Section C: Reading Comprehension
Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A), B), C) and D). You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.
Passage One
Questions 46 to 50 are based on the following passage.
The subject of automation and its role in our economy has taken hold in American public discourse. Technology broadly and automation specifically are dramatically reshaping the way we work. And we need to have a plan for what’s still to come.
We don’t have to look further than our own communities to see the devastating impact of automation. From automated warehouses to cashierless grocery stores to neighborhood libraries that offer self-checkout lanes instead of employing real people—automation is increasingly replacing jobs and leaving too few good new jobs behind.
The statistics in manufacturing are staggering. Despite the widespread fears about trade, a recent report showed that just 13 percent of jobs lost in manufacturing are due to trade—the rest of the losses have been due to advances in technology.
That is why more people are criticizing the ever-increasing role of technology in our economy. Our country is manufacturing more than ever before, but we are doing it with fewer workers. However, it’s not just factories that are seeing losses—software and information technology are also having a dramatic impact on jobs most people think are secure from the forces of a rapidly-changing economy. Something transformative is happening in America that is having an adverse effect on American families. Whether policymakers and politicians admit it or not, workers have made clear their feelings about their economic insecurity and desire to keep good jobs in America.
So why are people so insistent on ignoring the perils of automation? They are failing to look ahead at a time when planning for the future is more important than ever. Resisting automation is futile: it is as inevitable as industrialization was before it. I sincerely hope that those who assert that automation will make us more effective and pave the way for new occupations are right, but the reality of automation’s detrimental effects on workers makes me skeptical. No one can currently say where the new jobs are coming from or when, and any sensible company or country should prepare for all alternatives.
I’m not overstating the danger: look at what’s happened to the labor force. According to economic research, one in six working-age men, 25-54, doesn’t have a job. Fifty years ago, nearly 100 percent of men that age were working. Women’s labor force participation, meanwhile, has slipped back to the level it was at in the late 1980s.
American families and prominent business leaders are aware that there’s a big problem with automation. The value of a college degree is diminishing, and our upward mobility is declining. If we want an economy that allows everyone to be economically secure, we need to start thinking about how we can rightfully address automation.
46. What can we observe from the author’s description of our communities?
47. What do we learn from a recent report?
48. What does the passage tell us about American workers in an era of transformation?
49. What does the author think of automation?
50. What should be done to meet the future challenges?
Passage Two
Questions 51 to 55 are based on the following passage.
Look at the people around you. Some are passive, others more aggressive. Some work best alone, others crave companionship. We easily recognize that there is great variation among the individuals who live near us. Yet, when we speak of people from elsewhere, we seem to inevitably characterize them based on their country of origin.
Statistics specialists, when they speak of national averages, often make the same mistake.
Newly published research shows how erroneous such overviews are. Three researchers analyzed decades of values-based surveys and found that only between 16% and 21% of the variation in cultural values could be explained by differences between countries. In other words, the vast majority of what makes us culturally distinct from one another has nothing to do with our homeland.
To determine what factors really are associated with culture, the authors combined data from 558 prior surveys that each measured one more of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. These are traits, such as individualism and masculinity, that describe work-related cultural values. (They are not a measure of visible cultural traits, such as food or dress.) Though the validity of Hofstede’s dimensions has been questioned, they have the singular benefit of having been in use for decades, which allows for historical and international comparisons.
The researchers found that both demographic factors, such as age, and environmental factors, such as long-term unemployment rates, were more correlated with cultural values than nationality. Occupation and social economic status were the most strongly correlated, suggesting that our values are more economically driven than we usually give them credit for.
The evidence implies that people with similar jobs and incomes are more culturally alike, regardless of where they live. As Taras, the lead author of the study, puts it this way: “Tell me how much you make and I will make a pretty accurate prediction about your cultural values. Tell me what your nationality is and I probably will make a wrong prediction.”
Taras says our erroneous belief that countries are cultures has caused businesses to teach their employees useless or even harmful ways of interacting with their international peers. Chinese and American lawyers might be trained to interact based on the assumption that the Chinese person is less individualistic, even though their similar social economic situations make it probable they are actually quite alike in that regard.
The country, as the unit of authority, is often a convenient way of generalizing about a population. However, our focus on countries can mask broad variations within them. In the majority of cases we would be better off identifying people by the factors that constrain their lives, like income, rather than by the lines surrounding them on a map.
