单选题   SECTION A MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
    In this section there are three passages followed by ten multiple-choice questions. For each question, there are four suggested answers marked A, B, C and D. Choose the one that you think is the best answer and mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET TWO.
    PASSAGE ONE
    (1) Scarlett recalled bitterly her conversation with Grandma Fontaine. On that afternoon two months ago, which now seemed years in the past, she had told the old lady she had already known the worst which could possibly happen to her, and she had spoken from the bottom of her heart. Now that remark sounded like schoolgirl hyperbole. Before Sherman's men came through Tara the second time, she had her small riches of food and money, she had neighbors more fortunate than she and she had the cotton which would tide her over until spring. Now the cotton was gone, the food was gone, the money was of no use to her, for there was no food to buy with it, and the neighbors were in worse plight than she. At least, she had the cow and the calf, a few shoats (小猪) and the horse, and the neighbors had nothing but the little they had been able to hide in the woods and bury in the ground.
    (2) Fairhill, the Tarleton home, was burned to the foundations, and Mrs. Tarleton and the four girls were existing in the overseer's house. The Munroe house near Lovejoy was leveled too. The wooden wing of Mimosa had burned and only the thick resistant stucco of the main house and the frenzied work of the Fontaine women and their slaves with wet blankets and quilts had saved it. The Calverts' house had again been spared, due to the intercession of Hilton, the Yankee overseer, but there was not a head of livestock, not a fowl, not an ear of corn left on the place.
    (3) At Tara and throughout the County, the problem was food. Most of the families had nothing at all but the remains of their yam (山药) crops and their peanuts and such game as they could catch in the woods. What they had, each shared with less fortunate friends, as they had done in more prosperous days. But the time soon came when there was nothing to share.
    (4) At Tara, they ate rabbit and possum (负鼠) and catfish (鲶鱼), if Pork was lucky. On other days a small amount of milk, hickory nuts (山核桃), roasted acorns (橡实) and yams. They were always hungry. To Scarlett it seemed that at every turn she met outstretched hands, pleading eyes. The sight of them drove her almost to madness, for she was as hungry as they.
    (5) She ordered the calf killed, because he drank so much of the precious milk, and that night everyone ate so much fresh veal all of them were ill. She knew that she should kill one of the shoats but she put it off from day to day, hoping to raise them to maturity. They were so small. There would be so little of them to eat if they were killed now and so much more if they could be saved a little longer. Nightly she debated with Melanie the advisability of sending Pork abroad on the horse with some greenbacks to try to buy food. But the fear that the horse might be captured and the money taken from Pork deterred them. They did not know where the Yankees were. They might be a thousand miles away or only across the river. Once, Scarlett, in desperation, started to ride out herself to search for food, but the hysterical outbursts of the whole family fearful of the Yankees made her abandon the plan.
    (6) Pork foraged (四处搜寻) far, at times not coming home all night, and Scarlett did not ask him where he went. Sometimes he returned with game, sometimes with a few ears of corn, a bag of dried peas. Once he brought home a rooster which he said he found in the woods. The family ate it with relish (享受) but a sense of guilt, knowing very well Pork had stolen it, as he had stolen the peas and corn. One night soon after this, he tapped on Scarlett's door long after the house was asleep and sheepishly exhibited a leg peppered with small shot. As she bandaged it for him, he explained awkwardly that when attempting to get into a hen coop (鸡笼) at Fayetteville, he had been discovered. Scarlett did not ask whose hen coop but patted Pork's shoulder gently, tears in her eyes. Negroes were provoking sometimes and stupid and lazy, but there was loyalty in them that money couldn't buy, a feeling of oneness with their white folks which made them risk their lives to keep food on the table.
    PASSAGE TWO
    (1) It has long been believed that the smartphones in our pockets are actually making us dumber; but now there is evidence for it.
    (2) The constant presence of a mobile phone has a 'brain drain' effect that significantly reduces people's intelligence and attention spans, a study has found.
    (3) Researchers at the University of Texas discovered that people are worse at conducting tasks and remembering information if they have a smartphone within eye shot. In two experiments they found phones sitting on a desk or even in a pocket or handbag would distract users and lead to worse test scores even when it was set up not to disturb test subjects.
