Passage One?

The extent and limits of ape(猿) intelligence is a hct area in science， but most of the research has focused on cognition. Now a team of scientists has turned the spotlight on emotions， and how well apes can read the humankind as displayed in our facial expressions.?

A paper in the September issue of the journal Developmental Science describes studies from the Wolfgang Kohler Primate Research Center in Leipzig， Germany. In the first test， a researchers sat at a table on one side of a panel while an apes at on the other side. Two opaque boxes rested on the table. The scient it opened one box(making sure the ape could not see inside) and smiled with pleasure. He next opened the other and made a disgusted face. The ape was then allowed to reach through one of the holes in the panel and pick one box. Which would he choose??

In 57 percent of the tests， the ape chose the box that cli cited a smile from the scient it rather than an expression of disgust. Good choice. The box that brought the smile contained a grape， and the ape was rewarded for his perspicacity(敏銳) in reading human facial expressions. The other box contained dead insects. The apes ‘skill at reading an expression of happiness indicates that they can read meaning in the emotional expressions on human faces， suggesting that despite 6 million years of separate evolution apes and humans share a common emotional language.?

In the next experiments， the set-up was the same. An ape saw the scient it holdup a grape and a slice of banana， but his view was then blocked as the scientist put one treat under one cup and the other under the other cup. The ape then watched as the scientist looked under each of the two cups in turn， making an expression of happiness at one and of disgust at the other The scientist next reached under one cup(at this point， the ape's view was again blocked， so he could not see which cup the scientist chose) an date what was inside. His view restored， the ape saw the scientist chewing something with pleasure， and then was allowed to choose a cup for himself?

This time the apes tended to choose the cup that had triggered the expression of disgust. Counterintuitive(違反 常理的) ?Not at all The apes went beyond the far too smple“pick cup that elicited happy face “to make a fairly sophisticated computation. That is， they seemed to reason that the human would eat the food that made him smile， emptying that cup， with the result that only the disgust inducing cup would still contain a snack.?

1.The Wolfgang Kohler Primate Research Center is studying _?

A.how apes express their emotions?

B.how apes understand our emotions?

C.the difference between apes ‘a(chǎn)nd human's emotions?

D.the difference between apes ‘cognition and emotions?

2.In the first test， apes tended to choose the box with a grape inside because?

A.they knew their good choice would be rewarded

B.they read the indication of emotions on human faces?

C.they related the expression of happiness to a reward in the box?

D.they were more sensitive to expression of happiness than disgust?

3.By means of the next experiments， scient its intended to?

A.prove the relation be i ween expressions and emotions?

B.find the way in which apes express their emotions?

C.confirm the result of the first test?

D.study apes ‘reactions to emotions?

4.According to the scient its， the ape's choice in the next experiments was?

A.simply instinctive?

B.like rational thinking?

C.as intelligent as human?

D.beyond expectation?

5.The research on ape emotions is aimed at understanding?

A.the intelligence of apes?

B.the computation ability of apes?

C.the evolutionary stages of apes?

D.the difference between man and apes Passage?

Two People?

want action on noise， a recent public meeting in Brisbane showed. Some want technical improvements such as quieter air conditioners or better sound barriers around major roads. Others want tougher laws to restrict noise from building sites or to require owners to take responsibility for barking dogs. But the highest priority was a noise complaints system that works.?

Brisbane City Council receives more complaints about noise than all other problems put together So it conducted a survey and found that about half its residents are upset by noise in one form or another traffic， mowers， pool pumps， air conditioners or loud parties. This inspired the Council to bring together more than 100 citizens one evening to talk through a range of options.?

The meeting found the present regulatory system bizarre. Depending on the problem， responsibility for noise can lie with the Council the Environment Protection Authority， one of three government departments or even the police. So complainants often feel they are getting the run round. When the people at the forum were asked to vote for changes， the strongest response was for a 24-hour noise hot ne to be the first port of call for all complaints.?

The forum also favored regulatory measures， such as tougher minimum standards for no is c in appliances like air conditioners. This even makes economic sense， as noise is a waste of energy and money. Other measures the meeting supported were wider buffer(緩沖) zones around noisy activities and controls to keep heavy traffic away from residential areas.?

