【明德尚行教育】2020年广外英语学硕MA623英语水平考试专业课考研初试回忆真题

明德尚行考研

@Inez
Cloze
It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education.
Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked.
In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community. The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the Standard* written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write ’correctly; deviations from it are said to be 'incorrect!
All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries. The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to ‘improve’ the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterised by its reliance on 'rules' of grammar. Some usages are ‘prescribed’, to be learnt and followed accurately; others are 'proscribed’, to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them.
These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe -to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestley, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that ‘the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language’. Linguistic issues, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modem linguistic approach to grammatical analysis.
In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists’ and 'prescriptivists’ has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other. Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms - of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism.
Proof reading
Devise(→Devising) accurate calendars and clocks that(→to) measure the flow of time has proved to be an elusive, protracted intellectual pursuit. Drawing(→Drawn) to the movements of the heavens and the changing seasons, human developed the calendar. The Sumerians divided the year into 360 days, then designate(→designated) 12 lunar months of 30 days each. The Egyptians extended the year by five days. Latter (→Later) changes by the Romans, plus refinements by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582, which gave us today's Gregorian calendar, accurate to a day in every 3323 year(→years).
Early societies also broke the day into small(→smaller) units, presumably for the same reason as we do now – so we know when we’re supposed to be somewhere. The sun, arching overhead daily, was undoubtedly (加the) first timepiece, followed perhaps by the shadow of a stick sticking (→stuck) in the ground – a crude sundial.
In the 11th century a Chinese scholar named Su Sung invented a huge device that was among the first mechanical water clock(→clocks). More than 30 foot(→feet) high, powered by a waterwheel, his clock signaled the hours with gongs, bells and drums.
In 16th-century Italy, a young medical student named Galileo Galilei is said to have spied a new(→newly) lighted lamp swinging in the cathedral at Pisa. Timing it with his pulse, he found that each swing it took the same amount of time, regardless (加of) the distance traveled. He had discovered the pendulum. But seven decades passed before a Dutch scientist built the first pendulum clock, starting the era of precision timekeeping.

词汇
1.Trip  tour  excursion  expedition （bruise ship）
2.Aggregate demand
3.Ferocity

阅读
1. Any education that matters is liberal. (好像是华研专八阅读书上的) fact-filled man，well-educated man 在工作中怎么怎么样，后面的不记得了
2. 美国的博物馆开始展览不知名艺术家的作品，包括有色人种和女性艺术家
4. Scientists announced another exciting discovery today regarding potentially habitable exoplanets -- K2-18b.在此星球上发现了water vapor，地球的一年是此星球的一个月，star会发出强烈的红光
3.
Dress-down seems to have originated in places where people work through the heat of summer. Dress-down，restricted to Fridays, allows staff to head straight for their out-of-town retreats on Friday evenings without going home to change . But in New York it has now become a week-round state of affairs.
For me ,a manager in the head office of a bank，dress-down is a real headache for two reasons. The first is that it actually requires a new wardrobe（衣柜）. For my male colleagues in the US, it seemed to mean a change from one uniform to another. I basically only own two types of clothes—suits for working in and truly casual clothes for relaxing weekends in the countryside.
Later in London, I was rather confused to discover that my employers had employers had started summer dress-down. At first, I tried to sidestep it in my suit as usual, but my staff complained that they then felt pressured into doing the same. So, I found myself having to buy “smart casual” clothes specifically to wear to work; a ridiculous expense. Even more annoying is the fact that I still have to prepare a suit in my office in case I’m suddenly called to a meeting, where dress-down is banned.
For the other great inconvenience of dress-down is that it makes it easier than ever to spot when colleagues are going to job interviews . For the rest of the year, it is easy enough to arrange these during the working week，but in the summer when dress-down rules, it’ s a dead giveaway to arrive in smart clothes for such a formal appointment. However, I would normally applaud this state of affairs，as most of my time used to be spent trying to prevent valued employees from moving elsewhere.
1．According to the writer. “dress-down” in New York began as a way of_________.
A．discouraging staff from taking summer holidays
B．showing concern for staff who lived out of town
C．rewarding those employees willing to work in the heat
D．making life easier for staff in the summer months

2．What was the writer’s first reaction to the idea of “dress-down” in her London office?
A．She attempted to ignore it.                   B．She argued against it.
C．She recognized the need for it.             D．She urged her staff to adopt it.

3．The aspect of “dress—down” that most annoys the writer is the fact that         .
A．her clients find it embarrassing             B．not everyone has to conform to it
C．it does not apply on all occasions          D．the clothes themselves do not suit her

4．The writer thinks “dress-down”_________ according to the passage.
A．develops her ability to make a business   B．increases her expense on clothes
C．disturbs her personal life after work       D．damages her interpersonal relationships

5．In which aspect of her work does the writer find “dress-down” an advantage?
A．Employing new members of staff.        B．Monitoring the honesty of her staff.
C．Providing her staff with feedback.       D．Ensuring her staff remain loyal.