. In nearly all cases, moreover, the unifying force of competition is reflected at any given moment in a common price (that is, rate of interest) for similar transactions. Continuous fluctuations in the money market rates of interest result from changes in the pressure of available supplies of funds upon the market and in the pull of current demands upon the market. 26. The first paragraph is mainly about . A. the definition of money market B. the constitution of a money market C. the basic functions of a money market D. the general feature of a money market 27. According to this passage, the money market . A. provides convenient services to its customers B. has close contact with the individuals or firms seeking funds C. maintains accounts with various retailers of financial services D. is made up of institutions who specialize in handling wholesale monetary transactions 28. Which of the following statements concerning money market is not true according to this passage? A. Money market does not exist in planned economies. B. Money market has been established in some socialist countries. C. Money market encourages open competition among bulk suppliers of funds. D. Money market relies upon market processes to distribute funds to final users. 29. The author uses the example of middleman to show . A. market transactions are important in different countries B. dealers are needed in doing business C. middlemen can play great role in different transactions and different countries. D. middlemen in different countries have different actions in business. 30. According to this passage, . A. brokers usually perform the same kinds of services to their customers B. brokers have little contact with each other C. open competition tends to result in a common price for similar transactions at any given moment D. changes in the pressure of available supplies of funds upon market tends to maintain a common price for similar transactions Text 3 Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient one of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value and the utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance, this does not show why it is so bad if dodos become extinct or a rain forest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the loss to humans or other sentient creatures? Or is there more to it than that? Some philosophers are now prepared to defend the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual animals of which they consist), and perhaps ecological systems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or other sentient creatures. Our concern for the environment also raises the question of our obligations to future generations. How much do we owe to the future? From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing. For we can benefit them, but they are unable to reciprocate. Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own, provided only that we are certain that they will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what we do. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive wastes, it seems clear that what we do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come. The question becomes much more complex, however, when we consider that we can affect the size of future generations by the population policies we choose and the extent to which we encourage large or small families. Most environmentalists believe that the world is already dangerously overcrowded. This may well be so, but the notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that is ingeniously explored by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons (1984). What is optimum population? Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare—the average multiplied by the number of people—is as great as possible? Both answers lead to counterintuitive outcomes, and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics. 31. The first paragraph is mainly about . ［A］ the intrinsic value of human experiences ［B］ the intrinsic value of the experiences of nonhuman animals ［C］ the intrinsic value of ecological system as a whole ［D］ an ancient ethical question about the nature of intrinsic value 32. , we owe nothing to the future generations. ［A］ In the author’s opinion ［B］ From a social contrast view of ethics ［C］ For a utilitarian ［D］ For most environmentalists 33. Population policy we take should be considered . ［A］ positive ［B］ negative ［C］ complex ［D］ reasonable 34. According to this passage, optimum population . ［A］ refers to the population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible ［B］ refers to the population size at which the total amount of welfare will be as great as possible ［C］ is a difficult philosophical issue which remains to be resolved in the future ［D］ is a difficult philosophical issue which Derek Parfit has successfully settled in Reasons and Persons 35. The proper title for this passage should be . ［A］ A Mystery in Applied Ethics ［B］ Our Obligations to Future Generations ［C］ Environmental Ethics ［D］ Environmental issues Text 4 Perhaps only a small boy training to be a wizard at the Hogwarts school of magic could cast a spell so powerful as to create the biggest book launch ever. Wherever in the world the clock strikes midnight on June 20th, his followers will flock to get their paws on one of more than 10m copies of “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix”. Bookshops will open in the middle of the night and delivery firms are drafting in extra staff and bigger trucks. Related toys, games, DVDs and other merchandise will be everywhere. There will be no escaping Pottermania. Yet Mr Potter’s world is a curious one, in which things are often not what they appear. While an excitable media (hereby including The Economist, happy to support such a fine example of globalisation) is helping to hype the launch of J.K. Rowling’s fifth novel, about the most adventurous thing that the publishers (Scholastic in America and Britain’s Bloomsbury in English elsewhere) have organised is a reading by Ms Rowling in London’s Royal Albert Hall, to be broadcast as a live webcast. Hollywood, which owns everything else to do with Harry Potter, says it is doing even less. Incredible as it may seem, the guardians of the brand say that, to protect the Potter franchise, they are trying to maintain a low profile. Well, relatively low. Ms Rowling signed a contract in 1998 with Warner Brothers, part of AOL Time Warner, giving the studio exclusive film, licensing and merchandising rights in return for what now appears to have been a steal: some $500,000. Warner licenses other firms to produce goods using Harry Potter characters or images, from which Ms Rowling gets a big enough cut that she is now wealthier than the queen—if you believe Britain’s Sunday Times rich list. The process is self?generating: each book sets the stage for a film, which boosts book sales, which lifts sales of Potter products. Globally, the first four Harry Potter books have sold some 200m copies in 55 languages; the two movies have grossed over $1.8 billion at the box office. This is a stunning success by any measure, especially as Ms Rowling has long demanded that Harry Potter should not be over commercialised. In line with her wishes, Warner says it is being extraordinarily careful, at least by Hollywood standards, about what it licenses and to whom. It imposed tough conditions on Coca Cola, insisting that no Harry Potter images should appear on cans, and is now in the process of making its licensing programme even more restrictive. Coke may soon be considered too mass market to carry the brand at all. The deal with Warner ties much of the merchandising to the films alone. There are no officially sanctioned products relating to “Order of the Phoenix”; nor yet for “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban”, the film of the third book, which is due out in June 2004. Warner agrees that Ms Rowling’s creation is a different sort of commercial property, one with long-term potential that could be damaged by a typical Hollywood marketing blitz, says Diane Nelson, the studio’s global brand manager for Harry Potter. It is vital, she adds, that with more to come, readers of the books are not alienated. “The evidence from our market research is that enthusiasm for the property by fans is not waning.” 36. When the author says “there will be no escaping Potter mania”, he implies that . ［A］ Harry Potter’s appeal for the readers is simply irresistible ［B］ it is somewhat irrational to be so crazy about the magic boy ［C］ craze about Harry Potter will not be over in the near future ［D］ Hogwarts school of magic will be the biggest attraction world over 37. Ms Rowling’s reading in London’s Royal Albert Hall is mentioned to show . ［A］ publishers are really adventurous in managing the Potter’s business ［B］ businesses are actually more credible than media in Potter’s world ［C］ the media are promoting Pottermania more actively than Hollywood ［Ｄ］ businesses involved with Potter are moving along in an unusual way 38. The author believes that . ［A］ Britain’s Sunday Times rich list is not very convincing as it sounds ［B］ Time Warner’s management of licenses is a bit over commercialised ［C］ other firms may produce goods using Harry Potter images at will ［D］ what Ms Rowling got in return for her offering to Warner is a real bargain 39. Paragraph 4 intends mainly to show Warner’s . ［A］ determination to promote Potter ［B］ consistence in conducting busines ［C］ high regard for Ms Rowling’s request ［D］ careful restrictions on licensing to Coco-Cola 40. It can be concluded from the last paragraph that . ［A］ products of Potter films have brought enormous profits to Warner ［B］ current Hollywood’s marketing of Potter may damage its potential ［C］ readers could get tired of Ms Rowling’s writings sooner or later ［D］ Warner will maintain the same strategy with Potter in future
|