    (4) The effect was measurable even when the phones were switched off, and was worse for those who were deemed (认为) more dependent on their mobiles.
    (5) 'Although these devices have immense potential to improve welfare, their persistent presence may come at a cognitive (认知的) cost,' said Dr Adrian Ward, the lead author of the study. 'Even when people are successful at maintaining sustained attention—as when avoiding the temptation to check their phones—the mere presence of these devices reduces available cognitive capability.'
    (6) The researchers tested 520 university students on their memory and intelligence when in the presence of a smartphone to see how it affected them.
    (7) Participants were told to complete tests in mathematics, memory and reasoning with their smartphones either on their desk, in their bag or pockets, or in another room, and with alerts turned off so as not to distract students.
    (8) Those who had their phones on the desk recorded a 10 percent lower score than those who left them in a different room on operational span tasks, which measures working memory and focus. Those who kept their phones further out of sight in their pockets or their bags scored only slightly better than when phones were placed on desks.
    (9) The researchers found that the negative effect of having a phone within eyeshot was significantly greater among those who said they were dependent on their smartphones. Participants who had expressed sympathy with phrases such as 'I would have trouble getting through a normal day without my cellphone' and 'using my cellphone makes me feel happy' performed as well as others when their phone was in a different room, but worse when it was placed on their desk.
    (10) The study also found reaction speeds to be affected, with students who had their phone on the desk responding more sluggishly in high-pace tests.
    (11) It even found that phones can even distract users even when they are turned off and placed face down. Those with phones outside of the room 'slightly outperformed' those with switched off devices.
    (12) The researchers said the effect arises because part of a smartphone users' mind is dedicated to trying to not think about distractions such as whether they have any messages when the handset (手机) is in their line of sight.
    (13) 'We see a linear trend that suggests that as the smartphone becomes more noticeable, participants' available cognitive capacity decreases,' said Ward. 'Your conscious mind isn't thinking about your smartphone, but that process—the process of requiring yourself not to think about something—uses up some of your limited cognitive resources. It's a brain drain.'
    (14) Similar research has previously showed smartphones can have a 'butterfly brain effect' on users that can cause mental blunders.
    PASSAGE THREE
    (1) Humanities departments in America are once again being axed. The reasons, one hears, are economic rather than ideological. It's not that schools don't care about the humanities—they just can't afford them. But if one looks at these institutions' priorities, one finds a hidden ideology at work.
    (2) Earlier this month, the State University of New York (Suny) Stony Brook announced a plan to eliminate several of the college's well-regarded departments for budgetary reasons. Undergraduates will no longer be able to major in comparative literature, cinema and cultural studies or theater arts.
    (3) Three doctoral programs would be cut, and three departments (European languages and literature, Hispanic languages and literature, and cultural studies) would be merged into one. Not only students but faculty will be affected; many untenured (未获得终身职位的) teachers would lose their jobs, and doctoral candidates would have to finish their studies elsewhere.
    (4) This is happening at a time in which high salaries are awarded to college administrators that dwarf those of a junior or even senior faculty member teaching in at-risk departments. That discrepancy can only be explained through ideology.  The decision to reduce education to a corporate consumer-driven model, providing services to the student-client, is ideological too.
    (5) Suny Stony Brook is spending millions on a multiyear program entitled 'Far Beyond' that is intended to 'rebrand' the college's image: a redesigned logo and website, new signs, banners and flags throughout the campus. Do colleges now care more about how a school looks and markets itself than about what it teaches? Has the university become a theme park: Collegeland, churning out workers trained to fill particular niches? Far beyond what?
    (6) The threat of cuts that Suny Stony Brook is facing is not entirely new. In 2010, Suny Albany announced that it was getting rid of its Russian, classics, theater, French and Italian departments—a decision later rescinded (取消). The University of Pittsburgh has cut its German, classics and religious studies program.
    (7) This problem has parallels internationally. In the UK, protests greeted Middlesex University's 2010 decision to phase out its philosophy department. In June 2015, the Japanese minister of education sent a letter to the presidents of the national universities of Japan, suggesting they close their graduate and undergraduate departments in the humanities and social sciences and focus on something more practical.
    (8) Most recently, the Hungarian government announced restrictions that would essentially make it impossible for the Central European University, funded by George Soros, to function in Budapest.
