染雾考研英语真题 篇一
如何高效备考考研英语
备考考研英语是每个考研学生都面临的挑战。在备考过程中，如何高效地利用时间和资源是非常重要的。下面将介绍一些备考考研英语的高效方法。
首先，了解考试内容和要求是非常关键的。仔细阅读考试大纲和考试说明，了解考试的题型和分值分布。这样可以帮助你更好地规划备考时间和精力，有针对性地进行复习。
其次，建立一个合理的备考计划。根据自己的时间安排和个人情况，制定出一个详细的备考计划。这个计划应该包括每天的学习时间安排、复习内容和目标，以及检验和评估自己学习进度的方法。通过制定备考计划，你可以更好地管理时间，避免拖延和浪费。
第三，多做真题和模拟试题。考研英语真题是备考的重要资源，通过做真题可以熟悉考试题型和要求，提高解题的技巧和速度。同时，模拟试题可以帮助你考查自己的学习情况和掌握程度。通过不断做真题和模拟试题，你可以找到自己的薄弱环节，并有针对性地进行复习和提高。
第四，注重阅读和听力能力的提高。考研英语中，阅读和听力是重要的考查内容。通过大量的阅读和听力练习，可以提高自己的阅读理解和听力理解能力。建议选择一些经典的英语文章和英语听力材料进行练习，同时还可以利用一些学习app和在线资源进行学习。在练习中，可以注意一些词汇和句型的积累，提高自己的语言表达能力。
最后，保持积极的学习态度和良好的生活习惯。备考考研英语是一项长期而艰苦的任务，需要坚持和耐心。保持积极的学习态度，相信自己的能力，不断努力和进步。同时，保持良好的生活习惯，合理安排休息和运动，保持身心健康，才能有更好的备考效果。
通过以上的方法和建议，相信你可以更加高效地备考考研英语，取得优异的成绩。祝你成功！
考研英语真题 篇二
备考考研英语写作的技巧与方法
备考考研英语写作是考研学生的一项重要任务。写作的水平不仅是考试的一部分，也是评价考生英语综合能力的重要指标。下面将介绍一些备考考研英语写作的技巧与方法。
首先，了解写作的题型和要求。仔细阅读考试大纲和考试说明，了解写作的题型和分值分布。这样可以帮助你更好地理解写作的要求和评分标准，有针对性地进行备考。
其次，积累写作素材和语言表达。备考考研英语写作，需要有一定的写作素材和语言表达能力。建议多读一些英语文章和英语书籍，积累一些写作素材和观点。同时，注意一些常用的写作句型和表达方式，提高自己的语言表达能力。
第三，多做写作练习和模拟题。通过不断的写作练习和模拟题练习，可以提高自己的写作能力和应试技巧。建议选择一些经典的写作题目进行练习，模拟考试的时间和条件，提高自己的应试能力和心理素质。
第四，注重写作结构和逻辑。写作的结构和逻辑是考察考生写作能力的重要方面。在写作过程中，要注意文章的整体结构和段落间的逻辑关系。建议在写作之前，先做一个写作的大纲，明确文章的主题和论点，有条理地展开写作。
最后，多进行写作修改和评估。写作之后，要进行多次修改和评估。可以找一些专业的写作指导教师或者同学进行互评，找出文章的不足之处，进行修改和提高。同时，也可以参考一些优秀范文和写作指导书籍，学习一些写作的技巧和方法。
通过以上的方法和建议，相信你可以更好地备考考研英语写作，取得优异的成绩。祝你成功！
考研英语真题 篇三
2014考研英语真题
There are many reasons for this. One is the excessive costs of a legal education. There is just one path for a lawyer in most American states: a four-year undergraduate degree in some unrelated subject, then a three-year law degree at one of 200 law schools authorized by the American Bar Association and an expensive preparation for the bar exam. This leaves today’s average law-school graduate with $100,000 of debt on top of undergraduate debts. Law-school debt means that many cannot afford to go into government or non-profit work, and that they have to work fearsomely hard.