But there are obvious conflicts. Many people like to have a bar within walking distance if they feel like a drink， but they don’t want a noisy pub keeping them awake when they want an early night. Most people want to live near a major road providing good access to other parts of the city， but they don’t want the problem of road noise.

I was most interested by the proposals aimed at behavioral change. There was strong support for measures to reduce traffic：better public transport， cycleways and footpaths， even charges for road use. Many people optimistically thought industry awards for biter equipment would stimulate the production of quieter appliances. It was even suggested that noise from building sites could be alleviated if Brisbane adopted daylight saving， thus shifting the working day and providing longer， quieter evenings.?

6.In the recent public meeting in Brishbane， people showed greatest dissatisfaction with?

A.the technical flaws of the air conditioners?

B.the poor noise barriers around major roads?

C.the inefficient system for noise complaints?

D.the late working time of the building sites?

7.By saying that the complainants feel that “they are getting the run-round"， the author means?

A.the complainants are unfairly treated by the government departments?

B.the government departments seldom respond to the complaints?

C.it is in explicit which department is responsible for the complaints?

D.complaints will be treated only after being approved by all three departments?

8.Which of the following measures is mentioned as not only beneficial environmentally but also economically??

A.Enforcing stricter noise control on electrical apparatus.?

B.Prohibiting heavy traffic from entering residential areas.?

C.Launching a24hournoisehotlie.?

D.Increasing the charges for road use.?

9.What was the author's attitude towards the industry awards for quieter??

A.Skeptical.?

B.Disappointed.?

C.Concemed.?

D.Optimistic.?

10.The passage points out daylight saving could be adopted in order to?

A.prolong the daytime?

B.advance the working time?

C.shorten the working tie?

D.save time and energy?

Passage Three?

Google recently introduced a new service that adds social networking features to it popular G mail system. The service is called Buzz， and within hours of its release， people were howling about privacy issues—because， in its original form， Buzz showed everyone the list of people you e-mail most frequently. Even people who weren't cheating on their spouses or secretly applying for new jobs found this a little unnerving.?

Google backtracked and changed the software， and apologized for the misstep， claiming that， it just never occurred to us that people might get upset. “The public reaction was something we did not anticipate. But we've reacted very quickly to people ‘sun happiness， ”says Bradley Horowitz， vice president for product management at Google.?

Same goes for Facebook. In December， Facebook rolled out a new set of privacy settings. A spokesman says the move was intended to “empower people “by giving them more“granular”control(“漸進(jìn)式”控制， 指允許不同使 用者存取不同內(nèi)容的應(yīng)用) over their personal information. But many viewed the changes as a sneaky attempt to puslt members expose more information about themselves—partly because its default setting had lost of data， like your photo， city， gender， and information about your family and relationships， setup to be shared with every on con the Internet.(Sure， you could change those settings， but it was still creepy.) Facebook's spokesman says the open settings reflect “shift ng social norms around privacy”. Five years after Facebook was founded， he says， “we've noticed that people are not only sharing more information but also are becoming more comfortable about sharing more information with more people. “Nevertheless， the changes prom pled 10 consumer groups to file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission.?

What's happening is that our privacy has become a kind of currency. Is what we use to pay for online services. Google charges nothing for Gmail； instead， it reads your-email and sends you advertisements based on keywords in your private messages.?

The genius of Google， Facebook， and others is that they've created services that are so useful or entertaining that people will give up some privacy in order to use them Now the trick is to get people to give up more-in ettect， to keep raising the price of the service.?

These companies will never stop trying to chip away at our information. Their entire business model is based on the notion of“monetizing”our privacy. To succeed they must slowly change the notion of privacy itself—the “social norm”， as Facebook puts it—so that what we're giving up doesn't seem so valuable. Then they must gain our trust. Thus each new erosion of privacy comes delivered， paradoxically， with rhetoric(花言巧語(yǔ)) about how Company X really cares about privacy not sure whether Orwell would be appalled or impressed. And who knew Big Brother would be not a big government agency， but a bunch of kids in Silicon Valley??

ll.According to the passage， the original form of Buzz !?

A.was released to test how people regarded their private rights?

B.revolutionized the concept of the social networking function?

C.ruined the reputation of Google’s well-known Gmail system?

D.aroused people ‘sanger when it was added to Gmail system?

12.It can be inferred from Bradley Horowitz's words that?

