月5日-2017考研英語真題閱讀5夜10篇精讀直播隨堂筆記

Text①TheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceisindeedaninterestingexperiment,asAlexanderPolyakovsaidwhenheacceptedthisyear’sawardinMarch..正 在今年三月接受今年的基礎(chǔ)物理學(xué)獎的時候所說的那樣，.額達到300的基礎(chǔ)物理學(xué)獎的確是個有趣的嘗試 初相 人都Yuri ②Anditisfarfromtheonlyoneofitsfarfromisfarfrombeingaworldeconomyleader.③AsaNewsFeaturearticleinNaturediscusses,astringoflucrativeforresearchershavejoinedtheNobelPrizesinrecentyears.入到了獎的行列。④Many,liketheFundamentalPhysicsPrize,arefundedfromtheephones-number-sizedbankaccountsofInternetentrepreneurs.像基礎(chǔ)物理學(xué)獎一樣，很多獎項的經(jīng)費來自互聯(lián)網(wǎng)企業(yè)家的銀行賬戶⑤Thesebenefactorshavesucceededintheirchosenfields,theysay,andtheywanttousetheirwealthtodrawattentiontothosewhohavesucceededinscience.①What’snottolike?Quitealot,accordingtoahandfulofscientistsquotedintheNews有什么不妥呢？就專題的少數(shù)科學(xué)家的話來講，有很多②Youcannotbuyclass,astheoldsayinggoes,andtheseupstartentrepreneurscannotbuytheirprizestheprestigeoftheNobels. 望③Thenewareanexerciseinself-promotionforthosebehindthem,say科學(xué)家們說，這些獎只不過是設(shè)立這些獎的人的自我而已這些獎是背后的企業(yè)家們?yōu)榱俗晕倚麄鞫躎heycoulddistorttheachievement-basedsystemofpeer-review-led他們會以成果為基礎(chǔ)，以評審為引導(dǎo)的體系⑤Theycouldcementthestatusquoofpeer-reviewed他們會使評審研究的現(xiàn)狀不前⑥Theydonotfundpeer-reviewed他們不會資助評審研究⑦TheyperpetuatethemythofthelonePerpetuate:使…長存mythofthelonegenius①Thegoalsoftheprize-giversseemasscatteredasthecriticism.AseemasscatteredasBABAareasdiversifiedas和批評一樣，獎項設(shè)立者的目標也不盡相②Somewanttoshock,otherstodrawpeopleintoscience,ortobetterrewardthosewhohavemadetheircareersinresearch.havemadetheircareersinresearch.以科研為事業(yè)的Hehasmadehiscareerinteaching.①AsNaturehaspointedoutbefore,therearesomelegitimateconcernsabouthowscienceprize—bothnewandold—aredistributed.Legitimacy（，合理性）地位就如自 以 過的那樣，科學(xué)獎項（無論新舊，其分配方式確有值得擔(dān)心處②TheBreakthroughPrizeinLifeSciences,launchedthisyear,takesanviewofwhatthelifescience（）③ButtheNobelFoundation’slimitofthreerecipientsperprize,eachofwhommuststillbeliving,haslongbeenoutgrownbythecollaborativenatureofmodernresearch–aswillbedemonstratedbytheinevitablerowoverwhoisignoredwhenitcomestoacknowledgingthediscoveryoftheHiggsAoutgrowB：ABABhasbeenoutgrownbyA，；獎ThecollaborativenatureofmodernresearchwillbedemonstratedbytheinevitablerowoverwhoisignoredwhenitcomestoacknowledgingthediscoveryoftheHiggsboson.acknowledge:承認，表彰，頒獎，認可④TheNobelswere,ofcourse,themselvessetupbyaveryrichindividualwhohaddecidedwhathewantedtodowithhisownmoney.當(dāng)然，獎本身就是一個富人處置財產(chǎn)的結(jié)果⑤Time,ratherthanintention,hasgiventhem時間，而不是初衷成就了獎的地位①Asmuchassomescientistsmaycominaboutthenew,twothingsseemclear.Asmuchas=muchasMuchasIhatetogo,it'snowor雖然我很討厭去，但也就此雖然一些科學(xué)家對于這些新的獎項有這樣那樣的抱怨，但是有兩個事實是清晰的②First,mostresearcherswouldacceptsuchaprizeiftheywereoffered第一，如果頒獎，大多數(shù)獲獎?wù)叨紩邮堍跾econd,itissurelyagoodthingthatthemoneyandattentioncometoscienceratherthangoelsewhere.第二，金錢和關(guān)注匯聚到科學(xué)領(lǐng)域而不是其他領(lǐng)域是件好事④Itisfairtocriticizeandquestionthemechanism-thatisthecultureofresearch,afterall-butitistheprize-givers’moneytodowithastheyplease.⑤Itiswisetotakesuchgiftswithgratitudeand明智的做法是以感恩的心優(yōu)雅地接受獎金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科學(xué)研①Intheidealizedversionofhowscienceisdone,factsabouttheworldarewaitingtobeobservedandcollectedbyobjectiveresearcherswhousethescientificmethodtocarryouttheirwork.②Butintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.