月5日-2017考研英语真题阅读5夜10篇精读直播随堂笔记

Text①TheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceisindeedaninterestingexperiment,asAlexanderPolyakovsaidwhenheacceptedthisyear’sawardinMarch..正 在今年三月接受今年的基础物理学奖的时候所说的那样，.额达到300的基础物理学奖的确是个有趣的尝试 初相 人都Yuri ②Anditisfarfromtheonlyoneofitsfarfromisfarfrombeingaworldeconomyleader.③AsaNewsFeaturearticleinNaturediscusses,astringoflucrativeforresearchershavejoinedtheNobelPrizesinrecentyears.入到了奖的行列。④Many,liketheFundamentalPhysicsPrize,arefundedfromtheephones-number-sizedbankaccountsofInternetentrepreneurs.像基础物理学奖一样，很多奖项的经费来自互联网企业家的银行账户⑤Thesebenefactorshavesucceededintheirchosenfields,theysay,andtheywanttousetheirwealthtodrawattentiontothosewhohavesucceededinscience.①What’snottolike?Quitealot,accordingtoahandfulofscientistsquotedintheNews有什么不妥呢？就专题的少数科学家的话来讲，有很多②Youcannotbuyclass,astheoldsayinggoes,andtheseupstartentrepreneurscannotbuytheirprizestheprestigeoftheNobels. 望③Thenewareanexerciseinself-promotionforthosebehindthem,say科学家们说，这些奖只不过是设立这些奖的人的自我而已这些奖是背后的企业家们为了自我宣传而④Theycoulddistorttheachievement-basedsystemofpeer-review-led他们会以成果为基础，以评审为引导的体系⑤Theycouldcementthestatusquoofpeer-reviewed他们会使评审研究的现状不前⑥Theydonotfundpeer-reviewed他们不会资助评审研究⑦TheyperpetuatethemythofthelonePerpetuate:使…长存mythofthelonegenius①Thegoalsoftheprize-giversseemasscatteredasthecriticism.AseemasscatteredasBABAareasdiversifiedas和批评一样，奖项设立者的目标也不尽相②Somewanttoshock,otherstodrawpeopleintoscience,ortobetterrewardthosewhohavemadetheircareersinresearch.havemadetheircareersinresearch.以科研为事业的Hehasmadehiscareerinteaching.①AsNaturehaspointedoutbefore,therearesomelegitimateconcernsabouthowscienceprize—bothnewandold—aredistributed.Legitimacy（，合理性）地位就如自 以 过的那样，科学奖项（无论新旧，其分配方式确有值得担心处②TheBreakthroughPrizeinLifeSciences,launchedthisyear,takesanviewofwhatthelifescience（）③ButtheNobelFoundation’slimitofthreerecipientsperprize,eachofwhommuststillbeliving,haslongbeenoutgrownbythecollaborativenatureofmodernresearch–aswillbedemonstratedbytheinevitablerowoverwhoisignoredwhenitcomestoacknowledgingthediscoveryoftheHiggsAoutgrowB：ABABhasbeenoutgrownbyA，；奖ThecollaborativenatureofmodernresearchwillbedemonstratedbytheinevitablerowoverwhoisignoredwhenitcomestoacknowledgingthediscoveryoftheHiggsboson.acknowledge:承认，表彰，颁奖，认可④TheNobelswere,ofcourse,themselvessetupbyaveryrichindividualwhohaddecidedwhathewantedtodowithhisownmoney.当然，奖本身就是一个富人处置财产的结果⑤Time,ratherthanintention,hasgiventhem时间，而不是初衷成就了奖的地位①Asmuchassomescientistsmaycominaboutthenew,twothingsseemclear.Asmuchas=muchasMuchasIhatetogo,it'snowor虽然我很讨厌去，但也就此虽然一些科学家对于这些新的奖项有这样那样的抱怨，但是有两个事实是清晰的②First,mostresearcherswouldacceptsuchaprizeiftheywereoffered第一，如果颁奖，大多数获奖者都会接受③Second,itissurelyagoodthingthatthemoneyandattentioncometoscienceratherthangoelsewhere.第二，金钱和关注汇聚到科学领域而不是其他领域是件好事④Itisfairtocriticizeandquestionthemechanism-thatisthecultureofresearch,afterall-butitistheprize-givers’moneytodowithastheyplease.⑤Itiswisetotakesuchgiftswithgratitudeand明智的做法是以感恩的心优雅地接受奖金TheFundamentalPhysicsPrizeisseen［A］asymboloftheentrepreneurs’［B］ahandsomerewardfor［C］apossiblerecementoftheNobel［D］anexampleofbankers’Thecriticsthinkthatthenewwillmost［A］theprofit-oriented［B］theachievement-based［C］thefoundersofthe［D］peer-review-ledThediscoveryoftheHiggsbosonisatypicalcasewhich［A］legitimateconcernsoverthenew［B］controversiesoverthe［C］thejointeffortofmodern［D］thedemonstrationofresearchAccordingtoParagraph4,whichofthefollowingistrueoftheNobels［A］Historyhasnevercastdoubton［B］Theirendurancehasdonejusticeto［C］Theyarethemostrepresentative［D］TheirlegitimacyhaslongbeeninTheauthorbelievesthatthe ［A］unworthyofpublic［B］subjecttoundesirable［C］harmfultothecultureof［D］acceptabledespitethe科学研①Intheidealizedversionofhowscienceisdone,factsabouttheworldarewaitingtobeobservedandcollectedbyobjectiveresearcherswhousethescientificmethodtocarryouttheirwork.②Butintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.但是在每天的科学实践中，发现通常遵循一条模糊且复杂的路径③Weaimtobeobjective,butwecannotescapethecontextofouruniquelife我们的目标是做到客观，但我们却无法逃离我们独特的人生体验这样一个环境④Priorknowledgeandinterestinfluencewhatweexperience,whatwethinkourexperiencesmean,andthesubsequentactionswetake.⑤Opportunitiesformisinterpretation,error,andself-deception这里充满着，错误和自我的可能性①Consequently,discoveryclaimsshouldbethoughtofas所以，发现的应该被作为科学的原型②Similartonewlystakedminingclaims,theyarefullof这些类似于新矿勘探的，都充满着可能性③Butittakescollectivescrutinyandacceptancetotransformadiscoveryclaimintoamature但是把发现的变成成发现需要集体的和接受④Thisisthecredibilityprocess,throughwhichtheindividualresearcher’sme,here,nowesthecommunity’sanyone,anywhere,anytime.⑤Objectiveknowledgeisthegoal,notthestarting客观的知识不应该是起点而①Onceadiscovery espublic,thediscovererreceivesinlectual一旦发现的变成“public”,这个发现就获得了学术的认可②But,unlikewithminingclaims,thecommunitytakescontrolofwhathappens但是和采矿不同的是，科学界会接管接下来发生的事情③Withinthecomplexsocialstructureofthescientificcommunity,researchersmakediscoveries;editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuittheirownpurposes;andfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）receivesthenewdiscoveryandpossibly panyingtechnology.过Note:adiscoveryclaim espublic=editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuittheirownpurposes;andfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）receivesthenewdiscoveryandpossibly panyingtechnology.(被④Asadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity,theinctionandbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnologyinvolvedtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscovery.主干识别：Atransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scredibleA=theinctionandbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology支持某一科学和技术的理念与这一科和术的理会生互动冲，当一个发现的最终通过了科学界的逐级之后，支持某一科学和①Twoparadoxesexistthroughoutthiscredibility整个取得信任的过程中，存在着两种的情况②First,scientificworktendstofocusonsomeaspectofprevailingknowledgethatisviewedaspleteorincorrect.第一，科学研究工作倾向于关注流行知识中被认为不完整和不正确③Little paniesduplicationandconfirmationofwhatisalreadyknownand重复并确认已经为人所知以及可信的知识几乎不会带④Thegoalisnew-search,notre-参考译文：研究的目标是新的“寻找”而不是重复“寻⑤Notsurprisingly,newlypublisheddiscoveryclaimsandcrediblediscoveriesthatappeartobefutureresearchers.要面对将来研究者的质疑，可能的修改甚至是。⑥Second,noveltyitselffrequentlyprovokes.⑦NobelLaureateandphysiologistAlbertAzent-Gyorgyioncedescribeddiscoveryas“seeingwhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought.”⑧Butthinkingwhatnobodyelsehasthoughtandlingotherswhattheyhavemissedmaynotchangetheirviews.但是想无人所想，并且告诉其他人他们的纰漏未必能改变这些人的⑨Sometimesyearsarerequiredfortrulynoveldiscoveryclaimstobeacceptedand真正新的发现需要很多年才能被接受和认可①Intheend,credibility“happens”toadiscoveryclaim–aprocessthatcorrespondstowhatphilosopherAnnetteBaierhasdescribedasthecommonsofthemind.AnnetteBaier所描述的心灵的②“Wereasontogether,challenge,revise,andcompleteeachother’sreasoningandeachother’sconceptionsofreason.”