《2022年考博英语-沈阳药科大学考前模拟强化练习题92（附答案详解）》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《2022年考博英语-沈阳药科大学考前模拟强化练习题92（附答案详解）（40页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、2022年考博英语-沈阳药科大学考前模拟强化练习题（附答案详解）1. 单选题Irans possible acquisition of nuclear weapons is a serious matter, but it does not _ military action.问题1选项A.compromiseB.easeC.accommodateD.justify【答案】C【解析】句间逻辑中的转折关系。A选项compromise“妥协，折中”；B选项ease“减轻，缓解”；C选项accommodate“给提供方便”；D选项justify“证明是正当的；替辩护”。句意：虽然伊朗可能拥有核武器是
2、一个严重的问题，但这不_军事行动。根据but推断，前后两句意思发生了转折，前半句表达的是问题的严重性，那么后半句表达的是这件严重的事情还算好的一面，C选项accommodate“给提供方便”符合语境，句意为“虽然伊朗可能拥有核武器是一个严重的问题，但它不用于军事行动”。因此，本题最佳选项为C。2. 单选题Trans World Airlines (TWA) was criticized for trying to cover up the truth rather than promptly notifying victims families.问题1选项A.brieflyB.quicklyC
3、.accuratelyD.earnestly【答案】B【解析】【选项释义】A. briefly 简略地 B. quickly 迅速地C. accurately 准确地 D. earnestly 真诚地【考查点】副词辨析【解题思路】划线词是用来修饰“通知遇难者家属（notifying victims families）”，根据句意，航空公司因没有这么做而受到批评。根据常识，发生空难后正确的做法应该是“迅速通知家属”。B选项“迅速地”符合原句逻辑。原文promptly“迅速地”。【干扰项排除】A、C、D选项与原文不符。【句意】环球航空公司（TWA）因试图掩盖真相而没有及时通知遇难者家属而受到批评。
4、3. 单选题Bruce Stephen gripped the _ wheel hard as the car bounced up and down.问题1选项A.stirringB.drivingC.steeringD.revolving【答案】C【解析】考查形容词辨析与上下文语义。A选项stirring“激动人心的，活跃的；搅动（stir的ing形式）”；B选项driving“起推动作用的；有巨大影响力”；开车（drive的ing形式）；C选项steering“驾驶，掌舵（stir的ing形式）”；D选项revolving“旋转的；旋转（revolve的ing形式）”。句意：在汽车上下颠
5、簸的时候，Bruce Stephen紧紧地抓住方向盘。steering wheel表示方向盘，C选项最符合句意。4. 单选题The west is traditionally the land of the pioneers and the cowboys, where _ could be easily made in cattle or land.问题1选项A.fortunesB.propertyC.opportunitiesD.treasure【答案】A【解析】考查名词辨析与固定搭配。A选项fortunes“一大笔钱”；B选项property“（某人的）财产；不动产”，强调归属；C选项o
6、pportunities“机会”；D选项treasure“金银财宝，指金银珠宝一类”。句意：传统上西部是拓荒者和牛仔的领地，在那里可以很容易的用牛或者土地创造_。根据句意，此处是指用牛和土地就可以创造财富，排除C选项；不强调财富的归属，排除B选项；不是特指金银珠宝一类，排除D选项。另外，原文_ could be easily made，考查固定搭配make a fortune/make fortunes“发大财；赚大钱；创造财富”，A选项最符合语境。因此，本题最佳选项为A。5. 单选题In most peoples mind, growth is associated with prosper
7、ity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied
8、 by a growth in population. So, which is correct: growth means prosperity and no growth means adversity, or growth means adversity and no growth means.what?What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning o
9、f the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous, if not cruel, the pompous postulating of th
10、e comfortable and the secure. But is it? Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries? If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after
11、 a century of dedication to growth?To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries-the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth nostrum propounded through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to th
12、e people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agri-businesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and arboreal treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of t
13、heir local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crushing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of luxury cars, the padding of Swiss bank accounts, and the buying of condominiums in Miami?Admittedly, this is an oversim
14、plification, which applies to no country in its entirety and to some countries not at all. But the point, I believe, remains valid; that growth in under developed countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefi
15、ts and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.So, do we need growth for prosperity? Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to mans ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understanding. Anything that affects their functio
