2005年研究生英语考试试卷

『壹』 各位考研党，你们有05年以前的英语一真题和答案吗

淘宝上面有卖的，（链接发出来无法认证），辛苦你直接看一下我给你的图片。前面几年真题的参考价值不是非常的大，建议将近十年的多做几遍。。祝你考研成功~~加油~~~

『贰』 05年硕士研究生入学考试英语阅读理解试题译文

Everybody loves a fat pay rise. Yet pleasure at your own can vanish if you learn that a colleague has been given a bigger one. Indeed, if he has a reputation for slacking, you might even be outraged. Such behaviour is regarded as “all too human”, with the underlying assumption that other animals would not be capable of this finely developed sense of grievance. But a study by Sarah Brosnan and Frans de Waal of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, which has just been published in Nature, suggests that it all too monkey, as well.
The researchers studied the behaviour of female brown capuchin monkeys. They look cute. They are good-natured, co-operative creatures, and they share their food tardily. Above all, like their female human counterparts, they tend to pay much closer attention to the value of “goods and services” than males.
Such characteristics make them perfect candidates for Dr. Brosnan's and Dr. de waal's; study. The researchers spent two years teaching their monkeys to exchange tokens for food. Normally, the monkeys were happy enough to exchange pieces of rock for slices of cucumber. However, when two monkeys were placed in separate but adjoining chambers, so that each could observe what the other was getting in return for its rock, their behaviour became markedly different.
In the world of capuchins grapes are luxury goods (and much preferable to cucumbers) So when one monkey was handed a grape in exchange for her token, the second was reluctant to hand hers over for a mere piece of cucumber. And if one received a grape without having to provide her token in exchange at all, the other either tossed her own token at the researcher or out of the chamber, or refused to accept the slice of cucumber . Indeed, the mere presence of a grape in the other chamber (without an actual monkey to eat it) was enough to rece resentment in a female capuchin.
The researches suggest that capuchin monkeys, like humans, are guided by social emotions, in the wild, they are a co-operative, groupliving species, Such co-operation is likely to be stable only when each animal feels it is not being cheated. Feelings of righteous indignation, it seems, are not the preserve of people alone, Refusing a lesser reward completely makes these feelings abundantly clear to other members of the group. However, whether such a sense of fairness evolved independently in capuchins and humans, or whether it stems form the common ancestor that the species had 35 million years ago, is, as yet, an unanswered question.
人人都喜欢大幅加薪，但是当你知道一个同事薪水加得比你还要多的时候，那么加薪带给你的喜悦感就消失的无影无踪了。如果他还以懒散出名的话，你甚至会变得怒不可遏。这种行为被看作是“人之长情”，其潜在的假定其他动物不可能具有如此高度发达的不公平意识。但是由佐治亚州亚特兰大埃里莫大学的Sarah Brosnan 和Frans de Waal进行的一项研究表明，它也是“猴之常情”。这项研究成果刚刚发表在《自然》杂志上。
研究者们对雌性棕色卷尾猴的行为进行了研究。它们看起来很可爱，性格温顺，合作，乐于分享食物。最重要的是，就象女人们一样，它们往往比雄性更关注“商品和服务”价值。这些特性使它们成为Brosnan 和 de Waal理想的研究对象。研究者们花了两年的时间教这些猴子用代币换取食物。正常情况下，猴子很愿意用几块石头换几片黄瓜。但是，当两个猴子被安置在隔开但相邻的两个房间里，能够互相看见对方用石头换回来什么东西时，猴子的行为就会变的明显不同。
在卷尾猴的世界里，葡萄是奢侈品（比黄瓜受欢迎得多）。所以当一只猴子用一个代币换回一颗葡萄时，第二只猴子就不愿意用自己的代币换回一片黄瓜。如果一只猴子根本无需用代币就能够得到一颗葡萄的话，那么另外一只就会将代币掷向研究人员或者扔出房间外，或者拒绝接受那片黄瓜。事实上，只要在另一房间里出现了葡萄（不管有没有猴子吃它），都足以引起雌卷尾猴的怨恨。
研究人员指出，正如人类一样，卷尾猴也受社会情感的影响。在野外，它们是相互合作的群居动物。只有当每只猴子感到自己没有受到欺骗时，这种合作才可能稳定。不公平而引起的愤怒感似乎不是人类的专利。拒绝接受较少的酬劳可以让这些情绪准确无误地传达给其它成员。但是这种公平感是在卷尾猴和人类身上各自独立演化而成，还是来自三千五百万前他们共同的祖先，这还是一个悬而未决的问题。
Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn't know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way? Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.
There are upsetting parallels today, as scientists in one wave after another try to awaken us to the growing threat of global warming. The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that the Earth's atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made. The clear message is that we should get moving to protect ourselves. The president of the National Academy, Bruce Alberts, added this key point in the preface to the panel's report “Science never has all the answers .But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that out nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions.”
