题型有：1. Reading Module
Reading Module (60 minutes)
A spark, a flint: How fire leapt to lifeThe control of fire was the first and perhaps greatest of humanity’s steps towards a life-enhancing technology To early man, fire was a divine gift randomly delivered in the form of lightning, forest fire or burning lava. Unable to make flame for themselves, the earliest peoples probably stored fire by keeping slowburning logs alight or by carrying charcoal in pots. How and where man learnt how to produce flame at will is unknown. It was probably a secondary invention, accidentally made during tool-making operations with wood or stone. Studies of primitive societies suggest that the earliest method of making fire was through friction. European peasants would insert a wooden drill in a round hole and rotate it briskly between their palms. This process could be speeded up by wrapping a cord around the drill and pulling on each end. The Ancient Greeks used lenses or concav
e mirrors to concentrate the sun’s rays and burning glasses were also used by Mexican Aztecs and the Chinese. Percussion methods of firelighting date back to Paleolithic times, when some Stone Age tool-makers discovered that chipping flints produced sparks. The technique became more efficient after the discovery of iron, about 5000 years ago. In Arctic North America, the Eskimos produced a slow-burning spark by striking quartz against iron pyrites, a compound that contains sulphur. The Chinese lit their fires by striking porcelain with bamboo. In Europe, the combination of steel, flint and tinder remained the main method of fire-lighting until the mid-19th century. Fire-lighting was revolutionised by the discovery of phosphorus, isolated in 1669 by a German alchemist trying to transmute silver into gold. Impressed by the element’s combustibility, several 17th century chemists used it to manufacture firelighting devices, but the results were dangerously inflammable. With phosphorus costing the equivalent of several hundred pounds per ounce, the first matches were expensive. The quest for a practical match really began after 1781 when a group of French chemists came up with the Phosphoric Candle or Ethereal Match, a sealed glass tube containing a twist of paper tipped with phosphorus. When the tube was broken,
air rushed in, causing the phosphorus to self-combust. An even more hazardous device, popular in America, was the Instantaneous Light Box—a bottle filled with sulphuric acid into which splints treated with chemicals were dipped. The first matches resembling those used today were made in 1827 by John Walker, an English pharmacist who borrowed the formula from a military rocket-maker called Congreve. Costing a shilling a box, Congreves were splints coated with sulphur and tipped with potassium chlorate. To light them, the user drew them quickly through folded glass paper. Walker never patented his invention, and three years later it was copied by a Samuel Jones, who marketed his product as Lucifers. About the same time, a French chemistry student called Charles Sauria produced the first ‘strike-anywhere’ match by substituting white phosphorus for the potassium chlorate in the Walker formula. However, since white phosphorus is a deadly poison, from 1845 matchmakers exposed to its fumes succumbed to necrosis, a disease that eats away jaw-bones. It wasn’t until 1906 that the substance was eventually banned. That was 62 years after a Swedish chemist called Pasch had discovered non-toxic red or amorphous phosphorus, a development exploited commercially by Pasch’s compatriot J E Lundstrom i
n 1885. Lundstrom’s safety matches were safe because the red phosphorus was non-toxic; it was painted on to the striking surface instead of the match tip, which contained potassium chlorate with a relatively high ignition temperature of 182 degrees centigrade. America lagged behing Europe in match technology and safety standards. It wasn’t until 1900 that the Diamond Match Company bought a French patent for safety matches—but the formula did not work properly in the different climatic conditions prevailing in America and it was another 11 years before scientists finally adapted the French patent for the US. The Americans, however, can claim several ‘firsts’ in match technology and marketing. In 1892 the Diamond Match Company pioneered book matches. The innovation didn’t catch on until after 1896, when a brewery had the novel idea of advertising its product in match books. Today book matches are the most widely used type in the US, with 90 percent handed out free by hotels, restaurants and others. Other American innovations include an an-tiafterglow solution to prevent the match from smouldering after it has been blown out; and the waterproof match, which lights after eight hours in water.Questions 1-8Complete the summary below. Choose your answers from the box at the bottom of the page and writ
e them in boxes 1 - 8 on your answer sheet.NB There are more words than spaces so you will not use them all. You may use any of the words more than once. EARLY FIRE-LIGHTING METHODSPrimitive societies saw fire as a ______(Example)______ .gift. Answer heavenly They tried to【R1】______ burning logs or charcoal【R2】______ that they could create fire themselves. It is suspected that the first man-made flames were produced by【R3】______The very first fire-lighting methods involved the creation of【R4】______by, for example, rapidly【R5】______a wooden stick in a round hole. The use of【R6】______or persistent chipping was also widespread in Europe and among other peoples such as the Chinese and【R7】______ European practice of this method continued until the 1850s【R8】______the discovery of phosphorus some years earlier.List of WordsMexicans random rotatingdespite preserve realisingsunlight lacking heavenlypercussion chance frictionunaware without makeheating Eskimos surpriseduntilsmoke
1． 【R1】
正确答案：preserve
2． 【R2】
正确答案：unaware
3． 【R3】
正确答案：chance
4． 【R4】
正确答案：friction
5． 【R5】
正确答案：rotating
6． 【R6】
正确答案：percussion
7． 【R7】
正确答案：Eskimos