“Tohate,tolovetothink,tofeel,tosee;allthisisnothingbuttoperceive.”恨也罢，爱也罢，思想、感觉、观察也罢，无非都是在领悟David的二是比较。比较的方向与同情相反，当我们把他人的痛苦或快乐与自己进行比较时，Accordingtothefirstparagraph,theprocessofdiscoveryischaracterizedby［A］uncertaintyand［B］misconceptionand［C］logicalityand［ essandItcanbeinferredfromParagraph2thatcredibilityprocess［A］strict［B］shared［C］individual［D］persistentParagraph3showsthatadiscovery escredibleafter［A］hasattractedtheattentionofthegeneral［B］hasbeenexaminedbythescientificcommunity.被之后［C］hasreceivedrecognitionfromeditorsand［D］hasbeenfrequentlyquotedbypeerAlbertSzent-Györgyiwouldmostlikelyagree［A］scientificclaimswillsurvive［B］discoveriestodayinspirefuture［C］effortstomakediscoveriesare［D］scientificworkcallsforacriticalWhichofthefollowingwouldbethebesttitleofthe［A］NoveltyasanEngineofScientific［B］CollectiveScrutinyinScientific［C］EvolutionofCredibilityinng［D］ChallengetoCredibilityattheGateto第三篇科学研1)Intheidealizedversion（理想状态）ofhowscienceis2)factsabouttheworldarewaitingtobeobservedandcollectedbyobjectiveresearchers/（主动）3）whousethescientificmethodtocarryouttheirButintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.Weaimtobeobjective,butwecannotescapethecontext（环境）ofouruniquelifePriorknowledgeandinterestinfluence1）whatweexperience,2）whatwethinkourexperiencesmean,and3）thesubsequentactionswetake.Opportunitiesformisinterpretation,errorandself-deceptionabound.Aabound.ThisideaAccordingtothefirstparagraph,theprocessofdiscoveryischaracterizedbyButintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.［A］uncertaintyandcomplexity.ambiguousand［B］misconceptionand［C］logicalityand［ essand1.Consequentlydiscoveryclaimsshouldbethoughtofas2.Similartonewlystakedminingclaims,theyarefullof3ButittakescollectivescrutinyandacceptancetotransformadiscoveryclaimintoamaturecollectivescrutinyandThisisthecredibilityprocess（取得信任的过程）,throughwhichtheindividualresearcher’sme,here,now esthecommunity’sanyone,anywhere,anytime.（后Objectiveknowledgeisthegoal,notthestartingItcanbeinferredfromParagraph2thatcredibilityprocessrequirescollectivescrutinyand［A］strictinspection.=［B］shared=collective；efforts=scrutinyandacceptance.Best［C］individual［D］persistentButittakescollectivescrutinyandacceptancetotransformadiscoveryclaimintoamaturediscovery.collectivescrutinyand三1.Onceadiscoveryclaim espublic?,thediscovererreceivesinlectualcredit. But,unlikewithminingclaims,thecommunity(科学界takescontrolofwhathappens Withinthecomplexsocialstructureofthescientificcommunity,researchersmakediscoveries;editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;Candfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuit（满足）theirownpurposes;Dreceivesthenewdiscoveryand panying(随之)technology.SuitsbtodoAsadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity,theinctionbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnologyinvolvedtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscovery.1）Asadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity，theinctionandtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscoverybetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology主干识别：Atransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scredibleA=theinctionand betweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology支持某一科学和技术的理念与这一科和术的理会生互动冲，当一个发现的最终通过了科学界的逐级之后，支持某一科学和技术的理念与这一科学和技术的理念会产生互动和，这样过后就将个人现。