Just as on smoking, voices now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it's Ok to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure. This is a dangerous game: by the 100 percent of the evidence is in, it may be too late. With the risks obvious and growing, a prudent people would take out an insurance policy now.
Fortunately, the White House is starting to pay attention. But it's obvious that a majority of the president's advisers still don't take global warming seriously. Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research-a classic case of “paralysis by analysis”.
To serve as responsible stewards of the planet, we must press forward on deeper atmospheric and oceanic research But research alone is inadequate. If the Administration won't take the legislative initiative, Congress should help to begin fashioning conservation measures .A bill by Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, which would offer financial incentives for private instry is a promising start Many see that the country is getting ready to build lots of new power plants to meet our energy needs. If we are ever going to protect the atmosphere, it is crucial that those new plants be environmentally sound.
还记得科学家们认为吸烟会致人死亡，而那些怀疑者们却坚持认为我们无法对此得出定论的时候吗？还记得怀疑者们坚持认为缺乏决定性的证据，科学也不确定的时候吗？还记得怀疑者们坚持认为反对吸烟的游说是为了毁掉我们的生活方式，而政府应该置身事外的时候吗？许多美国人相信了这些胡言乱语，在三十多年中，差不多有一千万烟民早早的进了坟墓。
现在出现了与吸烟类似的令人感到难过的事情。科学家们前仆后继，试图使我们意识到全球气候变暖所带来的日益严重的威胁。最近的行动是由白宫召集了一批来自国家科学院的专家团，他们告诉我们，地球气候毫无疑问正在变暖，而这个问题主要是人为造成的。明确的信息表明是我们应该立刻着手保护自己。国家科学院院长Bruce Alberts在专家团报告的前言中加上了这一重要观点：“科学解答不了所有问题。但是科学确实为我们的未来提供了最好的指导，关键是我们的国家和整个的世界在做重要决策时，应该以科学能够提供的关于人类现在的行为对未来影响最好的判断作为依据。
就象吸烟问题一样，来自不同领域的声音坚持认为有关全球变暖的科学资料还不完整。在我们证实这件事之前可以向大气中不断的排放气体。这是一个危险的游戏；到了有百分之百的证据的时候，可能就太晚了。随着风险越来越明显，并且不断增加，一个谨慎的民族现在应该准备一份保单了。
幸运的是，白宫开始关注这件事了。但是显然大多数总统顾问并没有认真看待全球气候变暖这个问题。他们没有出台行动计划，相反只是继续迫切要求进行更多的研究――这是一个经典的“分析导致麻痹案例”。
为了成为地球上有责任心的一员，我们必须积极推进对于大气和海洋的深入研究。但只有研究是不够的。如果政府不争取立法上的主动权，国会就应该帮助政府开始采取保护措施。弗吉尼亚的民主党议员Robert Byrd提出一项议案，从经济上激励私企，就是一个良好的开端。许多人看到这个国家正准备修建许多新的发电厂，以满足我们的能源需求。如果我们准备保护大气，关键要让这些新发电厂对环境无害。
Of all the components of a good night's sleep, dreams seem to be least within our control. In dreams, a window opens into a world where logic is suspended and dead people speak. A century ago, Freud formulated his revolutionary theory that dreams were the disguised shadows of our unconscious desires and rears, by the late 1970s. neurologists had switched to thinking of them as just “mental noise” the random byprocts of the neural-repair work that goes on ring sleep. Now researchers suspect that dreams are part of the mind's emotional thermostat, regulating moods while the brain is “off-line”. And one leading authority says that these intensely powerful mental events can be not only harnessed but actually brought under conscious control, to help us sleep and feel better. “It's your dream” says Rosalind Cartwright, chair of psychology at Chicago's Medical Center. “If you don't like it , change it.”
Evidence from brain imaging supports this view. The brain is as active ring REM (rapid eye movement) sleep-when most vivid dreams occur-as it is when fully awake, says Dr, Eric Nofzinger at the University of Pittsburgh. But not all parts of the brain are equally involved, the limbic system (the “emotional brain”)is especially active, while the prefrontal cortex (the center of intellect and reasoning) is relatively quiet. “We wake up from dreams happy of depressed, and those feelings can stay with us all day” says Stanford sleep researcher Dr, William Dement.
The link between dreams and emotions shows up among the patients in Cartwright’s clinic. Most people seem to have more bad dreams early in the night, progressing toward happier ones before awakening, suggesting that they are working through negative feelings generated ring the day. Because our conscious mind is occupied with daily life we don’t always think about the emotional significance of the day’s events-until, it appears, we begin to dream.