但是在每天的科學(xué)實踐中，發(fā)現(xiàn)通常遵循一條模糊且復(fù)雜的路徑③Weaimtobeobjective,butwecannotescapethecontextofouruniquelife我們的目標是做到客觀，但我們卻無法逃離我們獨特的人生體驗這樣一個環(huán)境④Priorknowledgeandinterestinfluencewhatweexperience,whatwethinkourexperiencesmean,andthesubsequentactionswetake.⑤Opportunitiesformisinterpretation,error,andself-deception這里充滿著，錯誤和自我的可能性①Consequently,discoveryclaimsshouldbethoughtofas所以，發(fā)現(xiàn)的應(yīng)該被作為科學(xué)的原型②Similartonewlystakedminingclaims,theyarefullof這些類似于新礦勘探的，都充滿著可能性③Butittakescollectivescrutinyandacceptancetotransformadiscoveryclaimintoamature但是把發(fā)現(xiàn)的變成成發(fā)現(xiàn)需要集體的和接受④Thisisthecredibilityprocess,throughwhichtheindividualresearcher’sme,here,nowesthecommunity’sanyone,anywhere,anytime.⑤Objectiveknowledgeisthegoal,notthestarting客觀的知識不應(yīng)該是起點而①Onceadiscovery espublic,thediscovererreceivesinlectual一旦發(fā)現(xiàn)的變成“public”,這個發(fā)現(xiàn)就獲得了學(xué)術(shù)的認可②But,unlikewithminingclaims,thecommunitytakescontrolofwhathappens但是和采礦不同的是，科學(xué)界會接管接下來發(fā)生的事情③Withinthecomplexsocialstructureofthescientificcommunity,researchersmakediscoveries;editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuittheirownpurposes;andfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）receivesthenewdiscoveryandpossibly panyingtechnology.過Note:adiscoveryclaim espublic=editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuittheirownpurposes;andfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）receivesthenewdiscoveryandpossibly panyingtechnology.(被④Asadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity,theinctionandbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnologyinvolvedtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscovery.主干識別：Atransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scredibleA=theinctionandbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology支持某一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念與這一科和術(shù)的理會生互動沖，當(dāng)一個發(fā)現(xiàn)的最終通過了科學(xué)界的逐級之后，支持某一科學(xué)和①Twoparadoxesexistthroughoutthiscredibility整個取得信任的過程中，存在著兩種的情況②First,scientificworktendstofocusonsomeaspectofprevailingknowledgethatisviewedaspleteorincorrect.第一，科學(xué)研究工作傾向于關(guān)注流行知識中被認為不完整和不正確③Little paniesduplicationandconfirmationofwhatisalreadyknownand重復(fù)并確認已經(jīng)為人所知以及可信的知識幾乎不會帶④Thegoalisnew-search,notre-參考譯文：研究的目標是新的“尋找”而不是重復(fù)“尋⑤Notsurprisingly,newlypublisheddiscoveryclaimsandcrediblediscoveriesthatappeartobefutureresearchers.要面對將來研究者的質(zhì)疑，可能的修改甚至是。⑥Second,noveltyitselffrequentlyprovokes.⑦NobelLaureateandphysiologistAlbertAzent-Gyorgyioncedescribeddiscoveryas“seeingwhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought.”⑧Butthinkingwhatnobodyelsehasthoughtandlingotherswhattheyhavemissedmaynotchangetheirviews.但是想無人所想，并且告訴其他人他們的紕漏未必能改變這些人的⑨Sometimesyearsarerequiredfortrulynoveldiscoveryclaimstobeacceptedand真正新的發(fā)現(xiàn)需要很多年才能被接受和認可①Intheend,credibility“happens”toadiscoveryclaim–aprocessthatcorrespondstowhatphilosopherAnnetteBaierhasdescribedasthecommonsofthemind.AnnetteBaier所描述的心靈的②“Wereasontogether,challenge,revise,andcompleteeachother’sreasoningandeachother’sconceptionsofreason.”“Tohate,tolovetothink,tofeel,tosee;allthisisnothingbuttoperceive.”恨也罷，愛也罷，思想、感覺、觀察也罷，無非都是在領(lǐng)悟David的二是比較。