2005年英語一閱讀解析

❶ 05年碩士研究生入學考試英語閱讀理解試題譯文

Everybody loves a fat pay rise. Yet pleasure at your own can vanish if you learn that a colleague has been given a bigger one. Indeed, if he has a reputation for slacking, you might even be outraged. Such behaviour is regarded as 「all too human」, with the underlying assumption that other animals would not be capable of this finely developed sense of grievance. But a study by Sarah Brosnan and Frans de Waal of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, which has just been published in Nature, suggests that it all too monkey, as well.
The researchers studied the behaviour of female brown capuchin monkeys. They look cute. They are good-natured, co-operative creatures, and they share their food tardily. Above all, like their female human counterparts, they tend to pay much closer attention to the value of 「goods and services」 than males.
Such characteristics make them perfect candidates for Dr. Brosnan's and Dr. de waal's; study. The researchers spent two years teaching their monkeys to exchange tokens for food. Normally, the monkeys were happy enough to exchange pieces of rock for slices of cucumber. However, when two monkeys were placed in separate but adjoining chambers, so that each could observe what the other was getting in return for its rock, their behaviour became markedly different.
In the world of capuchins grapes are luxury goods (and much preferable to cucumbers) So when one monkey was handed a grape in exchange for her token, the second was reluctant to hand hers over for a mere piece of cucumber. And if one received a grape without having to provide her token in exchange at all, the other either tossed her own token at the researcher or out of the chamber, or refused to accept the slice of cucumber . Indeed, the mere presence of a grape in the other chamber (without an actual monkey to eat it) was enough to rece resentment in a female capuchin.
The researches suggest that capuchin monkeys, like humans, are guided by social emotions, in the wild, they are a co-operative, groupliving species, Such co-operation is likely to be stable only when each animal feels it is not being cheated. Feelings of righteous indignation, it seems, are not the preserve of people alone, Refusing a lesser reward completely makes these feelings abundantly clear to other members of the group. However, whether such a sense of fairness evolved independently in capuchins and humans, or whether it stems form the common ancestor that the species had 35 million years ago, is, as yet, an unanswered question.
人人都喜歡大幅加薪，但是當你知道一個同事薪水加得比你還要多的時候，那麼加薪帶給你的喜悅感就消失的無影無蹤了。如果他還以懶散出名的話，你甚至會變得怒不可遏。這種行為被看作是「人之長情」，其潛在的假定其他動物不可能具有如此高度發達的不公平意識。但是由喬治亞州亞特蘭大埃里莫大學的Sarah Brosnan 和Frans de Waal進行的一項研究表明，它也是「猴之常情」。這項研究成果剛剛發表在《自然》雜志上。
研究者們對雌性棕色卷尾猴的行為進行了研究。它們看起來很可愛，性格溫順，合作，樂於分享食物。最重要的是，就象女人們一樣，它們往往比雄性更關注「商品和服務」價值。這些特性使它們成為Brosnan 和 de Waal理想的研究對象。研究者們花了兩年的時間教這些猴子用代幣換取食物。正常情況下，猴子很願意用幾塊石頭換幾片黃瓜。但是，當兩個猴子被安置在隔開但相鄰的兩個房間里，能夠互相看見對方用石頭換回來什麼東西時，猴子的行為就會變的明顯不同。
在卷尾猴的世界裡，葡萄是奢侈品（比黃瓜受歡迎得多）。所以當一隻猴子用一個代幣換回一顆葡萄時，第二隻猴子就不願意用自己的代幣換回一片黃瓜。如果一隻猴子根本無需用代幣就能夠得到一顆葡萄的話，那麼另外一隻就會將代幣擲向研究人員或者扔出房間外，或者拒絕接受那片黃瓜。事實上，只要在另一房間里出現了葡萄（不管有沒有猴子吃它），都足以引起雌卷尾猴的怨恨。