    (9) These are hard times. Students need jobs when they graduate. But a singular opportunity has been lost if they are denied the opportunity to study foreign languages, the classics, literature, philosophy, music, theater and art. When else in their busy lives will they get that chance?
    (10) Eloquent defenses of the humanities have appeared—essays explaining why we need these subjects, what their loss would mean. Those of us who teach and study are aware of what these areas of learning provide: the ability to think critically and independently; to tolerate ambiguity; to see both sides of an issue; to look beneath the surface of what we are being told; to appreciate the ways in which language can help us understand one another more clearly and profoundly—or, alternately, how language can conceal and misrepresent. They help us learn how to think, and they equip us to live in—to sustain—a democracy.
    (11) Studying the classics and philosophy teaches students where we come from, and how our modes of reasoning have evolved over time. Learning foreign languages, and about other cultures, enables students to understand how other societies resemble or differ from our own. Is it entirely paranoid (多疑的) to wonder if these subjects are under attack because they enable students to think in ways that are more complex than the reductive simplifications so congenial (适合的) to our current political and corporate discourse?
    (12) I don't believe that the humanities can make you a decent person. We know that Hitler was an ardent (热心的) Wagner fan and had a lively interest in architecture. But literature, art and music can focus and expand our sense of what humans can accomplish and create. The humanities teach us about those who have gone before us; a foreign language brings us closer to those with whom we share the planet.
    (13) The humanities can touch those aspects of consciousness that we call intellect and heart—organs seemingly lacking among lawmakers whose views on health care suggest not only zero compassion but a poor understanding of human experience, with its crises and setbacks.