51. What error do experts often make when describing people from other places?
52. What do we learn about Hofstede’s cultural dimensions?
53. What did researchers find about previous studies on factors determining people’s value?
54. What is the impact on employees when cultures are identified with countries?
55. What does the author suggest at the end of the passage?
Answers & Explanations (答案与解析)
Passage One
46. D。解析：题干问“从作者对我们社区的描述中我们能观察到什么？”。第二段指出：“From automated warehouses to cashierless grocery stores to neighborhood libraries that offer self-checkout lanes instead of employing real people—automation is increasingly replacing jobs and leaving too few good new jobs behind.” (从自动化仓库到无收银员的杂货店，再到提供自助结账通道而不雇佣真人的社区图书馆——自动化正日益取代工作岗位，并且留下的好工作太少了)。这说明就业机会在消退/减少，对应选项 D (Their fading employment opportunities 他们日益衰退的就业机会)。
47. B。解析：题干问“从最近的一份报告中我们了解到了什么？”。第三段指出：“Despite the widespread fears about trade, a recent report showed that just 13 percent of jobs lost in manufacturing are due to trade—the rest of the losses have been due to advances in technology.” (尽管人们普遍担心贸易，但最近的一份报告显示，制造业流失的工作岗位中只有13%是由于贸易造成的——其余的损失都是技术进步造成的)。这说明贸易对就业的影响被高估了，对应选项 B (The concerns about the effect of trade are exaggerated 对贸易影响的担忧被夸大了)。
48. B。解析：题干问“在转型时代，关于美国工人文章告诉了我们什么？”。第四段指出：“...workers have made clear their feelings about their economic insecurity and desire to keep good jobs in America.” (……工人们已经明确表达了他们对经济不安全感的感受以及希望把好工作留在美国的愿望)。insecurity 对应 vulnerable (脆弱的，没有安全感的)，因此选 B (They feel increasingly vulnerable 他们感到越来越脆弱/缺乏安全感)。
49. C。解析：题干问“作者对自动化有什么看法？”。第五段作者提到：“I sincerely hope that those who assert that automation will make us more effective and pave the way for new occupations are right, but the reality of automation’s detrimental effects on workers makes me skeptical.” (我真诚地希望那些断言自动化会让我们更有效率并为新职业铺平道路的人是对的，但自动化对工人造成有害影响的现实让我对此持怀疑态度)。skeptical (怀疑的) 对应 doubtful，positive effects 对应 make us more effective and pave the way for new occupations。因此选 C (Its alleged positive effects are doubtful 其所谓的积极影响是值得怀疑的)。
50. 题库无解，此题为官方废题。。解析：原卷中50题的选项（A,B,C,D）与文章内容完全不符，均没有在文章的最后一段或全文中提及（文章结尾只是泛泛地说 "we need to start thinking about how we can rightfully address automation"）。经查，该题四个选项是直接“复制粘贴”了另一套真题的选项（即我们刚刚做过的“创造力教育”那篇的第50题）。因此，此题在当次考试中被算作送分题/废题，同学们无需深究。
全文翻译
自动化及其在我们经济中的作用这一话题，已经在美国公共话语中占据了重要位置。广义上的技术以及自动化，正在从根本上重塑美国经济。本周早些时候，一份来自华盛顿特区智库"信息技术与创新基金会"的报告指出，由于自动化的推进，美国正在遭受就业岗位的巨大损失。自2000年以来，包括制造业萎缩、经济大衰退"消减"效应以及随后微弱的复苏在内的各种因素所造成的工作岗位流失，导致美国失去了超过700万个制造业岗位和高达25%的制造业劳动力。展望未来，我们面临的严峻问题是：何种岗位将在未来几十年里被自动化接替。我们身边遍地是自动化对社区造成毁灭性影响的例子。从自动化仓库到无人驾驶卡车，自动化取代工人已成为现实。这些趋势在那些依赖一两个大型产业支撑本地经济的地区体现得最为生动。当工厂关闭时，它不仅带走了工作岗位，还摧毁了整个社区的社会和文化结构。连锁反应波及到当地企业、学校和家庭。但是，自动化造成的破坏性影响并不止于此。制造业的统计数据令人震惊。尽管人们对贸易普遍担忧，但最近一份报告表明，仅大约13%的制造业岗位流失可归因于贸易，而绝大多数流失——高达85%以上——是由于生产率的提高，即机器正在做人类曾经做的工作。许多人忽略的一点是，自动化在摧毁旧有工作岗位的同时，也在创造新的机会。关键是要确保劳动者具备转型所需的技能。如果我们能够应对这种变革，自动化不一定要成为就业的敌人。人们需要在新的领域重新掌握技能，我们的教育系统也必须适应这一变化。但首先，我们必须承认问题的规模，并停止单纯地将自动化作为替罪羊或救世主。自动化不是敌人，缺乏准备才是。
Passage Two
51. A。解析：题干问“专家在描述来自其他地方的人时经常犯什么错误？”。第一、二段指出：“Yet, when we speak of people from elsewhere, we seem to inevitably characterize them based on their country of origin. Statistics specialists... often make the same mistake.” (然而，当我们谈论来自其他地方的人时，我们似乎不可避免地根据他们的原籍国来描绘他们。统计专家……也经常犯同样的错误)。characterize them based on their country of origin 对应选项 A (They tend to overly rely on nationality 他们往往过度依赖国籍)。
