问答题 .  SECTION A MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS
    In this section there are four passages followed by fourteen multiple choice questions. For each multiple choice question, there are four suggested answers marked .4, 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)Cheating in sport is as old as sport itself. The athletes of ancient Greece used potions to fortify themselves before a contest, and their modern counterparts have everything from anabolic steroids and growth hormones to doses of extra red blood cells with which to invigorate theft bodies. These days, however, such stimulants are frowned on, and those athletes must therefore run the gauntlet of organizations such as the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), which would rather that athletes competed without resorting to them.
    (2)The agencies have had remarkable success. Testing for anabolic steroids (in other words, artficial testosterone) was introduced in the 1970s, and the incidence of cheating seems to have fallen dramatically as a result. The tests, however, are not foolproof. And a study just published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism by Jenny Jakobsson Schulze and her colleagues at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden suggests that an individual's genetic make-up could confound them in two different ways. One genotype, to use the jargon, may allow athletes who use anabolic steroids to escape detection altogether. Another may actually be convicting the innocent.
    (3)The test usually employed for testosterone abuse relies on measuring the ratio of two chemicals found in the urine: testosterone glucuronide (TG) and epitestosterone glucuronide (EG). The former is produced when testosterone is broken down, while the latter is unrelated to testosterone metabolism, and can thus serve as a reference point for the test. Any ratio above four of the former to one of the latter is, according to official Olympic policy, considered suspicious and leads to more tests.
    (4)However, the production of TG is controlled by an enzyme that is, in turn, encoded by a gene called UGT2B17. This gene comes in two varieties, one of which has a part missing and therefore does not work properly. A person may thus have none, one or two working copies of UGT2B17, since he inherits one copy from each parent. Dr. Schulze guessed that different numbers of working copies would produce different test results. She therefore gave healthy male volunteers whose genes had been examined a single 360mg shot of testosterone (the standard dose for legitimate medical use) and checked their urine to see whether the shot could be detected.
    (5)The result was remarkable. Nearly half of the men who carried no functional copies of UGT2B17 would have gone undetected in the standard doping test. By contrast, 14% of those with two functional copies of the gene were over the detection threshold before they had even received an injection. The researchers estimate this would give a false-positive testing rate of 9% in a random population of young men.
    (6)Dr. Schulze also says there is substantial ethnic variation in UGT2B17 genotypes. Two-thirds of Asians have no functional copies of the gene (which means they have a naturally low ratio of TG to EG), compared with under a tenth of Caucasians—something the anti-doping bodies may wish to take into account.
    (7)In the meantime, Dr. Schulze's study does seem to offer innocents a way of defending themselves. Athletes traveling to Beijing for the Olympic games may be wise to travel armed not only with courage and the "spirit of Olympianism", but also with a copy of their genetic profile, just in case.
    PASSAGE TWO
    (1)Asked what job they would take if they could have any, people unleash their imaginations and dream of exotic places, powerful positions or work that involves alcohol and a paycheck at the same time. Or so you'd think.
    (2)None of those appeals to Lori Miller who, as a lead word processor, has to do things that don't seem so dreamy, which include proofreading, spell checking and formatting. But she loves it. "I like and respect nearly all my co-workers, and most of them feel the same way about me," she says. "Just a few things would make it a little better," she says, including a shorter commute and the return of some great people who used to work there. And one more thing: She'd appreciate if everyone would put their dishes in the dishwasher.
    (3)It's not a lot to ask for and, it turns out, a surprising number of people dreaming up their dream job don't ask for much. One could attribute it to lack of imagination, setting the bar low or "anchoring," the term referring to the place people start and never move far from. One could chalk it up to rationalizing your plight.
    (4)But maybe people simply like what they do and aren't, as some management would have you believe, asking for too much—just the elimination of a small but disproportionately powerful amount of office inanity. That may be one reason why two-thirds of Americans would take the same job again "without hesitation" and why 90% of Americans are at least somewhat satisfied with their jobs, according to a Gallup Poll.
    (5)The matters that routinely rank high on a satisfaction scale don't relate to money but "work as a means for demonstrating some sort of responsibility and achievement," says Barry Staw, professor of leadership and communication at University of California, Berkeley's Haas School of Business. "Pay—even when it's important, it's not for what you can buy, it's a validation of your work and approval."