    (14) Courses in the humanities are as formative and beneficial as the classes that will replace them. Instead of Shakespeare or French, there will be (perhaps there already are) college classes in how to trim corporate spending—courses that instruct us to eliminate 'frivolous' programs of study that might actually teach students to think.
单选题     What can be concluded from Para. 1 about Scarlett after Sherman's troop went by Tara the second time? ______ (PASSAGE ONE)
 
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】 细节题。原文第一段第五句的最后一个分句提到，如今邻居们的处境比斯嘉丽还糟糕，由此可知，在谢尔曼的军队第二次经过塔拉之后，斯嘉丽的处境比她的邻居要好，因此C为答案。该段第四句提到在谢尔曼的军队第二次经过塔拉之前，斯嘉丽还有一些可以让她撑到春天的棉花，但第五句的第一个分句指出如今她的棉花没了，由此可知，在谢尔曼的军队第二次经过塔拉之后，斯嘉丽没有可以熬过冬天的棉花了，A与原文表述相反，故排除；第五句的第三个分句提到金钱对于她而言也毫无用处，因为没有什么吃的能用钱买得到，由此可知，斯嘉丽有钱，只是没有购买食物的渠道，故排除B；该段最后一句提到斯嘉丽还有那头母牛和牛犊，几头猪崽和那匹马，而邻居们一无所有，除了他们之前能够藏在林里和埋在地下的那点东西，由此可知，在森林里藏东西的是邻居们，原文并未提及斯嘉丽是否在林中藏有东西，故排除D。 [参考译文] (1)斯嘉丽心酸地回忆起她与方丹老太太的谈话。两个月前的那天下午，现在仿佛已时隔多年，她告诉老太太，她早已知道自己可能会碰到的最糟情况，她说的是心底话。这样的言辞现在听起来却像是女学生的夸大之词。在谢尔曼的军队第二次经过塔拉之前，她就已经拥有了包括食物和现金在内的一笔小小的财富，有几家邻居比她更幸运，但她还有一些可以让她撑到春天的棉花。如今，棉花没了，食物没了，金钱对于她而言毫无用处，因为没有什么吃的能用钱买得到。邻居们的处境比她还糟糕。至少，她还有那头母牛和牛犊，几头猪崽和那匹马，而邻居们除了他们之前能够藏在林里和埋在地下的那点东西，一无所有。 (2)塔尔顿家所在的费尔希尔农场被焚为平地，塔尔顿太太和她的四个姑娘住在监工的房里。靠近洛夫乔伊的芒罗家也被夷为了平地。米莫萨农场的木质厢房已被烧毁，只有主宅靠它厚厚的耐火灰泥和方丹家的妇女及其奴隶们用湿毛毯和棉被拼命灭火才得以挽救。由于那个北方佬监工希乐顿的求情，卡尔弗特家的房子总算再次幸免于难，但那里已没有一头牲口、一只家禽和一穗玉米了。 (3)在塔拉，甚至全县，难题就是食物。大多数家庭除了残留的山药作物和花生，以及他们能在树林里抓到的各种猎物以外，一无所有。他们所拥有的，每一样都分享给了更加不幸的朋友们，就像他们在比较富裕的日子里做的那样。但很快就无物可分了。 (4)如果波克运气好的话，在塔拉他们能吃到野兔、负鼠和鲶鱼。别的时候则是少量的牛奶、山核桃，烤橡子和山药。他们总是挨饿。对于斯嘉丽而言，她似乎到处都会碰到伸出的手和哀求的目光。他们的眼神逼得她快要发疯了，因为她也和他们一样饥饿。 (5)她命令仆人把牛犊宰掉，因为它喝掉了那么多宝贵的牛奶，那一夜每个人都吃了太多的新鲜牛肉，以至于全都生病了。她知道自己应该宰一只猪崽，但她一天天地往后推，希望能把它们养大了再说。它们还是太小了。如果现在就把它们宰掉，就没有什么肉可吃，但如果能多留一段时间，肉就会多得多了。每天晚上她都和梅兰妮辩论是否应该派波克骑马出去用一些联邦政府的绿钞购买食物。不过，由于害怕马可能被抓走，钱可能从波克手里被抢走的恐惧之情使她们打消了念头。她们不知道联邦军到哪儿了。他们可能在千里之外，也有可能就在河对岸。有一次，斯嘉丽绝望之下，准备自己骑马出去寻找食物，但害怕联邦军的全家人歇斯底里的爆发令她放弃了计划。 (6)波克到很远的地方搜寻食物，偶尔整夜不回家，斯嘉丽也没有问他到哪里去了。有时他带些猎物回来，有时带几穗玉米和一袋干豌豆。有一次他带回家一只公鸡，他说是在树林里发现的。全家人吃得津津有味，但也有负罪感，因为她们非常清楚波克是偷的这只鸡，就像他偷豌豆和玉米一样。这之后不久的一个晚上，全家人都睡着很长时间了，波克轻轻地敲了敲斯嘉丽的门，窘迫地露出一条布满小弹孔的腿。当斯嘉丽为他包扎时，他尴尬地解释道，他在弗耶特维尔试图钻进一个鸡窝时被人发现了。斯嘉丽没有询问那是谁家的鸡窝，只是眼含泪水轻轻地拍了拍波克的肩膀。黑人有时候令人生气，还又蠢又懒，但他们有着一颗用金钱也买不到的忠心，一种与他们白人主子是一体的感情，这使他们甘愿冒生命危险去给家里找吃的。
单选题     Whose house hadn't got burnt according to Para. 2? ______ (PASSAGE ONE)