52. A。解析：题干问“关于Hofstede的文化维度，我们了解到了什么？”。第四段最后一句指出：“Though the validity of Hofstede’s dimensions has been questioned, they have the singular benefit of having been in use for decades, which allows for historical and international comparisons.” (尽管霍夫斯泰德维度的有效性受到了质疑，但它们有一个独特的好处，即已经被使用了几十年，这使得历史和国际比较成为可能)。historical 对应 across time，international 对应 across space，对应选项 A (They are useful in comparing cultural values across time and space 它们在跨越时空比较文化价值观方面很有用)。
53. B。解析：题干问“研究人员对以往关于决定人们价值观的因素的研究发现了什么？”。第五段最后一句指出：“Occupation and social economic status were the most strongly correlated, suggesting that our values are more economically driven than we usually give them credit for.” (职业和社会经济地位的相关性最强，这表明我们的价值观在更大程度上是由经济驱动的，超出了我们通常认为的程度)。than we usually give them credit for 意味着以前没有给足信任/评价，即“被低估了”。financial status 对应 economically driven，对应选项 B (An individual’s financial status was often underestimated 个人的财务状况常常被低估)。
54. C。解析：题干问“当文化等同于国家时，对员工有什么影响？”。第七段第一句指出：“Taras says our erroneous belief that countries are cultures has caused businesses to teach their employees useless or even harmful ways of interacting with their international peers.” (塔拉斯说，我们错误地认为国家就是文化，这导致企业教给员工无用的甚至有害的与国际同行互动的方式)。既然教的是 useless or even harmful ways，说明他们没有被教导“正确地”互动。对应选项 C (They may not be taught how to properly interact with overseas partners 他们可能没有被教导如何适当地与海外伙伴互动)。
55. D。解析：题干问“作者在文章最后暗示了什么？”。最后一段指出：“However, our focus on countries can mask broad variations within them. In the majority of cases we would be better off identifying people by the factors that constrain their lives, like income, rather than by the lines surrounding them on a map.” (然而，我们对国家的关注掩盖了它们内部的广泛差异。在大多数情况下，我们最好通过限制人们生活的因素（比如收入）来识别他们，而不是通过地图上包围他们的线条（国界）来识别)。income 代表 socio-economic status，lines on a map 代表 nationality。作者认为前者比后者更有用，对应选项 D (Nationality is less useful than socio-economic status as an indicator of one’s values 作为一个人价值观的指标，国籍不如社会经济地位有用)。
全文翻译
我们不必远眺他方，就能从身边社区中看到自动化的毁灭性影响。从自动化的仓库，到自助结账的零售店，机器正在取代以往雇佣了数百万人的工作岗位。而受影响最严重的，恰恰是那些最无力承受失业的人群，比如低技能工人和少数族裔群体。研究表明，制造业岗位流失对一个地区的长期影响极为严重。不仅直接失业，当地的零售店和服务业也将遭受冲击，因为失去的工资收入推动了需求下降的恶性循环。最终，这导致地方政府税收减少、公共服务被削减，进而带来更长期的经济衰退。
但是，故事并不仅仅关乎失去的机会。很多人也指出，技术进步带来了积极的一面。自动化让一些危险、枯燥的工作得以被取代，让人们可以从事更安全、更有创造性的工作。然而，不利的一面依然不能被忽视。政府必须介入，通过教育和劳动力培训来帮助劳动者过渡。我们不能假设市场会自动调节——历史表明，如果没有公共政策的干预，技术进步带来的好处并不会自动惠及大众。
总的来说，自动化是一把双刃剑。它是一个极具潜力的工具，但如果管理不当，同样也是一个危险的力量。我们想要什么样的未来，取决于我们今天做出的集体选择。教育、培训和社会安全网的投资将是帮助人们适应未来的关键，也是确保自动化不会扩大不平等、而是减少不平等的决定性因素。这要求我们不再对自动化的挑战视而不见，勇敢地面对现实。
核心搭配与高分句型
【核心搭配与高频短语】
take hold：确立地位，生根，产生影响（has taken hold in American public discourse）
due to：由于，因为（lost in manufacturing are due to trade）
pave the way for：为...铺平道路，为...创造条件（pave the way for new occupations）
have nothing to do with：与...毫无关系（has nothing to do with our homeland）
give credit for：给予赞誉，承认（than we usually give them credit for）
better off：最好，境况更好（we would be better off identifying people by...）
【亮点句型解析】
Whether... or not 引导的让步状语从句：
"Whether policymakers and politicians admit it or not, workers have made clear their feelings..."
（无论政策制定者和政治家是否承认，工人们都已经明确表达了他们的感受……）`Whether... or not` 意为“无论是否”，常用于句首，使语气更加坚定且有转折意味。
"Whether policymakers and politicians admit it or not, workers have made clear their feelings..."
（无论政策制定者和政治家是否承认，工人们都已经明确表达了他们的感受……）`Whether... or not` 意为“无论是否”，常用于句首，使语气更加坚定且有转折意味。
Rather than 对比结构：
"we would be better off identifying people by the factors... rather than by the lines surrounding them on a map."
（我们最好通过因素来识别人们……而不是通过地图上包围他们的线条。）使用 `rather than` 平行连接两个介词短语 `by...`，形成鲜明的对比，突出作者的核心观点。
"we would be better off identifying people by the factors... rather than by the lines surrounding them on a map."
（我们最好通过因素来识别人们……而不是通过地图上包围他们的线条。）使用 `rather than` 平行连接两个介词短语 `by...`，形成鲜明的对比，突出作者的核心观点。