研究人員指出，正如人類一樣，卷尾猴也受社會情感的影響。在野外，它們是相互合作的群居動物。只有當每隻猴子感到自己沒有受到欺騙時，這種合作才可能穩定。不公平而引起的憤怒感似乎不是人類的專利。拒絕接受較少的酬勞可以讓這些情緒准確無誤地傳達給其它成員。但是這種公平感是在卷尾猴和人類身上各自獨立演化而成，還是來自三千五百萬前他們共同的祖先，這還是一個懸而未決的問題。
Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn't know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way? Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.
There are upsetting parallels today, as scientists in one wave after another try to awaken us to the growing threat of global warming. The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that the Earth's atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made. The clear message is that we should get moving to protect ourselves. The president of the National Academy, Bruce Alberts, added this key point in the preface to the panel's report 「Science never has all the answers .But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that out nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions.」
Just as on smoking, voices now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it's Ok to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure. This is a dangerous game: by the 100 percent of the evidence is in, it may be too late. With the risks obvious and growing, a prudent people would take out an insurance policy now.
Fortunately, the White House is starting to pay attention. But it's obvious that a majority of the president's advisers still don't take global warming seriously. Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research-a classic case of 「paralysis by analysis」.
To serve as responsible stewards of the planet, we must press forward on deeper atmospheric and oceanic research But research alone is inadequate. If the Administration won't take the legislative initiative, Congress should help to begin fashioning conservation measures .A bill by Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, which would offer financial incentives for private instry is a promising start Many see that the country is getting ready to build lots of new power plants to meet our energy needs. If we are ever going to protect the atmosphere, it is crucial that those new plants be environmentally sound.
還記得科學家們認為吸煙會致人死亡，而那些懷疑者們卻堅持認為我們無法對此得出定論的時候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅持認為缺乏決定性的證據，科學也不確定的時候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅持認為反對吸煙的游說是為了毀掉我們的生活方式，而政府應該置身事外的時候嗎？許多美國人相信了這些胡言亂語，在三十多年中，差不多有一千萬煙民早早的進了墳墓。
現在出現了與吸煙類似的令人感到難過的事情。科學家們前仆後繼，試圖使我們意識到全球氣候變暖所帶來的日益嚴重的威脅。最近的行動是由白宮召集了一批來自國家科學院的專家團，他們告訴我們，地球氣候毫無疑問正在變暖，而這個問題主要是人為造成的。明確的信息表明是我們應該立刻著手保護自己。國家科學院院長Bruce Alberts在專家團報告的前言中加上了這一重要觀點：「科學解答不了所有問題。但是科學確實為我們的未來提供了最好的指導，關鍵是我們的國家和整個的世界在做重要決策時，應該以科學能夠提供的關於人類現在的行為對未來影響最好的判斷作為依據。
就象吸煙問題一樣，來自不同領域的聲音堅持認為有關全球變暖的科學資料還不完整。在我們證實這件事之前可以向大氣中不斷的排放氣體。這是一個危險的游戲；到了有百分之百的證據的時候，可能就太晚了。隨著風險越來越明顯，並且不斷增加，一個謹慎的民族現在應該准備一份保單了。
幸運的是，白宮開始關注這件事了。但是顯然大多數總統顧問並沒有認真看待全球氣候變暖這個問題。他們沒有出台行動計劃，相反只是繼續迫切要求進行更多的研究――這是一個經典的「分析導致麻痹案例」。
為了成為地球上有責任心的一員，我們必須積極推進對於大氣和海洋的深入研究。但只有研究是不夠的。如果政府不爭取立法上的主動權，國會就應該幫助政府開始採取保護措施。弗吉尼亞的民主黨議員Robert Byrd提出一項議案，從經濟上激勵私企，就是一個良好的開端。許多人看到這個國家正准備修建許多新的發電廠，以滿足我們的能源需求。如果我們准備保護大氣，關鍵要讓這些新發電廠對環境無害。
