考研英語閱讀理解命題思路透析和真題揭秘(41)

2001年P(guān)assage 1

Specialisation can be seen as a response to the problem of an increasing accumulation of scientific knowledge. By splitting up the subject matter into smaller units, one man could continue to handle the information and use it as the basis for further research. But specialisation was only one of a series of related developments in science affecting the process of communication. Another was the growing professionalisation of scientific activity.

No clear-cut distinction can be drawn between professionals and amateurs in science: exceptions can be found to any rule. Nevertheless, the word 'amateur' does carry a connotation that the person concerned is not fully integrated into the scientific community and, in particular, may not fully share its values. The growth of specialisation in the nineteenth century, with its consequent requirement of a longer, more complex training, implied greater problems for amateur participation in science. The trend was naturally most obvious in those areas of science based especially on a mathematical or laboratory training, and can be illustrated in terms of the development of geology in the United Kingdom.

A comparison of British geological publications over the last century and a half reveals not simply an increasing emphasis on the primacy of research, but also a changing definition of what constitutes an acceptable research paper. Thus, in the nineteenth century, local geological studies represented worthwhile research in their own right; but, in the twentieth century, local studies have increasingly become acceptable to professionals only if they incorporate, and reflect on, the wider geological picture. Amateurs, on the other hand, have continued to pursue local studies in the old way. The overall result has been to make entrance to professional geological journals harder for amateurs, a result that has been reinforced by the widespread introduction of refereeing, first by national journals in the nineteenth century and then by several local geological journals in the twentieth century. As a logical consequence of this development, separate journals have now appeared aimed mainly towards either professional or amateur readership. A rather similar process of differentiation has led to professional geologists coming together nationally within one or two specific societies, whereas the amateurs have tended either to remain in local societies or to come together nationally in a different way.

Although the process of professionalisation and specialisation was already well under way in British geology during the nineteenth century, its full consequences were thus delayed until the twentieth century. In science generally, however, the nineteenth century must be reckoned as the crucial period for this change in the structure of science.

52. We can infer from the passage that ________.
[A] there is little distinction between specialisation and professionalization
[B] amateurs can compete with professionals in some areas of science
[C] professionals tend to welcome amateurs into the scientific community
[D] amateurs have national academic societies but no local ones

[答案] B

[解題思路]

本題可采用排除法來解決。對于A選項來說，通過閱讀第一、二段可以發(fā)現(xiàn)，specialization主要指的是學(xué)科細(xì)化，而professionalization指的是從事科學(xué)研究人員的職業(yè)化，兩個名次針對的對象是不同的，因而是有區(qū)別的，所以A是錯誤選項。關(guān)于C選項，文章第三段在舉geology的例子的時候，在第三句的后半句中指出"but, in the twentieth century, local studies have increasingly become acceptable to professionals only if they incorporate, and reflect on, the wider geological picture"（而到了20世紀(jì)，區(qū)域地質(zhì)學(xué)研究越來越傾向于必須體現(xiàn)或思考更廣闊的地質(zhì)面貌，只有這樣它才能夠被專業(yè)人員接受），因而可見professional接受amateurs是有條件的，即后者融入前者的文化價值和規(guī)范，但C選項沒有體現(xiàn)這個條件，是錯誤的。至于D選項，第三段一句提到"A rather similar process of differentiation has led to professional geologists coming together nationally within one or two specific societies, whereas the amateurs have tended either to remain in local societies or to come together nationally in a different way"（類似的分化過程也導(dǎo)致專業(yè)地質(zhì)學(xué)家聚集在一起，形成一兩個全國性的團體，而業(yè)余地質(zhì)學(xué)家則要么留在地方性團體中，要么以不同方式組成全國性的團體），可見業(yè)余者也有全國性組織，因此D選項與原文不符。因而B為正確選項，有原文為證，文章第二段第一句話就表明"No clear-cut distinction can be drawn between professionals and amateurs in science: exceptions can be found to any rule"（在科學(xué)領(lǐng)域內(nèi)，專業(yè)與業(yè)余之間沒有絕對的明確區(qū)分），盡管后面提到了"The trend was naturally most obvious in those areas of science based especially on a mathematical or laboratory training"（這種趨勢特別是在以數(shù)學(xué)和實驗室訓(xùn)練為基礎(chǔ)的科學(xué)領(lǐng)內(nèi)自然表現(xiàn)得尤為明顯），這仍說明業(yè)余者至少在一些科學(xué)領(lǐng)域是可以與專業(yè)者并駕齊驅(qū)的。

[題目譯文]

我們可以從文中推斷出                 。
[A] 專業(yè)分工和職業(yè)化之間幾乎沒有區(qū)別
[B] 在科學(xué)的一些領(lǐng)域，業(yè)余人員可以與專業(yè)人員競爭
[C] 專業(yè)人員往往歡迎業(yè)余人員加入科學(xué)界
[D] 業(yè)余人員有全國性的學(xué)術(shù)組織，卻沒有地方性的組織