2021北京同等学力人员申请硕士学位考试考试考前冲刺卷

1、第 页2021北京同等学力人员申请硕士学位考试考试考前冲刺卷本卷共分为1大题50小题，作答时间为180分钟，总分100分，60分及格。一、单项选择题（共50题，每题2分。每题的备选项中，只有一个最符合题意） 1.Visiting a National Park can be relaxing, inspiring, but it can also be disturbing. As you drive into Rocky Mountain National Park, you will see starving elk, damaged mead ows and dying forests.

2、 Our parks are growing old because we have mistakenly protected them from natural processes, such as fire, predation, and insects. We believed that we were saving these remnants of wild America, but actually we have protected them to death. If we want to save our National Parks, the National Park Se

3、rvice must change its management priorities to prevent over population of animals and to restore natural process in the forest in order to prevent their stagnation and death by old age. We must act soon: our parks are dying of old age because we have altered the forces in nature that keep them young

4、 and strong. By tracing the history of our National Parks, we can understand the problem and see why we need active management. In the early part of the 20th century, settlers exploited wildlife heavily, resulting in neat-extinction of many species. Therefore, several National Parks were established

5、 by Congress primarily to save endangered animals. However, stricter wildlife protection laws and improved wildlife management techniques resulted in greater populations of animals overcrowding in areas of high concentration, such as the Yellowstone elk herds. Complicating the problem, the National

6、Park Service in the early part of the 20th century adopted a policy of aggressive predator elimination, thus reducing natural wildlife population control. Subsequently, elk and deer populations exploded in many National Parks, resulting in severe damage to native vegetation. Vigorous forest fire and

7、 insect suppression in the National Parks throughout the 20th century further altered the natural environment by allowing forests to over-mature, without natural thinning processes. Park managers thought that they were protecting the land, but actually they were removing important controls from the

8、forest ecosystems. Clearly, we must act immediately if we want to pass down to our children and grandchildren the green legacy of our National Parks; we must step in and restore the natural processes which we have altered through our well-intentioned, but misguided, policies in the past.In the first

9、 sentence Visiting a National Park can be relaxing, inspiring, what are the functions of the three words Visiting, relaxing and inspiringAThe first is a gerund, the other two are adjectives.BThey are a gerund, a present participle and an adjective.CThey are all gerunds.DThe first is a gerund, the ot

10、her two are present participles. 2.Assuming that a constant travel-time budget, geographic constraints and short-term infrastructure constraints persist as fundamental features of global mobility, what longterm results can one expect In high-income regions, (61) North America, our picture suggests t

11、hat the share of traffic (62) supplied by buses and automobiles will decline as high-speed transport rises sharply. In developing countries, we (63) the strongest increase to be in the shares first for buses and later for automobiles. Globally, these (64) in bus and automobile transport are partiall

12、y offsetting. In all regions, the share of lowspeed mil transport will probably continue its strongly (65) decline. We expect that throughout the period 19902050, the (66) North American will continue to devote most of his or her 1.1-hour travel-time (67) to automobile travel. The very large demand

13、(68) air travel (or high-speed mil travel) that will be manifest in 2050 (69) to only 12 minutes per person a day; a little time goes a long way in the air. In several developing regions, most travel (70) in 2050 will still be devoted to no motorized modes. Buses will persist (71) the primary form o

14、f motorized transportation in developing countries for decades. (72) important air travel becomes, buses, automobiles and (73) low-speed trains will surely go on serving vital functions. (74) of the super-rich already commute and shop in aircraft, but average people will continue to spend most c the

15、ir travel time on the (75) .AprofitBcostCbudgetDfacility 3.Concern with money, and then more money, in order to buy the conveniences and luxuries of modern life, has brought great changes to the lives of most Frenchmen. More people are working than ever before in France. In the cities the traditiona

16、l leisurely midday meal is disappearing. Offices, shops and factories are discovering the greater efficiency of a short lunch hour in company lunchrooms. In almost all lines of work emphasis now falls on ever-increasing output. Thus the typical Frenchman produces more, earns more, and buys more cons

17、umer goods than his counterpart of only a generation ago. He gains in creature comforts and ease of life. What he loses to some extent is his sense of personal uniqueness, or individuality. Some say that France has been Americanized. This is because the United States is a world symbol of the technol

18、ogical society and its consumer products. The so-called Americanization of France has its critics. They fear that assembly-line life will lead to the dis- appearance of the pleasures of the more graceful and leisurely old French style. What will happen, they ask, to taste, elegance, and the cultivat

19、ion of the good things in lifeto joy in the smell of a freshly picked apple, a stroll by the river, or just happy hours of conversation in a local care Since the late 1940s life in France has indeed taken on qualities of rush, tension, and the pursuit of material gain. Some of the strongest critics