Paragraph3showsthatadiscovery escredibleafter Onceadiscovery espublic?,thediscovererreceives ［A］hasattractedtheattentionofthegeneral［B］hasbeenexaminedbythescientific［C］hasreceivedrecognitionfromeditorsand［D］hasbeenfrequentlyquotedbypeer模糊替换四1.Twoparadoxes（的地方）existthroughoutthiscredibilityviewedas pleteorincorrect.Littlereward paniesduplicationandconfirmationofwhatisalreadyknownandThegoalisnew-search,notre-Notsurprisingly,1)newlypublisheddiscoveryclaimsand/2)crediblediscoveries3)thatappeartobeimportantandconvincing/willalwaysbeopentochallengeandpotentialSecond,noveltyitselffrequentlyprovokeswhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought.”Butthinkingwhatnobodyelsehasthoughtand lingotherswhattheyhavemissedmaynotchangetheirviews.Sometimesyearsarerequiredfortrulynoveldiscoveryclaimstobeacceptedand2）新发现需要时间才能被认可AlbertSzent-Györgyiwouldmostlikelyagreewhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought”［A］scientificclaimswillsurvive［B］discoveriestodayinspirefuture［C］effortstomakediscoveriesare［D］scientificworkcallsforacriticalmind.thinkingwhatnobodyhasthoughtcriticalmind=creativemind!五1. Intheend,credibility“happens”toadiscoveryclaim–aprocessthatcorrespondstowhatphilosopherAnnetteBaierhasdescribedasthecommonsofthemind.2.“Wereasontogether,challenge,revise,andcompleteeachother’sreasoningandeachother’sconceptionsofreason.”David Whichofthefollowingwouldbethebesttitleofthe［A］NoveltyasanEngineofScientific［B］CollectiveScrutinyinScientific［C］Evolution（过程，演变）process ofCredibilityinngItakeatriptothetoilet.Revolution=change［D］ChallengetoCredibilityattheGateto第九篇科学研Text一1.TheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceisindeedaninterestingexperimentasAlexanderPolyakovsaidwhenheacceptedthisyear’sawardinMarch.AnditisfarfromtheonlyoneofitsAsaNewsFeaturearticleinNaturediscusses,astringoflucrative havejoinedtheNobelPrizesinrecentyears.Many,liketheFundamentalPhysicsPrize,arefundedfromtheephones-number-sizedbankaccountsofInternetentrepreneurs.arefundedephones-number-sizedbankaccounts账Thesebenefactors（金主，出资人，恩客）havesucceededintheirchosenfields,theysayandtheywanttousetheirwealthtodrawattentionto（使人们关注到）thosewhohavesucceededinscience.TheFundamentalPhysicsPrizeisseenTheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceastringoflucrativeMany,liketheFundamentalPhysics［A］asymboloftheentrepreneurs’［B］ahandsomerewardfor［C］apossiblerecementoftheNobel［D］anexampleof二1.What’snottoQuitealot,accordingtoahandfulofscientistsquotedintheNewsYoucannotbuyclass,astheoldsayinggoes,andtheseupstartentrepreneurscannotbuytheirprizestheprestigeoftheNobels.The areThe areanexerciseinself-promotionforthosebehindthem,sayscientists.Theycoulddistorttheachievement-basedsystemofpeer-review-ledresearch.peer-review-ledresearch.Theycouldcementthestatusquoofpeer-reviewed使…不前现状Theydonotfundpeer-reviewedTheyperpetuatethemythofthelone使…长久ThecriticsthinkthatthenewwillmostbenefitCritics=scientists.［A］theprofit-oriented以利润为导向［B］theachievement-based.The areanexercisein.The areanexerciseinself-promotionforthosebehindthem,sayscientists.［D］peer-review-led三1.Thegoalsoftheprize-giversseemasscatteredastheAseemasscatteredas2.Somewanttoshock,otherstodrawpeopleintoscience,ortobetterrewardthosewhohavemadetheircareersinresearch.Hehasmadehiscareerinteaching四.1.AsNaturehaspointedoutbefore,therearesomelegitimateconcernsabouthowscienceprize—bothnewandold—aredistributed.legitim