考研英語閱讀最新必備

　　考研英語閱讀理解精

　　(一)法律類

　　GOING BACK AND GETTING IT RIGHT

　　By almost every measure, Paul Pfingst is an unsentimental prosecutor. Last week the San Diego County district attorney said he fully intends to try suspect Charles Andrew Williams, 15, as an adult for the Santana High School shootings. Even before the tragedy, Pfingst had stood behind the controversial California law that mandates treating murder suspects as young as 14 as adults.

　　So nobody would have wagered that Pfingst would also be the first D.A. in the U.S. to launch his very own Innocence Project. Yet last June, Pfingst told his attorneys to go back over old murder and rape convictions and see if any unravel with newly developed DNA-testing tools. In other words, he wanted to revisit past victories--this time playing for the other team. "I think people misunderstand being conservative for being biased," says Pfingst. "I consider myself a pragmatic guy, and I have no interest in putting innocent people in jail."

　　Around the U.S., flabbergasted defense attorneys and their jailed clients cheered his move. Among prosecutors, however, there was an awkward pause. After all, each DNA test costs as much as $5,000. Then there's the unspoken risk: if dozens of innocents turn up, the D.A. will have indicted his shop.

　　But nine months later, no budgets have been busted or prosecutors ousted. Only the rare case merits review. Pfingst's team considers convictions before 1993, when the city started routine DNA testing. They discard cases if the defendant has been released. Of the 560 remaining files, they have re-examined 200, looking for cases with biological evidence and defendants who still claim innocence.

　　They have identified three so far. The most compelling involves a man serving 12 years for molesting a girl who was playing in his apartment. But others were there at the time. Police found a small drop of saliva on the victim's shirt--too small a sample to test in 1991. Today that spot could free a man. Test results are due any day. Inspired by San Diego, 10 other counties in the U.S. are starting DNA audits.

　　By Amanda Ripley ez ncisco sijevic rtwell; Lisa McLaughlin; Joseph Pierro; Josh Tyrangiel and Sora Song

　　注(1)本文選自Time; 03/19/20xx, Vol. 157 Issue 11, p62, 1p, 2c, 3bw

　　注(2)本文習(xí)題命題模仿對象20xx年真題text 1.

　　1.How did Pfingst carry out his own Innocence Project?

　　[A]By getting rid of his bias against the suspects.

　　[B]By revisiting the past victories.

　　[C]By using the newly developed DNA-testing tools.

　　[D]By his cooperation with his attorneys.

　　2.Which of the following can be an advantage of Innocence Project?

　　[A]To help correct the wrong judgments.

　　[B]To oust the unqualified prosecutors.

　　[C]To make the prosecutors in an awkward situation.

　　[D]To cheer up the defense attorneys and their jailed clients.

　　3.The expression “flabbergasted”(Line 1, Paragraph 3) most probably means _______.

　　[A]excited

　　[B]competent

　　[C]embarrassed

　　[D]astounded

　　4.Why was Pfingst an unsentimental prosecutor?

　　[A]He intended to try a fifteen-year old suspect.

　　[B]He had no interest in putting the innocent in jail.

　　[C]He supported the controversial California law.

　　[D]He wanted to try suspect as young as fourteen.

　　5.Which of the following is not true according to the text?

　　[A]Pfingst’s move didn’t have a great coverage.

　　[B] Pfingst’s move had both the positive and negative effect.

　　[C] Pfingst’s move didn’t work well.

　　[D]Pfingst’s move greatly encouraged the jailed prisoners.

　　篇章剖析

　　本文采用的是記敘文的模式。第一段指出芬斯特作為一位鐵面無私的檢查官的一些做法;第二段指出芬斯特實(shí)施“清白計(jì)劃”的打算及做法;第三段指出實(shí)施“清白計(jì)劃”造成的反應(yīng)以及可能存在的問題;第四段和第五段是實(shí)施“清白計(jì)劃”的結(jié)果和影響。

　　詞匯注釋

　　prosecutor [5prRsIkju:tE(r)]n.檢察官 ,檢察員,起訴人,原告

　　controversial [kRntrE5v:F(E)l]adj.爭論的, 爭議的

　　mandate [5mAndeIt]v.批準(zhǔn)制訂一個(gè)訓(xùn)令，如通過法律;發(fā)布命令或要求：

　　wager [5weIdVE(r)]v.下賭注, 保證

　　conviction [kEn5vIkF(E)n]n.定罪, 宣告有罪

　　unravel[Qn5rAv(E)l]v. 闡明, 解決

　　flabbergast[5flAbE^B:st; (?@) -^Ast]v.<口>使大吃一驚, 啞然失色, 使目瞪口呆

　　indict[In5daIt]v.起訴, 控告, 指控, 告發(fā)

　　bust[bQst]v.破產(chǎn)或缺錢

　　oust[aJst]v.剝奪, 取代, 驅(qū)逐

　　discard[dI5skB:d]v.拋開;遺棄;廢棄

　　molest[mE5lest]v.., 困擾, 調(diào)戲

　　saliva[sE5laIvE]n.口水, 唾液

　　難句突破

　　1.Even before the tragedy, Pfingst had stood behind the controversial California law that mandates treating murder suspects as young as 14 as adults.