20、of the new way of life are the young, especially university students. They are concerned with the future, and they fear that France is threatened by the triumph of the competitive, goods-oriented culture. Occasionally, they have reacted against the trend with considerable violence. In spite of the c

21、ritics, however, countless Frenchmen are committed to keeping France in the forefront of the modern economic world. They find that the present life brings more rewards, conveniences, and pleasures than that of the past. They believe that a modern, industrial France is preferable to the old.Which of

22、the following best states the main idea of the passageAChanges in the French way of life.BCriticism of the new life style.CThe Americanization of France.DFeatures of the new way of lif 4.When I was still an architecture student, a teacher told me, We learn more from buildings that fall down than fro

23、m buildings that stand up. What he meant was that construction is as much the result of experience as of theory. Although structural design follows established formulas, the actual performance of a building is complicated by the passage of time, the behavior of users, the natural elements and unnatu

24、ral events. All are difficult to simulate. Buildings, unlike cars, cant be crash-tested. The first important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is that tall buildings can withstand the impact of a large jetliner. The twin towers were supported by 59 perimeter columns on each side. Although ab

25、out 30 of these columns, extending from four to six floors, were destroyed in each building by the impact, initially both towers remained standing. Even so, the death toll (代价) was appalling2,235 people lost their lives. I was once asked, how tall buildings should be designed given what wed learned

26、from the World Trade Center collapse. My answer was, Lower. The question of when a tall building becomes unsafe is easy to answer. Common aerial fire-fighting ladders in use today are 100 feet high and can reach to about the 10th floor, so fires in buildings up to 10 stoties high can be fought from

27、the exterior (外部). Fighting fires and evacuating occupants above that height depend on fire stairs. The taller the building, the longer it will take for firefighters to climb to the scene of the fire. So the simple answer to the safety question is Lower than 10 stories. Then why dont cities impose l

28、ower height limits A 60-story office building does not have six times as much rentable space as a 10-story building. However, all things being equal, such a building will produce four times more revenue and four times more in property taxes. So cutting building heights would mean cutting city budget

29、s. The most important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is not that we should stop building tall buildings but that we have misjudged their cost. We did the same thing when we underestimated the cost of hurtling along a highway in a steel box at 70 miles per hour. It took many years before s

30、eat belts, air bags, radial tires, and antilock brakes became commonplace. At first, cars simply were too slow to warrant concern. Later, manufacturers resisted these expensive devices, arguing that consumers would not pay for safety. Now we do-willingly.Why are there still high buildings, or even s

31、kyscrapers in many citiesABecause they are the symbol of modern time.BBecause many cities now lack building space.CBecause high buildings are an important financial source of a citys budget.DBecause high buildings represent the level of a countrys science and technology. 5.When I was still an archit

32、ecture student, a teacher told me, We learn more from buildings that fall down than from buildings that stand up. What he meant was that construction is as much the result of experience as of theory. Although structural design follows established formulas, the actual performance of a building is com

33、plicated by the passage of time, the behavior of users, the natural elements and unnatural events. All are difficult to simulate. Buildings, unlike cars, cant be crash-tested. The first important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is that tall buildings can withstand the impact of a large jet

34、liner. The twin towers were supported by 59 perimeter columns on each side. Although about 30 of these columns, extending from four to six floors, were destroyed in each building by the impact, initially both towers remained standing. Even so, the death toll (代价) was appalling2,235 people lost their

35、 lives. I was once asked, how tall buildings should be designed given what wed learned from the World Trade Center collapse. My answer was, Lower. The question of when a tall building becomes unsafe is easy to answer. Common aerial fire-fighting ladders in use today are 100 feet high and can reach t

36、o about the 10th floor, so fires in buildings up to 10 stoties high can be fought from the exterior (外部). Fighting fires and evacuating occupants above that height depend on fire stairs. The taller the building, the longer it will take for firefighters to climb to the scene of the fire. So the simpl

37、e answer to the safety question is Lower than 10 stories. Then why dont cities impose lower height limits A 60-story office building does not have six times as much rentable space as a 10-story building. However, all things being equal, such a building will produce four times more revenue and four t

38、imes more in property taxes. So cutting building heights would mean cutting city budgets. The most important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is not that we should stop building tall buildings but that we have misjudged their cost. We did the same thing when we underestimated the cost of hu

39、rtling along a highway in a steel box at 70 miles per hour. It took many years before seat belts, air bags, radial tires, and antilock brakes became commonplace. At first, cars simply were too slow to warrant concern. Later, manufacturers resisted these expensive devices, arguing that consumers woul

40、d not pay for safety. Now we do-willingly.What is the most important lesson of the WTC collapseAWe should wear seat belts while driving.BWe should build low buildings just as we should drive slowly.CWe should make building tall buildings illegal.DWe should pay for safety while constructing tall buil

