《【考研英语】2021年8月上海大学研究生招生考试英语练习题100道（附答案解析）》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《【考研英语】2021年8月上海大学研究生招生考试英语练习题100道（附答案解析）（64页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、全文可编辑word文档 页眉与背景水印可删除【考研英语】2021年8月上海大学研究生招生考试英语练习题100道（附答案解析）第1题【单选题】All plays are alike to me just as all music is alike to Tony. A、所有的戏剧对于我就像所有的音乐对托尼一样。 B、正如托尼对音乐毫无欣赏一样，我对戏剧也是一窍不通。 C、我对戏剧就像托尼对音乐一样，非常欣赏。 D、正如托尼喜欢所有的音乐一样，我也非常喜欢所有的戏剧。【正确答案】B【答案解析】答案选B。本题主要考查英语结构。有些句子虽然没有使用否定句，也没有使用具有否定意味的动词、名词、形容词等，
2、但是上下文却暗示着一种否定意味。allis/are alike 可直译为：“（对某人来说）都一样”，言外之意是说自己没能力加以辨别或欣赏。第2题【单选题】It is so difficult a problem that _ student in this class _ work it out. A、any, cant B、no, can C、every, can D、no, cant【正确答案】B【答案解析】此题很容易误选A，因为从句意上看，选A可将此句理解为“这个问题是如此之难，这个班上任何一个学生都不可能做出来”。但按英语习惯，any(任何一个)作为非肯定词，它只能出现在否定词not之
3、后，而不能在其前，即可说not any，但不说any not。所以正确答案应选B。第3题【单选题】Lets _ the bird from the case. A、liberate B、put C、set D、free【正确答案】D【答案解析】句意：咱们把鸟从笼子里放了吧。free意为“使自由；释放”，常与from连用；liberate意为“释放”；put不能和from连用；set后面接from的时候还要加free，即set free from. 第4题【单选题】The construction of the two new stadiums _ by now. A、has been comp
4、leted B、have completed C、has completed D、have been completed【正确答案】A【答案解析】答案选A。考查主谓一致和语态。by now 到在为止，应该用现在完成时。主语是the construction 与 complete 是被动关系，所以选择A项。第5题【单选题】_ me to give you some advice. A、Purchase B、Essence C、Permit D、Bound【正确答案】C【答案解析】Permit 许可；允许。第6题【单选题】We have a _ agreement with her. A、unif
5、orm B、version C、verbal D、utmost【正确答案】C【答案解析】verbal 口头的；言语的；动词的；照字面的。第7题【单选题】The car honked at me until I fastened my seat belt. A、汽车向我发出嘟嘟的声音，直到我系上了安全带。 B、汽车发出嘟嘟的声音，我系上安全带就不响了。 C、汽车在我系上安全带之前发出嘟嘟的声音。 D、汽车发出嘟嘟的声音，我才系上了安全带。【正确答案】B【答案解析】答案选B。until在否定句中表示的意思是“直到才”；在肯定句中等于before；本句的意思是：汽车一直嘟嘟地响，直到我系上安全带才停
6、下来。翻译的时候要体现连词until表示的意思，所以比较恰当的用法应该是B项。A项虽然有“直到”的意思，但是表达方式不符合汉语习惯，意思模糊不清。第8题阅读理解Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. A received one for its “one-click” online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation stra
7、tegy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.Now the nations top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the
8、U.S. court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known, is “a very big deal”, says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law. It “has the potential to eliminate an e
9、ntire class of patents.”Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produce
10、d an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might
11、beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even a
12、s they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the courts judges, rather than a typical panel of thre
13、e, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should “reconsider” its state street Bank ruling.The Federal Circuits action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the jus
14、tices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for “inventions” that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are “reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court”, says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. A、their limited
15、 value to business B、their connection with asset allocation C、the possible restriction on their granting D、the controversy over authorization【正确答案】C【答案解析】同义替换。possible= potential，eliminate= restriction。 A、Its ruling complies with the court decisions. B、It involves a very big business transaction. C、It has been dismissed by the Federal Circuit. D、It may change the legal practices in the U.S.【正确答案】D【答案解析】potential= may, change 对应着第一段和第二段之间的转折。从本段的review，eliminate也可以看出这是一种转折。全文一直没有讲Bilski case的判决的结果，而A、C都是在讲其判决