And this process need not be left to the unconscious. Cartwright believes one can exercise conscious control over recurring bad dreams As soon as you awaken, identify what is upsetting about the dream. Visualize how you would like it to end instead, the next time is occurs, try to wake up just enough to control its course. With much practice people can learn to, literally, do it in their sleep.
At the end of the day, there's probably little reason to pay attention to our dreams at all unless they keep us from sleeping of “we wake u in a panic,” Cartwright says. Terrorism, economic uncertainties and general feelings of insecurity have increased people's anxiety. Those suffering from persistent nightmares should seek help from a therapist For the rest of us, the brain has its ways of working through bad feelings. Sleep-or rather dream-on it and you'll feel better in the morning.
在高质量睡眠的所有因素中，梦似乎是最无法控制的一个。在梦中，窗户通向的世界里，逻辑暂时失去了效用，死人开口说话。一个世纪前，弗洛伊德阐述了革命性的理论，即梦是人们潜意识中欲望和恐惧经伪装后的预示；到了20世纪70年代末期，神经病学家们转而认为梦是“精神噪音”，即睡眠时进行的神经修复活动的一种杂乱的副产品。目前，研究人员猜想梦是大脑情感自动调节系统的组成部分，当大脑处于“掉线”状态时对情绪进行规整。一名主要的权威人士说，梦这种异常强烈的精神活动不仅能被驾驭，事实上还可以有意识地加以控制，以帮助我们更好地睡眠和感觉。芝加哥医疗中心心里学系主任 Rosalind Cartwright说“梦是你自己的，如果你不喜欢，就改变它。”
大脑造影的证据支持了以上观点。匹兹堡大学的埃里克博士说，在出现清晰梦境的快速动眼睡眠中大脑和完全清醒时一样活跃。但并非大脑的所有部分都一样，脑边缘系统（“情绪大脑”）异常活跃，而前额皮层（思维和推理的中心地带）则相对平静大。斯坦福睡眠研究员William Dement博士说：“我们从梦中醒来，或者高兴或者沮丧，这些情绪会伴随我们一整天。”
梦和情绪之间的联系在Cartwright的诊所的病人身上显露出来了。多数人似乎在晚上入睡的较早阶段做更多不好的梦，而在快睡醒前会逐渐做开心一些的梦，这说明人们在梦里渐渐克服了白天的不良情绪。因为清醒时我们的头脑被日常琐事占据着，所以并不总是想到白天发生的事情对我们情绪的影响，直到我们开始做梦，这种影响才出现。
这一过程不一定是无意识的。Cartwright认为人们可以练习有意识地控制噩梦的重演。你一醒来就立刻确定梦中有什么在困扰你，设想一下你所希望的梦的结局，下次再做同样的梦时，试图醒来以控制它的进程。通过多次练习，人们完全可以学会在梦中这样做。
Cartwright说，说到底，只要梦不使我们无法睡眠或“从梦中惊醒”，就没有理由太在意所做的梦。恐怖主义、经济不确定及通常的不安全感都增加了人们的焦虑。那些长期受到噩梦折磨的人应该寻求专家帮助，而对其他人来说，大脑有自动消除不良情绪的方法。安心睡觉甚至做梦，早上醒来时你会感觉好多了。
American no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing:The Degradation of language and Music and why we should like, care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter-culture as responsible for the decline of formal English.
Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in ecation. Mr.McWhorter’s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the graal disappearance of “whom” ,for example, to be natural and no more regranttable than the loss of the case-endings of Old English.
But the cult of the authentic and the personal, “doing our own thing”, has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly ecated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English, talking is triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft.
Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non-standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive-there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas .He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper.
Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old-fashioned to most English-speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical ecation reforms-he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English “on paper plates instead of china”. A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one.
美国人已不再期待公众人物在演讲或写作中能运用技巧和文采来驾驭英语，而公众人物自己也不渴望这样。语言学家麦荷特喜好争论，他的观点混杂着自由派与保守派的看法。在他最近的书《做我们自己的事：语言和音乐的退化，以及为什么我们应该喜欢或在意？》中，这位学者认为60年代反文化运动的胜利要对正式英语的退化负责。
责备放纵的六十年代不是什么新鲜事，但这次算不上是对教育衰落的又一场批判。麦荷特先生的学术专长在于语言史和语言演变。举例来说，他认为“whom”一词的逐渐消失是自然的，并不比古英语中词格尾缀的消失更让人惋惜。
然而，“做自己的事”这一对事务真实性和个人性的崇高信条，已经导致了正式演讲、写作、诗歌及音乐的消亡。在20世纪60年代以前，仅受过一般教育的人在下笔时都会寻求一种更高雅的强调；而那之后，即使是最受关注的文章也开始逮住口语就写在纸面上。同样的，对于诗歌来说，非常个性化和富有表现力的创作风格成为了能够表达真实生动含义的唯一形式。无论作为口语还是书面语的英语，随意言谈胜过雅致的言辞，自我发挥也压过了精心准备。
麦荷特显示先生从上层和下层文化中列举了一系列有趣的例子，从而说明他记录的这种趋势是确凿无误的。但就书中副标题中的疑问：为什么我们应该、喜欢或在意，答案却不够明确。作为语言学家，麦荷特认为各种各样的人类语言，包括像黑人语言这样的非标准语言，都具有强大的表达力――世上没有传达不了复杂思想的语言或方言。不像其他大多数人，麦荷特先生并不认为我们说话方式不再规范就会使我们不能够准确的思考。
俄罗斯人深爱自己的语言，并在脑海中存储了大量诗歌；而意大利的政客们往往精心准备演讲，即使这在大多数讲英语的人们眼里已经过时。麦荷特先生认为正式语言并非不可或缺，也没有提出要进行彻底的教育改革――他其实只是为那些美好事务而不是实用品的消逝而哀叹。我们现在用“纸盘子”而非“瓷盘子”装着我们的英语大餐。真是惭愧啊，但很可能已无法避免。