8． 【R8】
正确答案：despite
Look at the following notes that have been made about the matches described in Reading Passage 1. Decide which type of match(A - H)corresponds with each description and write your answer in boxes 9 — 15 on your answer sheet.NB There are more matches than descriptions so you will not use them all. You may use any match more than once.Example Answercould be lit after soaking in water HNOTESTypes of Matches(A)the Ethereal Match(B)the Instantaneous Lightbox(C)Congreves(D)Lucifers(E)the first strike-anywhere match(F)Lundstrom’time in a bottles safety match(G)book matches(H)waterproof matches
9． made using a less poisonous type of phosphorus
正确答案：F
10． identical to a previous type of match
正确答案：D
11． caused a deadly illness
正确答案：E
12． first to look like modern matches
正确答案：C
13． first matches used for advertising
正确答案：G
14． relied on an airtight glass container
正确答案：A
15． made with the help of an army design
正确答案：C
You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 16 - 28 which are based on Reading Passage 2 below.Zoo conservation programmesOne of London Zoo’s recent advertisements caused me some irritation, so patently did it distort reality. Headlined ‘Without zoos you might as well tell these animals to get stuffed’, it was bordered with illustrations of several endangered species and went on to extol the myth that without zoos like London Zoo these animals ‘will almost certainly disappear forever’. With the zoo world’s rather mediocre record on conservation, one might be forgiven for being slightly sceptical about such an advertisement. Zoos were originally created as places of entertainment, and their suggested involvement with conservation didn’t seriously arise until about 30 years ago, when the Zoological Society of London held the first formal international meeting on the subject. Eight years later, a series of world conferences took pl
ace, entitled ‘The Breeding of Endangered Species’, and from this point onwards conservation became the zoo community’s buzzword. This commitment has now been clearly defined in The World Zoo Conservation Strategy(WZCS, September 1993), which—although an important and welcome document—does seem to be based on an unrealistic optimism about the nature of the zoo industry. The WZCS estimates that there are about 10,000 zoos in the world, of which around 1,000 represent a core of quality collections capable of participating in coordinated conservation programmes. This is probably the document’s first failing, as I believe that 10,000 is a serious underestimate of the total number of places masquerading as zoological establishments. Of course it is difficult to get accurate data but, to put the issue into perspective, I have found that, in a year of working in Eastern Europe, I discover fresh zoos on almost a weekly basis. The second flaw in the reasoning of the WZCS document is the naive faith it places in its 1,000 core zoos. One would assume that the calibre of these institutions would have been carefully examined, but it appears that the criterion for inclusion on this select list might merely be that the zoo is a member of a zoo federation or association. This might be a good starting point, working
on the premise that members must meet certain standards, but again the facts don’t support the theory. The greatly respected American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums(AAZPA)has had extremely dubious members, and in the UK the Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland has occasionally had members that have been roundly censured in the national press. These include Robin Hill Adventure Park on the Isle of Wight, which many considered the most notorious collection of animals in the country. This establishment, which for years was protected by the Isle’s local council(which viewed it as a tourist amenity), was finally closed down following a damning report by a veterinary inspector appointed under the terms of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981. As it was always a collection of dubious repute, one is obliged to reflect upon the standards that the Zoo Federation sets when granting membership. The situation is even worse in developing countries where little money is available for redevelopment and it is hard to see a way of incorporating collections into the overall scheme of the WZCS. Even assuming that the WZCS’s 1,000 core zoos are all of a high standards—complete with scientific staff and research facilities, trained and dedicated keepers, accommodation that permits normal or n
atural behaviour, and a policy of co-operating fully with one another—what might be the potential for conservation? Colin Tudge, author of Last Animals at the Zoo(Oxford University Press, 1992), argues that ‘if the world’s zoos worked together in co-operative breeding programmes, then even without further expansion they could save around 2,000 species of endangered land vertebrates’. This seems an extremely optimistic proposition from a man who must be aware of the failings and weaknesses of the zoo industry—the man who, when a member of the council of London Zoo, had to persuade the zoo to devote more of its activities to conservation. Moreover, where are the facts to support such optimism? Today approximately 16 species might be said to have been ‘saved’ by captive breeding programmes, although a number of these can hardly be looked upon as resounding successes. Beyond that, about a further 20 species are being seriously considered for zoo conservation programmes. Given that the international conference at London Zoo was held 30 years ago, this is pretty slow progress, and a long way off Tudge’s target of 2,000.Questions 16-22Do the following statements agree with the views of the writer in Reading Passage 21 In boxes 16 -22 writeYES if the statement agrees with the wri
terNO if the statement contradicts the writerNOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about thisExample AnswerLondon Zoo’s advertisements are poorly presented. NOT GIVEN
发布评论