Reforming the system would help both lawyers and their customers. Sensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them. One idea is to allow people to study law as an undergraduate degree. Another is to let students sit for the bar after only two years of law school. If the bar exam is truly a stern enough test for a would-be lawyer, those who can sit it earlier should be allowed to
do so. Students who do not need the extra training could cut their debt mountain by a third.
The other reason why costs are so high is the restrictive guild-like ownership structure of the business. Except in the District of Columbia, non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm. This keeps fees high and innovation slow. There is pressure for change from within the profession, but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.
In fact, allowing non-lawyers to own shares in law firms would reduce costs and improve services to customers, by encouraging law firms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus on improving firms’ efficiency. After all, other countries, such as Australia and Britain, have started liberalizing their legal professions. America should follow.
26.a lot of students take up law as their profession due to
[A]the growing demand from clients.
[B]the increasing pressure of inflation.
[C]the prospect of working in big firms.
[D]the attraction of financial rewards.
27.Which of the following adds to the costs of legal education in most American states?
[A]Higher tuition fees for undergraduate studies.
[B]Admissions approval from the bar association.
[C]Pursuing a bachelor’s degree in another major.
[D]Receiving training by professional associations.
28.Hindrance to the reform of the legal system originates from
[A]lawyers’ and clients’ strong resistance.
[B]the rigid bodies governing the profession.
[C]the stem exam for would-be lawyers.
[D]non-professionals’ sharp criticism.
29.The guild-like ownership structure is considered “restrictive”partly because it
[A]bans outsiders’ involvement in the profession.
[B]keeps lawyers from holding law-firm shares.
[C]aggravates the ethical situation in the trade.
[D]prevents lawyers from gaining due profits.
30.In this text, the author mainly discusses
[A]flawed ownership of America’s law firms and its causes.
[B]the factors that help make a successful lawyer in America.
[C]a problem in America’s legal profession and solutions to it.
[D]the role of undergraduate studies in America’s legal education.
Text 3
The US$3-million Fundamental physics prize is indeed an interesting experiment, as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March. And it is far from the only one of its type. As a News Feature article in Nature discusses, a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years. Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs. These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.
What’s not to like? Quite a lot, according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature. You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels, The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them, say scientists. They could distort the
The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism. Some want to shock, others to draw people into science, or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.
As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes—both new and old—are distributed. The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include. But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson. The Nobels were, of course, themselves set up by a very rich inpidual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money. Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.
As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards, two things seem clear. First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere, It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism—that is the culture of research, after all—but it is the prize-givers’ money to do with as they please. It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
31. The Fundamental Physics Prize is seen as
[A]a symbol of the entrepreneurs’ wealth.
[B]a possible replacement of the Nobel Prizes.
[C]an example of bankers’ investments.
[D]a handsome reward for researchers.
32. The critics think that the new awards will most benefit
[A]the profit-oriented scientists.
[B]the founders of the new awards.
[C]the achievement-based system.
[D]peer-review-led research.
33. The discovery of the Higgs boson is a typical case which involves
[A]controversies over the recipients’ status.
[B]the joint effort of modern researchers.
[C]legitimate concerns over the new prizes.
[D]the demonstration of research findings.
34. According to Paragraph 4,which of the following is true of the Nobels?
[A]Their endurance has done justice to them.
[B]Their legitimacy has long been in dispute.
[C]They are the most representative honor.
[D]History has never cast doubt on them.
35.The author believes that the now awards are
[A]acceptable despite the criticism.
[B]harmful to the culture of research.
[C]subject to undesirable changes.
[D]unworthy of public attention.
Text 4
“The Heart of the Matter,” the just-released report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAAS), deserves praise for affirming the importance of the humanities and social sciences to the prosperity and security of liberal democracy in America. Regrettably, however, the report’s failure to address the true nature of the crisis facing liberal education may cause more harm than good.