比較的方向與同情相反，當(dāng)我們把他人的痛苦或快樂與自己進行比較時，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-Gy?rgyiwouldmostlikelyagree［A］scientificclaimswillsurvive［B］discoveriestodayinspirefuture［C］effortstomakediscoveriesare［D］scientificworkcallsforacriticalWhichofthefollowingwouldbethebesttitleofthe［A］NoveltyasanEngineofScientific［B］CollectiveScrutinyinScientific［C］EvolutionofCredibilityinng［D］ChallengetoCredibilityattheGateto第三篇科學(xué)研1)Intheidealizedversion（理想狀態(tài)）ofhowscienceis2)factsabouttheworldarewaitingtobeobservedandcollectedbyobjectiveresearchers/（主動）3）whousethescientificmethodtocarryouttheirButintheeverydaypracticeofscience,discoveryfrequentlyfollowsanambiguousandcomplicatedroute.Weaimtobeobjective,butwecannotescapethecontext（環(huán)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（取得信任的過程）,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(科學(xué)界takescontrolofwhathappens Withinthecomplexsocialstructureofthescientificcommunity,researchersmakediscoveries;editorsandreviewersactasgatekeepersbycontrollingthepublicationprocess;Candfinally,thepublic（includingotherscientists）otherscientistsusethenewfindingtosuit（滿足）theirownpurposes;Dreceivesthenewdiscoveryand panying(隨之)technology.SuitsbtodoAsadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity,theinctionbetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnologyinvolvedtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscovery.1）Asadiscoveryclaimworksitthroughthecommunity，theinctionandtransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scrediblediscoverybetweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology主干識別：Atransformsanindividual’sdiscoveryclaimintothecommunity’scredibleA=theinctionand betweensharedandcompetingbeliefsaboutthescienceandthetechnology支持某一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念與這一科和術(shù)的理會生互動沖，當(dāng)一個發(fā)現(xiàn)的最終通過了科學(xué)界的逐級之后，支持某一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念與這一科學(xué)和技術(shù)的理念會產(chǎn)生互動和，這樣過后就將個人現(xiàn)。Paragraph3showsthatadiscovery escredibleafter Onceadiscovery espublic?,thediscovererreceives ［A］hasattractedtheattentionofthegeneral［B］hasbeenexaminedbythescientific［C］hasreceivedrecognitionfromeditorsand［D］hasbeenfrequentlyquotedbypeer模糊替換四1.Twoparadoxes（的地方）existthroughoutthiscredibilityviewedas pleteorincorrect.Littlereward paniesduplicationandconfirmationofwhatisalreadyknownandThegoalisnew-search,notre-Notsurprisingly,1)newlypublisheddiscoveryclaimsand/2)crediblediscoveries3)thatappeartobeimportantandconvincing/willalwaysbeopentochallengeandpotentialSecond,noveltyitselffrequentlyprovokeswhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought.”Butthinkingwhatnobodyelsehasthoughtand lingotherswhattheyhavemissedmaynotchangetheirviews.Sometimesyearsarerequiredfortrulynoveldiscoveryclaimstobeacceptedand2）新發(fā)現(xiàn)需要時間才能被認可AlbertSzent-Gy?rgyiwouldmostlikelyagreewhateverybodyhasseenandthinkingwhatnobodyhasthought”［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（過程，演變）process ofCredibilityinngItakeatriptothetoilet.Revolution=change［D］ChallengetoCredibilityattheGateto第九篇科學(xué)研Text一1.TheUS＄3-millionFundamentalPhysicsPriceisindeedaninterestingexperimentasAlexanderPolyakovsaidwhenheacceptedthisyear’sawardinMarch.AnditisfarfromtheonlyoneofitsAsaNewsFeaturearticleinNaturediscusses,astringoflucrative havejoinedtheNobelPrizesinrecentyears.Many,liketheFundamentalPhysicsPrize,arefundedfromtheephones-number-sizedbankaccountsofInternetentrepreneurs.arefundedephones-number-sizedbankaccounts賬Thesebenefactors（金主，出資人，恩客）havesucceededintheirchosenfields,theysayandtheywanttousetheirwealthtodrawattentionto（使人們關(guān)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…不前現(xiàn)狀Theydonotfundpeer-reviewedTheyperpetuatethemythofthelone使…長久ThecriticsthinkthatthenewwillmostbenefitCritics=scientists.［A］theprofit-oriented以利潤為導(dǎo)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