2014年考研英语(一)真题及参考答案(12)

[B]the factors that help make a successful lawyer in America．

[C]a problem in America’s legal profession and solutions to it．

[D]the role of undergraduate studies in America’s legal education．

答案：C。该题为文章主旨题，考察文章中心。该篇文章属于问题解决型文章，前5段均在说美国法律职业存在的问题，最后一段提出了解决措施“allowing non－lawyers to own shares in law firms would reduce costs and improve services to customers， by encouraging law firms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus on improving firms’ efficiency．”。因此，该篇属于问题解决型文章，选C。其他几个选项均为文中的个别细节，以偏概全。

Text 3

The US$3－million Fundamental physics prize is indeed an interesting experiment， as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March． And it is far from the only one of its type． As a News Feature article in Nature discusses， a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years． Many， like the Fundamental Physics Prize， are funded from the telephone－number－sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs． These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields， they say， and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science．

What’s not to like? Quite a lot， according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature． You cannot buy class， as the old saying goes， and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels， The new awards are an exercise in self－promotion for those behind them， say scientists． They could distort the achievement－based system of peer－review－led research． They could cement the status quo of peer－reviewed research． They do not fund peer－reviewed research． They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius．

The goals of the prize－givers seem as scattered as the criticism．Some want to shock， others to draw people into science， or to better reward those who have made their careers in research．

As Nature has pointed out before， there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes―both new and old―are distributed． The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences， launched this year， takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include．But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize， each of whom must still be living， has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research―as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson． The Nobels were， of course，themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money． Time， rather than intention， has given them legitimacy．