41、dings. 6.Concern with money, and then more money, in order to buy the conveniences and luxuries of modern life, has brought great changes to the lives of most Frenchmen. More people are working than ever before in France. In the cities the traditional leisurely midday meal is disappearing. Offices,

42、shops and factories are discovering the greater efficiency of a short lunch hour in company lunchrooms. In almost all lines of work emphasis now falls on ever-increasing output. Thus the typical Frenchman produces more, earns more, and buys more consumer goods than his counterpart of only a generati

43、on ago. He gains in creature comforts and ease of life. What he loses to some extent is his sense of personal uniqueness, or individuality. Some say that France has been Americanized. This is because the United States is a world symbol of the technological society and its consumer products. The so-c

44、alled Americanization of France has its critics. They fear that assembly-line life will lead to the dis- appearance of the pleasures of the more graceful and leisurely old French style. What will happen, they ask, to taste, elegance, and the cultivation of the good things in lifeto joy in the smell

45、of a freshly picked apple, a stroll by the river, or just happy hours of conversation in a local care Since the late 1940s life in France has indeed taken on qualities of rush, tension, and the pursuit of material gain. Some of the strongest critics of the new way of life are the young, especially u

46、niversity students. They are concerned with the future, and they fear that France is threatened by the triumph of the competitive, goods-oriented culture. Occasionally, they have reacted against the trend with considerable violence. In spite of the critics, however, countless Frenchmen are committed

47、 to keeping France in the forefront of the modern economic world. They find that the present life brings more rewards, conveniences, and pleasures than that of the past. They believe that a modern, industrial France is preferable to the old.Which statement can be inferred from this passageAFrenchman

48、 is in dilemma when trying to keep the traditional culture while living a modern life.BAmericanization is the enemy of localization in France.CAll the Frenchmen prefer the modern and industrial society rather than traditional one.DUnder the pressure of globalization, French romantic life style has t

49、o weaken. 7.Assuming that a constant travel-time budget, geographic constraints and short-term infrastructure constraints persist as fundamental features of global mobility, what longterm results can one expect In high-income regions, (61) North America, our picture suggests that the share of traffi

50、c (62) supplied by buses and automobiles will decline as high-speed transport rises sharply. In developing countries, we (63) the strongest increase to be in the shares first for buses and later for automobiles. Globally, these (64) in bus and automobile transport are partially offsetting. In all re

51、gions, the share of lowspeed mil transport will probably continue its strongly (65) decline. We expect that throughout the period 19902050, the (66) North American will continue to devote most of his or her 1.1-hour travel-time (67) to automobile travel. The very large demand (68) air travel (or hig

52、h-speed mil travel) that will be manifest in 2050 (69) to only 12 minutes per person a day; a little time goes a long way in the air. In several developing regions, most travel (70) in 2050 will still be devoted to no motorized modes. Buses will persist (71) the primary form of motorized transportat

53、ion in developing countries for decades. (72) important air travel becomes, buses, automobiles and (73) low-speed trains will surely go on serving vital functions. (74) of the super-rich already commute and shop in aircraft, but average people will continue to spend most c their travel time on the (

54、75) .AinBofCatDfor 8.When I was still an architecture student, a teacher told me, We learn more from buildings that fall down than from buildings that stand up. What he meant was that construction is as much the result of experience as of theory. Although structural design follows established formul

55、as, the actual performance of a building is complicated by the passage of time, the behavior of users, the natural elements and unnatural events. All are difficult to simulate. Buildings, unlike cars, cant be crash-tested. The first important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is that tall bu

56、ildings can withstand the impact of a large jetliner. The twin towers were supported by 59 perimeter columns on each side. Although about 30 of these columns, extending from four to six floors, were destroyed in each building by the impact, initially both towers remained standing. Even so, the death

57、 toll (代价) was appalling2,235 people lost their lives. I was once asked, how tall buildings should be designed given what wed learned from the World Trade Center collapse. My answer was, Lower. The question of when a tall building becomes unsafe is easy to answer. Common aerial fire-fighting ladders

58、 in use today are 100 feet high and can reach to about the 10th floor, so fires in buildings up to 10 stoties high can be fought from the exterior (外部). Fighting fires and evacuating occupants above that height depend on fire stairs. The taller the building, the longer it will take for firefighters

59、to climb to the scene of the fire. So the simple answer to the safety question is Lower than 10 stories. Then why dont cities impose lower height limits A 60-story office building does not have six times as much rentable space as a 10-story building. However, all things being equal, such a building

60、will produce four times more revenue and four times more in property taxes. So cutting building heights would mean cutting city budgets. The most important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is not that we should stop building tall buildings but that we have misjudged their cost. We did the s