2024年4月26日发(作者：)

翻译硕士英语阅读理解专项强化真题试卷29

(总分100,考试时间60分钟)

阅读理解

Beauty has always been regarded as something praiseworthy. Almost everyone thinks

attractive people are happier and healthier, have better marriages and have more respectable

occupations. Personal consultants give them better advice for finding jobs. Even judges are softer

on attractive defendants. But in the executive circle, beauty can become a liability.

While attractiveness is a positive factor, for a man on his way up the executive ladder, it is

harmful to a woman.

Handsome male executives were perceived as having more integrity than plainer men; effort

and ability, were thought to account for their success.

Attractive female executives were considered to have less integrity than unattractive ones;

their success was attributed not to ability but to factors such as luck.

All unattractive women executives were thought to have more integrity and to be more

capable than the attractive female executives. Interestingly, though, the rise of the unattractive

overnight successes was attributed more to personal relationships and less to ability than was that

of attractive overnight successes.

Why are attractive women not thought to be able? An attractive woman is perceived to be

more feminine and an attractive man more masculine than the less attractive ones. Thus, an

attractive women has an advantage in traditionally female jobs, but an attractive women in a

traditionally masculine position appears to lack the "masculine" qualities required.

This is true even in politics. " When the only clue is how he or she looks, people treat men

and women differently. " says Anne Bowman, who recently published a study on the effects of

attractiveness on political candidates. She asked 125 undergraduate students to rank two groups of

photographs, one of men and one of women, in order of attractiveness. The students were told the

photographs were of candidates for political offices. They were asked to rank them again, in the

order they would vote them.

The results showed that attractive males utterly defeated unattractive men, but the women

who had been ranked most attractive invariably received the fewest votes.

1. underlined word "liability" in Paragraph 1 most probably means______.

A. misfortune

B. instability

C. disadvantage

D. burden

2. traditionally female jobs, attractiveness______.

A. reinforces the feminine qualities required

B. makes women look more honest and capable

C. is of primary importance to women

D. often enables women to succeed quickly

3. 's experiment reveals that when it comes to politics, attractiveness______.

A. turns out to be an obstacle men

B. affects men and women alike

C. has as little effect on men as women

D. is more of an obstacle than a benefit to women

4. can be inferred from the passage that people's views on beauty are often______.

A. practical

B. humorous

C. funny

D. radical

5. author writes this passage to______.

A. discuss the negative aspects of being attractive

B. demand equal rights for women

C. give advice to job-seekers who are attractive women in executive and political circles

D. emphasize the importance of appearance

In recent years, nonhuman animals have been at the center of an intense philosophical debate.

In particular, many authors have criticized traditional morality, maintaining that the way in

which we treat members of other species is ethically indefensible. We routinely use animals as

means to our ends—in fact, we treat them in ways in which we would deem it profoundly immoral

to treat human being. Though they are "moral patients" , that is, beings whose treatment may be

subject to moral evaluation—their status is infinitely inferior to ours. Are such double standards

warranted? And, if so, on what grounds?

While not **pletely overlooked by philosophers, the first justification offered is powerful and

widespread at the societal level, mainly due to its simplicity. To the question of what divides us

from the other animals, the answer is; the fact that they are not human. On such a view, what

makes the difference is the possession, or lack, of a genotype characteristics of the species Homo

sapiens. Is this a good reply? No. Those appealing to species membership work within the

framework of the human egalitarian paradigm. And it is just the line of reasoning that supports

human equality that implies, by denying the moral relevance of race or sex membership, the

rejection of the idea that species membership in itself can make a difference in moral status. If one

claims that biological characteristic like race and sex cannot play a role in ethics, how can one

attribute a role to another biological characteristics such as species membership? Moral views that,

while rejecting racism and sexism, accept "speciesism"—the view that grants members of our own

species special moral status—are internally inconsistent.

Sheer speciesism is hardly plausible. But there are more sophisticated ways of defending our

current double standards to which the theoretical defenders of the status quo tend to turn. For most

philosophers, it is not species membership rather than the possession of rationality that plays a

central role. We can set aside for the sake of argument the(questionable)assumption that rationality

is a human prerogative in order to focus on the moral significance attached to rationality.

Though many other defences of the doctrine of human superiority have been put forward, the

appeal to species membership, the appeal to the possession of rationality, as a precondition of

morals , and the appeal to this very same characteristic as a means to intersubjective agreement are

certainly the most basic, around which all the others revolve. If none of them can justify

maintaining nonhuman animals in their present inferior moral condition, it seems plausible to infer

that our current attitude is deeply flawed.

6. ing to traditional morality, ______.

A. animals are rarely thought of as "moral patients"

B. Animals should not be used as means to our ends

C. the ways in which we treat animals is obviously improper

D. the way in which we treat animals now is undisputed

7. this passage, the author______the double standards we use to treat other species.

A. challenges

B. defends

C. justifies

D. verifies

8. first justification offered for the double standards we use to treat other species is______.

A. simplicity

B. racism and sexism

C. species membership

D. human equality

9. r way used to defend the double standards is______.

A. sheer speciecism

B. the possession of rationality

C. for the sake of argument

D. the moral significance

10. author's attitude toward the way in which we currently treat nonhuman animals

is______.

A. impartial

B. indifferent

C. crucial

D. critical

Practically speaking, the artistic maturing of the cinema was the single-handed achievement

of David W. Griffith(1875 - 1948). Before Griffith, photography in dramatic films consisted of

little more than placing the actors before a stationary camera and showing them in full length as

they would have appeared on stage. From the beginning of his career as a director, however,

Griffith, because of his love of Victorian painting, **position. He conceived of the camera image

as having a foreground and a rear ground, as well as the middle distance preferred by most

directors. By 1910 he was using close-ups to reveal significant details of the scene or of the acting

and extreme long shots to achieve a sense of spectacle and distance. His appreciation of the

camera's possibilities produced novel dramatic effects. By splitting an event into fragments and

recording each from the most suitable camera position, he could significantly vary, the emphasis

from camera shot to camera shot.

Griffith also achieved dramatic effects by means of creative editing. By juxtaposing images

and varying the speed and rhythm of their presentation, he could control the dramatic intensity of

the events as the story progressed. Despite the reluctance of his producers, who feared that the