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】 细节题。原文第二段最后一句提到，由于那个北方佬监工希乐顿的求情，卡尔弗特家的房子had again been spared“再次幸免于难”，由此可知，卡尔弗特家的房子没有被烧毁，故D为答案。该段第一句和第二句直接提到塔尔顿家所在的费尔希尔农场和靠近洛夫乔伊的芒罗家都被夷为平地了，故排除A和B；第三句提到米莫萨农场的木质厢房已被烧毁，只有主宅靠它厚厚的耐火灰泥和方丹家的妇女及其奴隶们用湿毛毯和棉被拼命灭火才得以挽救，这表明方丹家的房子尽管没有完全被烧毁，但还是起火被烧了，故排除C。
单选题     The fifth paragraph claims all the following EXCEPT ______. (PASSAGE ONE)
 
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】 细节题。原文第五段第五句和第六句提到，每天晚上斯嘉丽都和梅兰妮辩论是否应该派波克骑马出去用一些联邦政府的绿钞购买食物，但马可能被抓走以及钱可能从波克手里被抢走的恐惧之情使她们打消了念头。由此可知，斯嘉丽最终并没有派波克骑马出去购买食物，故答案为C。该段第一句提到，那一夜每个人都吃了太多的新鲜牛肉，以至于全都生病了，A在原文直接提及，故排除；第二句指出斯嘉丽知道自己应该宰一只猪崽，但她一天天地往后推，希望能把它们养大了，由此可知，斯嘉丽本应该宰掉一只猪崽，但她并没有这么做，B与原文表述相符，故排除；最后一句提到，有一次斯嘉丽在绝望之下，准备自己骑马出去寻找食物，但害怕联邦军的全家人歇斯底里的爆发令她放弃了该计划，由此可知，斯嘉丽未能骑马出去寻找食物，D也与原文表述相符，故排除。
单选题     What is the whole family's attitude towards Pork's stealing? ______ (PASSAGE ONE)
 
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】 态度题。原文最后一段第二句和第三句提到了有时波克会带些猎物回来，有时带几穗玉米和一袋干豌豆，有一次他带回家一只公鸡，他说是在树林里发现的。随后的第四句明确表明了全家人的态度：“The family ate it with relish but a sense of guilt, knowing very well Pork had stolen it...”。转折词but表明她们对波克的盗窃行为是持矛盾的态度，一方面由全家人吃得津津有味可知她们对有东西吃感到很高兴，另一方面她们又有负罪感，故A为答案，同时排除C和D。原文并未提到全家人批评了波克的盗窃行为，故排除B。
单选题     Which group of subjects got the lowest score on operational span tasks? ______ (PASSAGE TWO)
 
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】 推断题。原文第八段第一句直接提到，在测试工作记忆力和注意力的操作跨度类任务中，手机放在桌上的人比手机放在另一间房里的人记录的得分低10%，而该段第二句又指出，那些把手机放在口袋或包里，使其在视野之外的人，得分仅比手机放在桌上的人稍高一点，由此可知，手机放在桌上的人比其他人的得分都低，故A为答案，同时排除B、C和D。 [参考译文] (1)长期以来，人们都相信放在口袋里的智能手机实际上让我们越来越笨了；而如今有证据来证明这一点了。 (2)一项研究发现，手机的长期存在会产生一种“脑力流失”效应，会显著降低人们的智力和注意力的持续时间。 (3)德克萨斯大学的研究人员发现，如果人们的智能手机在视野内，那么他们处理任务和记忆信息的表现就会变糟。在两组实验中，研究人员发现，手机放在桌上，甚至是装在口袋或背包里，即便设置成防干扰模式，还是会让使用者分心，并令其测试得分较低。 (4)即使手机处于关机状态，其影响还是十分显著，对于那些被认为更依赖手机的人而言，影响更大。 (5)“尽管这些电子设备具有提高幸福度的巨大潜力，但它们的持续存在可能会让人们付出认知力下降的代价，”该项研究的主要作者艾德·沃德博士说道。“即使人们成功地保持了持续性注意力——比如当人们抵挡查看手机的诱惑时——仅仅手机的存在就能降低现有的认知能力。” (6)研究人员测试了520名大学生在智能手机在场时的记忆力和智力，来观察手机对他们的影响。 (7)测试对象被要求完成数学、记忆和推理方面的测试，而其手机要么放在桌上、包里或口袋里，要么放在另外一个房间里，并且手机提示音都被关闭，以防他们分心。 (8)在测试工作记忆力和注意力的操作跨度类任务中，手机放在桌上的人比手机放在另一个房间里的人记录的得分低10%。那些把手机放在口袋或包里，使其在视野之外的人，得分仅比手机放在桌上的人稍高一点。 (9)研究人员发现，位于视野内的手机对那些自称依赖智能手机的人产生的负面影响明显更大。