Of all the components of a good night's sleep, dreams seem to be least within our control. In dreams, a window opens into a world where logic is suspended and dead people speak. A century ago, Freud formulated his revolutionary theory that dreams were the disguised shadows of our unconscious desires and rears, by the late 1970s. neurologists had switched to thinking of them as just 「mental noise」 the random byprocts of the neural-repair work that goes on ring sleep. Now researchers suspect that dreams are part of the mind's emotional thermostat, regulating moods while the brain is 「off-line」. And one leading authority says that these intensely powerful mental events can be not only harnessed but actually brought under conscious control, to help us sleep and feel better. 「It's your dream」 says Rosalind Cartwright, chair of psychology at Chicago's Medical Center. 「If you don't like it , change it.」
Evidence from brain imaging supports this view. The brain is as active ring REM (rapid eye movement) sleep-when most vivid dreams occur-as it is when fully awake, says Dr, Eric Nofzinger at the University of Pittsburgh. But not all parts of the brain are equally involved, the limbic system (the 「emotional brain」)is especially active, while the prefrontal cortex (the center of intellect and reasoning) is relatively quiet. 「We wake up from dreams happy of depressed, and those feelings can stay with us all day」 says Stanford sleep researcher Dr, William Dement.
The link between dreams and emotions shows up among the patients in Cartwright』s clinic. Most people seem to have more bad dreams early in the night, progressing toward happier ones before awakening, suggesting that they are working through negative feelings generated ring the day. Because our conscious mind is occupied with daily life we don』t always think about the emotional significance of the day』s events-until, it appears, we begin to dream.
And this process need not be left to the unconscious. Cartwright believes one can exercise conscious control over recurring bad dreams As soon as you awaken, identify what is upsetting about the dream. Visualize how you would like it to end instead, the next time is occurs, try to wake up just enough to control its course. With much practice people can learn to, literally, do it in their sleep.
At the end of the day, there's probably little reason to pay attention to our dreams at all unless they keep us from sleeping of 「we wake u in a panic,」 Cartwright says. Terrorism, economic uncertainties and general feelings of insecurity have increased people's anxiety. Those suffering from persistent nightmares should seek help from a therapist For the rest of us, the brain has its ways of working through bad feelings. Sleep-or rather dream-on it and you'll feel better in the morning.
在高質量睡眠的所有因素中，夢似乎是最無法控制的一個。在夢中，窗戶通向的世界裡，邏輯暫時失去了效用，死人開口說話。一個世紀前，弗洛伊德闡述了革命性的理論，即夢是人們潛意識中慾望和恐懼經偽裝後的預示；到了20世紀70年代末期，神經病學家們轉而認為夢是「精神噪音」，即睡眠時進行的神經修復活動的一種雜亂的副產品。目前，研究人員猜想夢是大腦情感自動調節系統的組成部分，當大腦處於「掉線」狀態時對情緒進行規整。一名主要的權威人士說，夢這種異常強烈的精神活動不僅能被駕馭，事實上還可以有意識地加以控制，以幫助我們更好地睡眠和感覺。芝加哥醫療中心心裡學系主任 Rosalind Cartwright說「夢是你自己的，如果你不喜歡，就改變它。」
大腦造影的證據支持了以上觀點。匹茲堡大學的埃里克博士說，在出現清晰夢境的快速動眼睡眠中大腦和完全清醒時一樣活躍。但並非大腦的所有部分都一樣，腦邊緣系統（「情緒大腦」）異常活躍，而前額皮層（思維和推理的中心地帶）則相對平靜大。斯坦福睡眠研究員William Dement博士說：「我們從夢中醒來，或者高興或者沮喪，這些情緒會伴隨我們一整天。」