    (6)So, money doesn't interest Elizabeth Gray as much as a level playing field. "I like what I do," says the city project manager who once witnessed former colleagues award a contractor, paid for work he never completed, with the title of "Contractor of the Year".
    (7)Thus: "My dream job would be one free of politics," she says. "All advancement would be based on merit. The people who really did the work would be the ones who received the credit."
    (8)Frank Gastner has a similar ideal: "VP in charge of destroying inane policies." Over the years, he's had to hassle with the simplest of design flaws that would cost virtually nothing to fix were it not for the bureaucracies that entrenched them. So, the retired manufacturer's representative says he would address product and process problems with the attitude, "It's not right; let's fix it now without a committee meeting."
    (9)Monique Huston actually has her dream job—and many tell her it's theirs, too. She's general manager of a pub in Omaha, the Dundee Dell, which boasts 650 single-malt scotches on its menu. She visits bars, country clubs, people's homes and Scotland for whiskey tasting. "I stumbled on my passion in life," she says.
    (10)Still, some nights she doesn't feel like drinking—or smiling. "Your face hurts," she complains. And when you have your dream job you wonder what in the world you'll do next.
    (11)One of the big appeals of a dream job is dreaming about it. Last year, George Reinhart saw an ad for a managing director of the privately owned island of Mustique in the West Indies.
    (12)He was lured by the salary ($1 million) and a climate that beat the one enjoyed by his Boston suburb. A documentary he saw about Mustique chronicled the posh playground for the likes of Mick Jagger and Princess Margaret. He reread Herman Wouk's "Don't Stop the Carnival," about a publicity agent who leaves his New York job and buys an island hotel. In April of last year, he applied for the job.
    (13)He heard nothing. So last May, he wrote another letter: "I wanted to thank you for providing the impetus for so much thought and fun." He didn't get the job but, he says, he takes comfort that the job hasn't been filled. "So, I can still dream," he adds.
    (14)I told him the job had been filled by someone—but only after he said, "I need to know, because then I can begin to dream of his failure."
    PASSAGE THREE
    (1)Israel is a "powerhouse of agricultural technology", says Abraham Goren of Elbit Imaging (EI), an Israeli multinational. The country's cows can produce as much as 37 liters of milk a day. In India, by contrast, cows yield just seven liters. Spotting an opportunity, EI is going into the Indian dairy business. It will import 10,000 cows and supply fortified and flavored milk to supermarkets and other buyers.
    (2)So will EI lap up India's milk market? Not necessarily. As the Times of India points out, its cows will ruminate less than 100 miles from the headquarters of a formidable local producer—the Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation, otherwise known as Amul. This Farmers' Co-operative spans 2.6m members, collects 6.5m liters of milk a day, and boasts one of the longest-running and best-loved advertising campaigns in India. It has already shown "immense resilience" in the face of multinational competition, says Arindam Bhattacharya of the Boston Consulting Group (BCG). Its ice-cream business survived the arrival of Unilever; its chocolate milk has thrived despite Nestlé.
    (3)Indeed, Amul is one of 50 firms—from China, India, Brazil, Russia and six other emerging economies— that BCG has anointed as "local dynamos". They are prospering in their home market, are fending off multinational rivals, and are not focused on expanding abroad. BCG discovered many of these firms while drawing up its "global challengers" list of multinationals from the developing world. The companies that were venturing abroad most eagerly, it discovered, were not necessarily the most successful at home.
    (4)Emerging economies are still prey to what Harvard's Dani Rodrik has called "export fetishism". International success remains a firm's proudest boast, and with good reason: economists have shown that exporters are typically bigger, more efficient and pay better than their more parochial rivals. "Exporters are better" was the crisp verdict of a recent review of the data.
    (5)Countries like India and Brazil were, after all, once secluded backwaters fenced off by high tariffs. Prominent firms idled along on government favors and captive markets. In that era, exporting was a truer test of a company's worth. But as such countries have opened up, their home markets have become more trying places. Withstanding the onslaught of foreign firms on home soil may be as impressive a feat as beating them in global markets.
    (6)BCG describes some of the ways that feat has been accomplished. Of its 50 dynamos, 41 are in consumer businesses, where they can exploit a more intimate understanding of their compatriots' tastes. It gives the example of Gol, a Brazilian budget airline, which bet that its cash-strapped customers would sacrifice convenience and speed for price. Many Gol planes therefore depart at odd hours and make several hops to out-of-the-way locations, rather than flying directly.