『叁』 2005年至2014年英语考研，哪套试卷最难,哪几套简单

06 10 11 14 最难 国庆后再研究！

『肆』 高分。考研英语一的卷子做的05-12年的，做完一遍重复做还是做05年以前的卷子。12月份考研

建议重做05年以后的，或者反复精度05以后年份的阅读。原因是这样的：考研英语和别的英语考试不一样，一方面强调精读和分析能力，另一方面考研的英语有一种出题人自己的思路，这个思路和别的考试不一样，做除了真题以外的练习题都无法帮助你熟悉出题人思路，所以好多考高分的人都会建议大家反复做真题。然后，好像考研英语的出题人换过一波（好像是当年考研班老师讲的，具体忘了，只记得有这一个事），所以做以前那一波出题人的真题没意义，所以不建议做年份很靠前的真题，其实能反复把近十年的真题做两三遍，弄懂每个单词每个句子的意思就已经很够了。

个人观点吧，不一定适合所有人，请根据自身情况选择或调整。

望采纳。

『伍』 谁有2000～2005年考研英语一真题及详解啊

想看英语真题，直接去买何凯文的《考研英语历年真题全解析》就好了，很全面的

『陆』 求05年到18年英语一考研真题，PDF或者word，百度云

这是去年英语一跟英语二的真题链接你可以看一下
网页链接
网页链接