曾对“没有手机我一天也熬不过去”和“玩手机让我感到很开心”等话语表示深有同感的测试对象，在其手机位于另一个房间时表现得和其他人一样好，但是当手机放在桌上时，则表现得比其他人差。 (10)研究还发现反应速度也受到了影响，把手机放在桌上的学生在高节奏测试中的反应更为迟缓。 (11)研究甚至发现，即使手机已关机并且屏幕朝下放着，它们也能让使用者分心。与手机在身上但已关机的人相比，手机放在房间外面的人表现要略胜一筹。 (12)研究人员表示，手机之所以对认知能力产生影响，是因为手机在视线范围内时，智能手机用户的部分注意力就会集中在努力不让自己去思考那些分心的事物，比如是否有短信。 (13)“我们观察到一种线性趋势，该趋势表明随着智能手机变得越来越引人注目，测试对象现有的认知能力却逐渐下降，”沃德说道。“你的表意识并没有在想智能手机，但该过程——要求自己不去想某物的过程——消耗了你有限认知资源的一部分。这就是脑力流失。” (14)此前已有类似的研究表明，智能手机会对用户产生一种“使思维过于跳跃的影响”，这可能会造成精神错乱。
单选题     Which of the following findings of the research is INCORRECT? ______ (PASSAGE TWO)
 
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】 推断题。原文第九段第一句提到，研究人员发现位于视野内的手机对那些自称依赖智能手机的人产生的负面影响明显更大，紧接着第二句对这一结论进行了具体的解释，该句指出曾对“没有手机我一天也熬不过去”和“玩手机让我感到很开心”等话语表示深有同感的测试对象，在其手机位于另一个房间时表现得和其他人一样好，但是当手机放在桌上时，则表现得比其他人差，由此可知，当手机在房间外面时，智能手机的依赖者们表现得和其他人一样好，而不是较差，B与原文表述不符，故为答案，同时排除A，A在原文直接提及。第十段提到研究还发现反应速度也受到手机影响，把手机放在桌上的学生在高节奏测试中的反应更为迟缓，C与原文表述相符，故排除；第十一段第一句指出研究甚至发现，即使手机已关机并且屏幕朝下放着，它们也能让使用者分心，由此可知，测试者们的注意力仍然会被已关机并且屏幕朝下放着的手机转移，故排除D。
单选题     What is the correlation between the noticeableness of a smartphone and the existing cognitive capacity of the subjects according to Dr Adrian Ward? ______ (PASSAGE TWO)
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】 推断题。原文第十三段第一句提到，沃德表示他们观察到一种线性趋势，该趋势表明随着智能手机变得越来越引人注目，测试对象现有的认知能力却逐渐下降。这表明，智能手机的醒目性递增时，测试对象现有的认知能力随之递减，由此可知，两者的关系是线性负相关，故D为答案，同时排除B和C。这两者之间的变化并非没有规律，故排除A“零相关”。
单选题     It can be inferred from the passage that Suny Stony Brook ______. (PASSAGE THREE)
 
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】 推断题。原文第三段提到，纽约州立大学石溪分校会取消三个博士项目，并将三个院系(欧洲语言文学、西裔语言文学和文化研究)合并成一个，不仅学生，教职工也将受到影响，许多未获得终身职位的教师会失去工作，博士研究生要到其他地方完成学业。由此可知，在这三个人文学院工作的部分教师会受到影响并失去工作，故答案为C，同时排除D，因为原文提到的是人文学科的博士研究生而不是本科生要到其他地方继续学业。第二段第一句指出，石溪分校宣布出于预算的原因要取消该校几个口碑良好的院系，由此可知，本月初是宣布而不是起草院系削减计划，故排除A；该段第二句提到，本科生将再也不能主修比较文学、电影和文化研究或戏剧艺术了，结合第一句可知，石溪分校计划取消的几个口碑良好的院系是人文学科的而非实用学科的，B与原文表述不符，故排除。 [参考译文] (1)美国的人文学院再次遭到裁撤。据说是经济原因而非意识形态的原因。并不是学校不在乎人文学科——而是他们负担不起。但如果人们看到这些学校的工作重点，他们就会发现是隐藏的意识形态在起作用。 (2)本月初，纽约州立大学石溪分校宣布了一项计划，出于预算的原因将取消该校几个口碑良好的院系。本科生将再也不能主修比较文学、电影和文化研究或戏剧艺术了。 (3)三个博士项目将被取消，三个院系(欧洲语言文学、西裔语言文学和文化研究)会被合并成一个。不仅学生，教职工也将受到影响；许多未获得终身职位的教师会失去工作，博士研究生要到其他地方完成学业。 (4)与此同时，学校的行政人员被给予高薪，相比之下，那些在处境危险的院系教书的初级甚至高级教师的收入就显得相形见绌了。只有意识形态才能阐明这种差异。这一决定，将教育贬成同企业一样的消费者驱动型模式，给学生客户提供服务，这也是意识形态的一种。 (5)石溪分校正耗资数百万美元，打造一个名为“超越”的多年项目，该项目旨在“重塑”学校形象：重新设计的校标和网站，遍布学校的新指示牌、横幅和旗帜。比起传授的知识内容，大学如今更在乎学校的形象和自我营销方式吗?这所大学已经变成批量生产那些经过训练来填补特定职位空缺的员工的“大学乐园”了吗?到底要超越什么? (6)石溪分校所面临的砍掉学科的威胁并非全新问题。在2010年，纽约州立大学奥尔巴尼分校宣布要取消俄语、古典文学、戏剧、法语和意大利语等院系——该决定后来被撤销。匹茨堡大学已经取消了其德语、古典文学和宗教研究项目。 (7)国际上也存在类似的问题。在英国，密德萨斯大学2010年关于逐步取消其哲学系的决定遭到抗议。2015年6月，日本教育大臣致函本国所有的国立大学校长，建议他们应该关闭人文与社会科学的本科和研究生院系，并专注于更加实用的学科。 (8)最近，匈牙利政府颁布了禁令，使乔治·索罗斯资助的中欧大学基本不可能在布达佩斯运营。 (9)现在是困难时期。学生毕业后需要工作。但如果他们被剥夺了学习外语、古典文学、文学、哲学、音乐、戏剧和艺术的机会，那唯一的机会就被错失了。在他们忙碌的生活中还有什么时候能得到这种机会呢? (10)已经有人为维护人文学科进行了有力的辩论——许多文章解释了我们为什么需要这些学科以及它们的取消将意味着什么。我们当中的那些教师和学生非常清楚这些学科所能提供的东西：批判思维与独立思考的能力；对模糊的容忍力；洞察事物两面性的能力；透过我们被告知的事情表象看到本质的能力；对语言帮助我们更加透彻和深刻地理解彼此的方式的欣赏力——或者，换言之，语言进行掩饰和歪曲的方式。这些学科帮助我们学习如何思考，让我们有能力生活在民主制度中，并有能力维持这种民主制度。 (11)研究古典文学和哲学能教会学生人类来自何方以及我们的推理模式如何与时俱进。学习外语并了解他国文化能让学生理解其他社会与本土社会的异同之处。与如此适合我们当前政治和企业话语的过分简化的思维方式相比，这些学科能让学生用更复杂的方式思考问题，因此它们才会遭受攻击，我这样想是否太多疑了? (12)我不相信人文学科就会使你成为一个正派的人。我们知道希特勒曾是瓦格纳的铁粉，还对建筑学怀有浓厚的兴趣。但文学、艺术和音乐可以集中并扩大我们对人类所能完成和创造之物的认识。人文学科教会我们有关我们祖先的知识；一门外语使我们更靠近那些和我们共享地球的人。 (13)人文学科可以触及人类意识中我们称为智慧与心灵的这两个方面——有些立法者看似缺乏这些，他们对医疗保健的看法表明他们不仅毫无同情心，而且对人类关于危机和挫折的经验也了解甚少。 (14)人文学科的课程与将要取而代之的课程同样具有重大影响和益处。取代莎士比亚或法语的，将会是(或许早已是)关于如何削减企业支出的大学课程——这些课程指导我们取消那些“无用的”但却可能真正教会学生思考的研究项目。
单选题     What is the author's attitude towards the program 'Far Beyond'? ______ (PASSAGE THREE)
 
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】 态度题。原文第五段第一句提到，石溪分校正耗资数百万美元打造一个名为“超越”的多年项目，该项目旨在“重塑”学校形象。作者随后使用了三个疑问句质疑石溪分校的工作重心偏离了主业，过于追求实用性，以及该项目的目的。由此可知，作者对“超越”项目持否定的态度，故B为答案。
单选题     Which of the following universities has already eliminated some humanities departments? ______ (PASSAGE THREE)
 
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】 细节题。原文第六段第三句提到匹茨堡大学已经取消了其德语、古典文学和宗教研究项目，由此可知，匹茨堡大学已取消一些人文学院，故答案为B。该段第二句指出，在2010年，纽约州立大学奥尔巴尼分校打算取消俄语、古典文学、戏剧、法语和意大利语等院系——该决定后来被撤销，因此A与原文表述相反，故排除；第七段第二句提到，英国密德萨斯大学2010年关于逐步取消其哲学系的决定遭到抗议，但原文并未提及该决定是否执行了，故排除C；该段最后一句提到，2015年6月，日本教育大臣致函本国所有的国立大学校长，建议他们应该关闭人文与社会科学的本科和研究生院系，并专注于更加实用的学科，但这只是日本教育大臣的一项建议，而非实际操作，故排除D。
单选题     SECTION B SHORT ANSWER QUESTIONS
    In this section there are five short-answer questions based on the passages in SECTION A. Answer the questions with NO MORE THAN TEN WORDS in the space provided on ANSWER SHEET TWO.