夢和情緒之間的聯系在Cartwright的診所的病人身上顯露出來了。多數人似乎在晚上入睡的較早階段做更多不好的夢，而在快睡醒前會逐漸做開心一些的夢，這說明人們在夢里漸漸克服了白天的不良情緒。因為清醒時我們的頭腦被日常瑣事占據著，所以並不總是想到白天發生的事情對我們情緒的影響，直到我們開始做夢，這種影響才出現。
這一過程不一定是無意識的。Cartwright認為人們可以練習有意識地控制噩夢的重演。你一醒來就立刻確定夢中有什麼在困擾你，設想一下你所希望的夢的結局，下次再做同樣的夢時，試圖醒來以控制它的進程。通過多次練習，人們完全可以學會在夢中這樣做。
Cartwright說，說到底，只要夢不使我們無法睡眠或「從夢中驚醒」，就沒有理由太在意所做的夢。恐怖主義、經濟不確定及通常的不安全感都增加了人們的焦慮。那些長期受到噩夢折磨的人應該尋求專家幫助，而對其他人來說，大腦有自動消除不良情緒的方法。安心睡覺甚至做夢，早上醒來時你會感覺好多了。
American no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing:The Degradation of language and Music and why we should like, care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter-culture as responsible for the decline of formal English.
Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in ecation. Mr.McWhorter』s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the graal disappearance of 「whom」 ,for example, to be natural and no more regranttable than the loss of the case-endings of Old English.
But the cult of the authentic and the personal, 「doing our own thing」, has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly ecated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English, talking is triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft.
Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non-standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive-there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas .He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper.
Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old-fashioned to most English-speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical ecation reforms-he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English 「on paper plates instead of china」. A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one.
美國人已不再期待公眾人物在演講或寫作中能運用技巧和文采來駕馭英語，而公眾人物自己也不渴望這樣。語言學家麥荷特喜好爭論，他的觀點混雜著自由派與保守派的看法。在他最近的書《做我們自己的事：語言和音樂的退化，以及為什麼我們應該喜歡或在意？》中，這位學者認為60年代反文化運動的勝利要對正式英語的退化負責。
責備放縱的六十年代不是什麼新鮮事，但這次算不上是對教育衰落的又一場批判。麥荷特先生的學術專長在於語言史和語言演變。舉例來說，他認為「whom」一詞的逐漸消失是自然的，並不比古英語中詞格尾綴的消失更讓人惋惜。
然而，「做自己的事」這一對事務真實性和個人性的崇高信條，已經導致了正式演講、寫作、詩歌及音樂的消亡。在20世紀60年代以前，僅受過一般教育的人在下筆時都會尋求一種更高雅的強調；而那之後，即使是最受關注的文章也開始逮住口語就寫在紙面上。同樣的，對於詩歌來說，非常個性化和富有表現力的創作風格成為了能夠表達真實生動含義的唯一形式。無論作為口語還是書面語的英語，隨意言談勝過雅緻的言辭，自我發揮也壓過了精心准備。
麥荷特顯示先生從上層和下層文化中列舉了一系列有趣的例子，從而說明他記錄的這種趨勢是確鑿無誤的。但就書中副標題中的疑問：為什麼我們應該、喜歡或在意，答案卻不夠明確。作為語言學家，麥荷特認為各種各樣的人類語言，包括像黑人語言這樣的非標准語言，都具有強大的表達力――世上沒有傳達不了復雜思想的語言或方言。不像其他大多數人，麥荷特先生並不認為我們說話方式不再規范就會使我們不能夠准確的思考。
俄羅斯人深愛自己的語言，並在腦海中存儲了大量詩歌；而義大利的政客們往往精心准備演講，即使這在大多數講英語的人們眼裡已經過時。麥荷特先生認為正式語言並非不可或缺，也沒有提出要進行徹底的教育改革――他其實只是為那些美好事務而不是實用品的消逝而哀嘆。我們現在用「紙盤子」而非「瓷盤子」裝著我們的英語大餐。真是慚愧啊，但很可能已無法避免。

❷ 大神有2001年到2005年的英語考研真題和答案詳解嗎

2005年的英語考研真題和答案詳解
In 2005 the English articles and detailed answers

❸ 考研英語05年之前的閱讀簡單嗎

相對05年之後的容易一些，一是體現在詞彙上比較容易，二是長難句更容易讀懂。要是准備今年考研要認真鑽研近些年考題，05年之前作為基礎訓練吧。

❹ 各位考研黨，你們有05年以前的英語一真題和答案嗎

淘寶上面有賣的，（鏈接發出來無法認證），辛苦你直接看一下我給你的圖片。前面幾年真題的參考價值不是非常的大，建議將近十年的多做幾遍。。祝你考研成功~~加油~~~

❺ 求2005年考研英語二真題閱讀部分的答案

英語二是從2010年才開始考的，不可能有2005年的英語二真題

❻ 誰有2000～2005年考研英語一真題及詳解啊

想看英語真題，直接去買何凱文的《考研英語歷年真題全解析》就好了，很全面的

❼ 來一份2005-2009的考研英語真題及詳解吧

我給你推薦一本書吧。有20期真題！真的很好！
新航道考研英語真題。解析也好。電子版我以前下過但不在這個電腦上，希望你還是用紙質的書。
希望採納我的答案。