    (7)Similarly astute was India's Titan Industries, which has increased its share of India's wristwatch market despite the entry of foreign brands such as Timex and Swatch. It understood that Indians, who expect a good price even for old newspapers, do not throw their watches away lightly, and has over 700 after-sales centers that will replace straps and batteries.
    (8)Exporters tend to be more capital-intensive than their home-bound peers; they also rely more on skilled labor. Many local dynamos, conversely, take full advantage of the cheap workforce at their disposal. Focus Media, China's biggest "out of home" advertising company, gets messages out on flat-panel displays in 85,000 locations around the country. Those displays could be linked and reprogrammed electronically, but that might fall foul of broadcast regulations. So instead the firm's fleet of workers on bicycles replaces the displays' discs and flash-cards by hand.
    (9)The list of multinationals resisted or repelled by these dynamos includes some of the world's biggest names: eBay and Google in China; Wal-Mart in Mexico; SAP in Brazil. But Mr. Goren of EI is not too worried about Amul. The market is big enough for everybody, he insists. Nothing, then, is for either company to cry about.
    PASSAGE FOUR
    (1)It is hard for modern people to imagine the life one hundred years ago. No television, no plastic, no ATMs, no DVDs. Illnesses like tuberculosis, diphtheria, pneumonia meant only death. Of course, cloning appeared only in science fiction. Not to mention, computer and Internet.
    (2)Today, our workplace are equipped with assembly lines, fax machines, computers. Our daily life is cushioned by air conditioners, cell phones. Antibiotics helped created a long list of miracle drugs. The by-pass operation saved millions. The discovery of DNA has revolutionized the way scientists think about new therapies. Man finally stepped on the magical and mysterious Moon. With the rapid changes we have been experiencing, the anticipation for the future is higher than ever.
    (3)A revolutionary manufacturing process made it possible for anyone to own a car. Henry Ford is the man who put the world on wheels.
    (4)When it comes to singling out those who have made a difference in all our lives, you cannot over-look Henry Ford. A historian a century from now might well conclude that it was Henry Ford who most influenced all manufacturing everywhere, even to this day, by introducing a new way to make cars—one, strange to say, that originated in slaughter houses.
    (5)Back in the early 1900s, slaughter houses used what could have been called a "disassembly line." That is, the carcass of a slain steer or a pig was moved past various meat-cutters, each of whom cut off only a certain portion. Ford reversed this process to see if it would speed up production of a part of an automobile engine called a magneto. Rather than have each worker completely assemble a magneto, one of its elements was placed on a conveyer, and each worker, as it passed, added another component to it, the same one each time. Professor David Hounshell, of The University of Delaware, an expert on industrial development tells what happened: "The previous day, workers carrying out the entire process had averaged one magneto every 20 minutes. But on that day, on the line, the assembly team averaged one every 13 minutes and 10 seconds per person."
    (6)Within a year, the time had been reduced to five minutes. In 1913, Ford went all the way. Hooked together by ropes, partially assembled vehicles were towed past workers who completed them one piece at a time. It wasn't long before Ford was turning out several hundred thousand cars a year, a remarkable achievement then. And so efficient and economical was this new system that he cut the price of his cars in half, to $260, putting them within reach of all those who, up until that time, could not afford them. Soon, auto makers over the world copied him. In fact, he encouraged them to do so by writing a book about all of his innovations, entitled Today and Tomorrow. The Age of the Automobile had arrived. Today, aided by robots and other forms of automation, everything from toasters to perfumes is made on assembly lines.
    (7)Edsel Ford, Henry's great-grandson, and a Ford vice president: "I think that my great-grandfather would just be amazed at how far technology has come."
    (8)Many of today's innovations come from Japan. Norman Bodek, who publishes books about manufacturing processes, finds this ironic. On a recent trip to Japan he talked to two of the top officials of Toyota. "When I asked them where these secrets came from, where their ideas came from to manufacture in a totally different way, they laughed, and they said. 'Well. We just read it in Henry Ford's book from 1926: Today and Tomorrow.'"1.  The second paragraph implies that testing for anabolic steroids ______.(PASSAGE ONE)