    What does 'that remark' in Para. 1 refer to? (PASSAGE ONE)
 
【正确答案】
【答案解析】 语义题。原文第一段第三句提到这样的言辞现在听起来却像是女学生的夸大之词，remark在此处的意思是“言辞”。前两句提到斯嘉丽心酸地回忆起她与方丹老太太的谈话，两个月前的那天下午，她告诉老太太，她早已知道自己可能会碰到的最糟情况。由此可推知，该句中的“言辞”是指两个月前的那天下午，斯嘉丽所说的早已知道自己可能会碰到的最糟情况，故答案为“Scarlett's words about having known her worst possible encounter. ”。
单选题     What kind of commendable trait does the case of Pork show? (PASSAGE ONE)
 
【正确答案】
【答案解析】 推断题。作者在文章最后一段中举了波克为斯嘉丽全家人寻找食物并因此而受伤的例子。本段最后一句提到黑人有时候令人生气，还又蠢又懒，但他们有着金钱也买不到的忠心，一种与他们白人主子是一体的感情，这使他们甘愿冒生命危险去给家里找吃的。由此可见，作者以波克为例证想要表明的品质是忠诚，故答案为“Fidelity/Loyalty. ”。
单选题     Why do smartphone users get distracted when the handset is in sight according to the researchers? (PASSAGE TWO)
 
【正确答案】
【答案解析】 推断题。作者在原文第十二段提到，研究人员表示，影响之所以产生是因为手机在视线内时，手机用户的部分注意力就会集中在努力不让自己去思考那些分心的事物，比如是否有短信。由上一段可知，该影响是指手机在房间内时，即使手机已关机并且屏幕朝下放着，它们也能让机主分心。综合考虑，研究人员认为当手机在视线内时，手机用户会分心的原因是他们的部分注意力就会集中在不去思考那些分心的事物，故答案为“Because they need to resist the distractions. ”。
单选题     What does 'That discrepancy' in Para. 4 refer to? (PASSAGE THREE)
 
【正确答案】
【答案解析】 语义题。原文第四段第二句提到，只有意识形态才能阐明这种差异。而前一句指出学校的行政人员被给予高薪，相比之下，那些在处境危险的院系教书的初级甚至高级教师的收入就显得相形见绌了，由dwarf一词可知，在处境危险的院系教书的教师薪水不高，因此，这种差异是指行政人员的高薪与在处境危险的院系中工作的教师的低薪之间的差距，故答案为“The income gap between administrators and teachers in at-risk departments. ”。
单选题     What is the purpose of the writer in writing this passage? (PASSAGE THREE)
 
【正确答案】
【答案解析】 主旨题。解答本题应通览全文，并辨清文章结构。作者在文章第一段提到美国的人文学院再次遭到裁撤，并引出其真实原因是隐藏的意识形态在起作用；然后第二段到第五段，通过将纽约州立大学石溪分校因资金问题而取消人文学院所带来的潜在不良影响，与该校耗费巨资打造“超越”项目的不妥之处进行对比，表明了作者对取消人文学院持否定的态度；第六段至第八段则举例说明大学砍掉人文学科这一问题的普遍性；第九段表明大学是学习人文学科的唯一机会，不容错过；最后五段介绍了学习人文学科的好处。综合考虑，作者写本文的目的是为了“反对砍掉大学的人文学院”，故答案为“To object to cutting the humanities departments at universities. ”。