A.Google thought to promote users ‘a(chǎn)wareness on socializing?

B.Google made a mistake in judging their users ‘needs?

C.people were in tune with Google's developing strategies?

D.the development of the digital age will change old opinions?

13.How does Facebook evaluate people's tolerance on private information sharing??

A.People are still too conservative to share their private information.?

B.People tend to keep up with the change of social norms on privacy.?

C.People have tolerated well when their private information has been shared?

D.People can tolerate the private information sharing within the social norms?

14.The ultimate goal of Google， Facebook and others is to?

A.ask customers to pay more for their service?

B.persuade users to give up rights on privacy?

C.provide more entertainments for online users?

D.upgrade their service to adapt to customers ‘needs?

15.What does the author think of some companies ‘strategies on privacy?

A.They intrude people's privacy under tricky disguise?

B.They endeavor to change people ‘side as on privacy?

C.They fr gh ten people to give up some privacy.?

D.They take serious responsibility for people's privacy?

Passage Four?

The organization behind the Law School Admission Test reported that the number of tests it administered this year dropped by more than 16 percent， the largest decline in more than a decade.?

The decline reflects a spread ng view that the legal market in the United States is in terrible shape and will have a hard tie absorbing the roughly 45， 000 students who are expected to graduate from law school in each of the next three years.?

Many lawyers and law professors have argued in recent years that the legal market will ethers top developing or shrink as technology allows more low-end legal work to be handled overseas， and as corporations demand more cost-efficient fee arrangements from their firms?

That argument， and news that so many new lawyers are struggling with immense deb， is changing the way law school is perceived by undergrads. Word is getting through that law school is no longer a safe place to sit out an economic recession—an article of faith for years—and that strong grades at an above-average school no longer guarantees a six-figure law firm job?

“For along time there has been this cultural y embedded perception that if you go to law school， it will be worth the money， ”said Kyle McEntee of Law School Transparency. “The idea that law school is an easy ticket to financial security is finally breaking down.”?

Law schools have also suffered through some critical press in the last couple of years. Some blogs， most of them written by unemployed or underemployed graduates， have accused law schools of tempting students with questionable data. Attention has focused on a crucial statistic：the percentage of graduates who are employed nine months after graduation.?

In recent months， class-action lawsuits have been fed against more than a dozen law schools， charging that students were deceived into enrolling by postgraduate employment figures that were vastly， and falsely， inflated(夸 張的) .Even if law schools are able to defeat these lawsuits-and many legal scholars anticipate they will—the media attention has been bruising.?

For some law schools， the gradually diminishing number of test-takers represents a serious long-term challenge.?

“What Id anticipate is that you’ll see the biggest falloff in applications in the bottom end of the law school food chain， ”said Andrew Morris of the University of Alabama School of Law. “Those schools are going to have significant difficulty because they are dependent on tuition to fund themselves and they'll either have to cute class size to maintain standards， or accept students with lower levels.”?

If they take the second course， Mr.Morriss said， it would hurt the school three years later because there is a strong correlation between poor performance on the LSAT and poor performance on the bar exam. If student start failing the bar， then the prestige of the school will drop， which would mean lowering standards even more. “At that point， ”Mr.Morriss said， “the school is risking a death spiral.”?

16.The deeline of the number of test-takers in the Law Sehool Admission Tests reflects that

A.the tests become more difficult?

B.the test fee has increased?

C.the total number of college students drops?

D.it difficult for law school graduates to find jobs?

17.The reason for the shrinkage of legal market is that?

A.technology develops too fast?

B.more simple legal work is dealt with abroad?

C.companies become more efficient?

D.companies cut down the fee arrangements?

18.What did the undergrads think about the law school in the past??

A.Law schools were not attractive to students anymore?

B.Students graduated from law schools would have heavy debts.?

C.Graduates of law schools could find a job even in the recession?

D.Law schools meant a good job in the law firm with high salary.?

19.What's the effect of test-takers ‘reduction on the worst law schools??

A.Some law schoolteachers will lose their jobs.?

B.Those schools will have financial problems.?

C.The class hours will be shortened.?

D.Those schools will have to recruit younger students.?

20.What's Andrew Morris’s attitude towards the second solution of the worst law schools??

A.Negative.?

B.Neutral.?

C.Uninterested?

D.Supportive.