| 考研易错题（2019/8/29） |
| 第1题： 既滋肾敛肺，又宁心安神的药是： A．酸枣仁 B．柏子仁 C．五倍子 D．五味子 E．罂粟壳 |
| 【单选题】： |
| 第2题：当代大学生学习马克思主义理论，确立马克思主义的科学信仰，最重要的是t ) A．学习和掌握马克思主义的世界观和方法论 B．把个人的成长成才与国家的富强繁荣、乃至与全人类的解放紧密联系起来 C．报效祖国，奉献社会，创造有价值的人生 D．建设和发展中国特色社会主义、实现中华民族伟大复兴 |
| 【多选题】： |
| 第3题：The first time I tried shark-fin soup was at Time Warner’s annual dinner in Hong Kong. Shark-fin soup is a luxury item ($100 bowl in some restaurants)in Hong Kong and MainlandChina, its biggest consumers; it’s a dish that embodies eastAsia’s intertwined notions of hospitality and keeping (or losing) "face". "It’s like champagne", saysAlvin Leung, owner ofBo Innovation, aCantonese restaurant in Hong Kong. "You don’t open a bottle ofCoke to celebrate. It’s a ritual. " Unfortunately, this gesture of hospitality comes with a price tag much bigger than that $ 100 bowl.All told, up to 70 million sharks are killed annually for the trade, despite the fact that 30% of shark species are threatened with extinction. "Sharks have made it through multiple mass extinctions on our planet, " says Matt Rand, director of Pew’s Global Shark Conservation division. "Now many species are going to go the way of the dinosaur—for a bowl of soup. " The shark-fin industry has gained notoriety in recent years not just because of what it’s doing to the global shark population but also because of what’s known as finning—the practice of catching a shark, removing its fins and dumping the animal back into the se A、 While a pound of shark fin can go for up to $ 300, most shark meat isn’t particularly valuable, and it takes up freezer space and weight on fishing boats. Today, finning is illegal in the waters of theE、U. , the U. S. andAustralia, among others; boats are required to carry a certain ratio of fins to carcasses(尸体) to prevent massive overfishing.But there are loopholes in antifinning laws that are easy to exploit. In theE、U. , for example, ships can land the fins separately from the carcasses, making the job of monitoring the weight ratio nearly impossible. In the U. S. , a boat found carrying nearly 65, 000 lB、( 30, 000 kg) of illegal shark fins won a court case because it was registered as a cargo vessel, which current U. S. finning. laws do not cover. Sharks populations can’t withstand commercial fishing the way more fertile marine species can. Unlike other fish harvested from the wild, sharks grow slowly. They don’t reach sexual maturity until later in life—the female great white, for example, at 12 to 14 years—and when they do, they have comparatively few offspring at a time, unlike, tunas, which release millions of eggs when they spawn. The shark’s plight is starting to be weighed against the delicacy’s cultural value. The conservation group has lobbied local restaurants that offer the classic nine-course banquet served at Cantonese weddings, of which shark fin is traditionally a part, to offer a no-shark menu as a choice to couples. After my first encounter with shark-fin soup, I decided that, like my colleagues, I would probably skip it next time. Unfortunately, that next time came at an intimate dinner in a small, private dining room, where I was both a guest and a stranger. When the soup—the centerpiece of the meal—was set down before me, I ate it.Apparently, I’m not the only one to cave. "You go to a wedding, and you refused to eat it just because you feel you’re insulted— I’m not that extreme, " Leung, the chef, says. "If other people believe that it brings luck .or brings face, I’d be a spoilsport. "To make a dent in the slaughter of the sharks, however, there are going to have to be a lot of people willing to spoil this particular sport. Some fishmen land the fins separately from the carcasses in order to ______. A、escape punishment by law B、make more freezer spaces on boat C、prevent massive overfishing D、exploit bad execution of law |
| 【单选题】： |
| 第4题：The point of the restorationist critique of preservationism is the claim that it rests on an unhealthy dualism that conceives nature and humankind as radically distinct and opposed to each other.Dissatisfaction with dualism has for some time figured prominently in the unhappiness of environmentalists with mainstream industrial society. However, the writings of the restorationists themselves―particularly, William Jordan and Frederick Turner―offer little evidence to support this accusation. In their view, preservationists are filled with the same basic mind-set as the industrial mainstream, the only difference being that the latter ranks humans over nature while the former elevates nature over humans. While it is perhaps puzzling that Jordan and Turner do not see that there is no logic that requires dualism as a philosophical basis for preservation, more puzzling is the sharpness and ruthlessness of their attack on preservationists, reinforced by the fact that they offer little, if any, criticism of those who have robbed the natural worlD、 The crucial question, however, about the restorationist outlook has to do with the degree to which the restorationist program is itself faithful to the first principle of restoration: that nature and humanity are fundamentally united rather than separate. Rejecting the old domination model, which sees humans as over nature, restoration theory supports a model of community participation. Yet some of the descriptions that Jordan and Turner give of what restorationists are actually up to--for example , Turner’’s description of humans as "the lords of creation", or Jordan’’s statement that "the fate and well being of the biosphere depend ultimately on us and our relationship with it"--are not consistent well with the community-participation model. Another holistic model―namely, that of nature as an organism―might be more serviceable to the restorationists.As with the community model, the "organic" model pictures nature as a system of interconnected parts. A、fundamental difference, however, is that in an organism the parts are wholly useful to the life of the organism. If we could think of the biosphere as a single living organism and could identify humans with the brain (or theDNA、, or control center, we would have a model that more closely fits the restorationists’’ view. However, to consider humans as the control center of the living earth is to attribute to them a dominating role in nature. Is this significantly different from the old-fashioned domination model In both systems humans hold the place of highest authority and power in the worlD、Also neither view recognizes any limits to the scope and range of reasonable human manipulation in the worlD、This does not mean that there are no restrictions, only beneficial manipulation should be undertaken.But it does not mean that nothing is off-limits. A、further parallel is that, because the fate of the world rests on humans, they must have a clear idea of what needs to be done. There are also important differences between the two theories. For example, restorationists no longer view the world in the old dominationist way as a passive object.And though both assign to humans a controlling role in the world, dominationists conceive this in terms of conquest while restorationists conceive it in terms of healing.Also, restorationists insist that the ideas which must serve to guide our work in the world are drawn not solely from a consideration of human needs and purposes but from an understanding of the biosphere; as a result, they are more conscious than dominationists of our capacity to human nature.Which of the following best expresses the function of the first paragraph in relation to the text as a whole A、To establish the parameters of a following debate about man’’s role in nature. B． To identify problem areas under debate ,which are then explored in detail. C． To discuss secondary issues prior to |
| 【单选题】： |
| 第5题：已知α1，α2，α3是3维向量空间V的一组基，设β1=α1，β2=α2+α3，β3=aα1+α2-α3． 求β1，β2，β3到α1，α2，α3的过渡矩阵； |
| 【分析题】： |