Part A: Reading Comprehension

Directions: Read the following text. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET. (40 points)

Text 3

The US$3-million Fundamental Physics Prize is indeed an interesting experiment, as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March. And it is far from the only one of its type. As a News Feature article in Nature discusses, a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years. Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs. These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.

What’s not to like? Quite a lot, according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature. You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels. The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them, say scientists. They could distort the achievement-based system of peer-review-led research. They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research. They do not fund peer-reviewed research. They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.

The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism. Some want to shock, others to draw people into science, or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.

As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes-both new and old-are distributed. The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include. But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research-as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson. The Nobels were, of course, themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money. Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.

As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards, two things seem clear. First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere. It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism-that is the culture of research, after all-but it is the prize-givers’ money to do with as they please. It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.

31. The Fundamental Physics Prize is seen as

[A]

a symbol of the entrepreneurs’ wealth. 

[B]

a handsome reward for researchers. 

[C]

a possible replacement of the Nobel Prizes. 

[D]

an example of bankers’ investments. 

32. The critics think that the new awards will most benefit

[A]

the profit-oriented scientists. 

[B]

the achievement-based system. 

[C]

the founders of the new awards. 

[D]

peer-review-led research. 

33. The discovery of the Higgs boson is a typical case which involves

[A]

legitimate concerns over the new prizes. 

[B]

controversies over the recipients’ status. 

[C]

the joint effort of modern researchers. 

[D]

the demonstration of research findings. 

34. According to Paragraph 4, which of the following is true of the Nobels?

[A]

History has never cast doubt on them. 

[B]

Their endurance has done justice to them. 

[C]

They are the most representative honor. 

[D]

Their legitimacy has long been in dispute. 

35. The author believes that the new awards are

[A]

unworthy of public attention. 

[B]

subject to undesirable changes. 

[C]

harmful to the culture of research. 

[D]

acceptable despite the criticism. 

Answers & Explanations (答案与深度解析)

试题精解

31. [B] a handsome reward for researchers.
【解析】细节题。第一段提到，基础物理学奖（Fundamental Physics Prize）绝不是同类中的唯一一个。接着指出：“a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes”（一系列为研究人员提供丰厚奖金的奖项已经加入了诺贝尔奖的行列）。lucrative（赚大钱的/利润丰厚的）同义替换为 B 选项中的 handsome（丰厚的/可观的）。

32. [C] the founders of the new awards.
【解析】细节题。第二段讲述了批评家（critics/scientists）对新奖项的看法：“The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them”（这些新奖项是幕后推手自我推销的手段）。“those behind them”（幕后推手）即创立这些奖项的互联网企业家，完美对应 C 选项“the founders of the new awards”。

33. [C] the joint effort of modern researchers.
【解析】例证题。第四段指出，诺贝尔奖规定每个奖项最多只能有三名获奖者，但这“has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research”（早就被现代研究的合作性质所超越）。紧接着用破折号引出例子：“as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson”（正如在承认希格斯玻色子发现时，关于谁被忽略的不可避免的争论所证明的那样）。因此，发现希格斯玻色子是一个体现“现代研究团队合作（joint effort/collaborative nature）”的典型案例。

34. [B] Their endurance has done justice to them.
【解析】推理题。第四段最后两句谈到了诺贝尔奖的由来和合法性：“The Nobels were... set up by a very rich individual... Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.”（诺贝尔奖也是由一个极其富有的人设立的... 是时间，而非意图，赋予了它们合法性）。“Time”（时间）对应 B 选项的“endurance”（持久/时间的沉淀），“given them legitimacy”（赋予它们合法性/正当性）对应“done justice to them”（公平对待了它们/赋予其公正的地位）。

35. [D] acceptable despite the criticism.
【解析】态度题。最后一段表达了作者对新奖项的态度：“As much as some scientists may complain... two things seem clear.”（尽管一些科学家可能会抱怨，但有两件事是清楚的）。第一，绝大多数研究者被授予此类奖项都会接受；第二，钱和注意力流向科学总归是件好事。最后结论：“It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.”（带着感激和优雅接受这些礼物是明智的）。这表明作者认为这些新奖项“尽管有批评，但也是可以接受的（acceptable despite the criticism）”。

考研核心句型与长难句

【长难句剖析】

1. 形象的复合形容词：
"Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs."
【解析】telephone-number-sized 是一个非常生动形象的复合形容词，字面意思是“像电话号码那么长的”，在此形容互联网企业家的银行账户数额巨大（高达百万、千万甚至亿万）。

2. 否定词首置与倒装意味：
"You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels."
【解析】句中 buy someone something 为双宾语结构：buy their prizes (间接宾语) the prestige of the Nobels (直接宾语)。意为：这些暴发户企业家无法为他们的奖项买来诺贝尔奖那样的声望。

3. as 引导的非限制性定语从句：
"...has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson."
【解析】破折号后的 as 代指前文的整个句子（诺奖规则被现代研究的合作性所超越）。when it comes to 意为“当提到/涉及到...时”，后面接动名词 acknowledging。over 后面跟的是由 who 引导的宾语从句作介词的宾语，描述了科学界关于“谁被遗漏”的激烈争论。