　　主體句式：…Pfingst had stood behind …

　　結(jié)構(gòu)分析：Even before the tragedy是本句的時(shí)間狀語;主句是Pfingst had stood behind…;that 引導(dǎo)的`賓語從句修飾law;在從句中，as…as是一詞組，意思是“和…一樣”;出現(xiàn)的第三個(gè)as是介詞，意思是“作為”。

　　句子譯文：甚至在這場悲劇發(fā)生之前芬斯特就支持加利福尼亞州的一項(xiàng)頗有爭議的法律。這項(xiàng)法律規(guī)定，以成人身份受審的謀殺嫌疑犯的最低年齡可以降到十四歲。

　　題目分析

　　1.答案為C，屬事實(shí)細(xì)節(jié)題。文中對應(yīng)信息“Pfingst told his attorneys to go back over old murder and rape convictions and see if any unravel with newly developed DNA-testing tools.”是對第二段第一句的補(bǔ)充說明。

　　2.答案為A，屬推理判斷題。從上下文我們可以得知，實(shí)施“清白計(jì)劃”就是使用先進(jìn)的DNA技術(shù)來重新審理過去的案件當(dāng)中可能存在的冤案錯案。

　　3.答案為D, 屬猜詞題。從第二段第一句話我們得知芬斯特可能是美國第一個(gè)實(shí)施非常獨(dú)特的“清白計(jì)劃”的人，因此他的做法很可能是令人感到吃驚的，從而可猜出該詞的含義。

　　4.答案為B，屬推理判斷題。從第一段和第二段給出的事例我們可以看出，芬斯特不愿放過任何一個(gè)犯罪的人，即便他的年齡還不算大;他也不愿使無辜者蒙冤，即便案件已經(jīng)審理。

　　5.答案為C，屬推理判斷題。正因?yàn)?“Pfingst’s move works well”,美國才又有“ten other counties are starting DNA audits”,而且，“no budgets have been busted or prosecutors ousted”.

　　考研英語真題——98閱讀最難篇

　　Passage3

　　Science has long had an uneasy relationship with other aspects of culture. Think of Gallileo's17th-century trial for his rebelling belief before the Catholic Church of poet William Blake's harsh remarks against the mechanistic worldview of Isaac Newton. The schism between science and the humanities has，if anything，deepened in this century.

　　Until recently，the scientific community was so powerful that it could afford to ignore its critics but no longer. As funding for science has declined，scientists have attacked “antiscience” in several books，notably Higher Superstition，by Paul R.Gross，a biologist at the University of Virginia，and Norman Levitt，a mathematician at Rutgers University; and The Demon-Haunted World，by Car Sagan of Cornell University.

　　Defenders of science have also voiced their concerns at meetings such as “The Flight from Science and Reason，”held in New York City in1995，and “Science in the Age of(Mis)information，”which assembled last June near Buffalo.

　　Antiscience clearly means different things to different people. Gross and Levitt find fault primarily with sociologists，philosophers and other academics who have questioned science's objectivity. Sagan is more concerned with those who believe in ghosts，creationism and other phenomena that contradict the scientific worldview.

　　A survey of news stories in1996reveals that the antiscience tag has been attached to many other groups as well，from authorities who advocated the elimination of the last remaining stocks of smallpox virus to Republicans who advocated decreased funding for basic research.

　　Few would dispute that the term applies to the Unabomber，whose manifesto，published in1995，scorns science and longs for return to a pretechnological utopia. But surely that does not mean environmentalists concerned about uncontrolled industrial growth are antiscience，as an essay in US News & World Report last May seemed to suggest.

　　The environmentalists，inevitably，respond to such critics. The true enemies of science，argues Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University，a pioneer of environmental studies，are those who question the evidence supporting global warming，the depletion of the ozone layer and other consequences of industrial growth. Indeed，some observers fear that the antiscience epithet is in danger of becoming meaningless. “The term 'antiscience' can lump together too many，quite different things，”notes Harvard University philosopher Gerald Holton in his1993work Science and Anti-Science. “They have in common only one thing that they tend to annoy or threaten those who regard themselves as more enlightened.”

　　62.The author's attitude toward the issue of “science vs. antiscience” is .

　　A. impartial B. subjective C. biased D. puzzling

　　這道題涉及作者對“科學(xué)pk其它文化”這個(gè)矛盾的態(tài)度。從第一段的開頭就能看出，作者只是以局外人的姿態(tài)，指出兩者之間的矛盾嚴(yán)峻，作者應(yīng)該是中立態(tài)度;再者，根據(jù)上面對文章主題兩層語義的分析，作者既指出科學(xué)家的反擊，也指出他們的過火，換言之，作者的討論是很辨證的，是客觀中立的。綜合起來，答案選A“中立的”。

　　能接受嗎?同學(xué)們要學(xué)會正確地分析文章的主旨和作者的傾向，從而把題目作對。

【考研英語閱讀最新必備】相關(guān)文章：

英語考研必備四個(gè)角度訓(xùn)練英語閱讀11-29

考研英語閱讀技巧11-18

考研英語閱讀題型06-26

考研英語閱讀資料必看12-29

名師點(diǎn)評考研英語閱讀06-26

考研英語閱讀勝經(jīng)06-25

考研英語閱讀思路介紹06-24

時(shí)文精選考研英語閱讀11-29

考研英語閱讀方法技巧10-07

考研英語報(bào)刊文章閱讀07-26