当前位置:英美者>>考研就业>>英语专业考研>>浏览文章    

北京外国语大学英语专业考研2005基础英语真题

2012年06月08日  所属:英语专业考研  来源:考研论坛  作者:youmumzky

北京外国语大学英语专业考研真题之2005基础英语原题。

Please write all the answers on the answer sheets.
  Time Limit:3 hours

  I.Reading Comprehension
  This section contains two passages.Read each passage and then answer the questions given at the end of it.Your answers must be in English.

  Passage One
  Critics and supporters of the United Nations have sometimes seemed worlds apart.But since last year, almost all of them, whether multilateralist or unilateralist, American or European, have come to agree that the organization is in crisis.This week, a blue.ribbon panel commissioned by the body’s secretary-general.Kofi Annan, released its report on what to do about it.
  The UN’s sorry state became most obvious with the Iraq war.Those favoring the war were furious that after a decade of Security Council resolutions, including the last-chance Resolution 1441 threatening “serious consequences” if Iraq did not prove its disarmament, the UN could not agree to act.Anti-war types were just as frustrated that the world body failed to stop the war.But Iraq was not the UN’s only problem.It has done little to stop humanitarian disasters, such as the ongoing horror in Sudan.And it has done nothing to stop Iran’s and North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
  Recognizing the danger of irrelevance. Mr. Annan last year told a 16-member panel, composed mainly of former government ministers and heads of government, to suggest changes.These fall broadly into two categories:the institutional and the cultural.The former has got most of the headlines—particularly a call for changing the structure of the Security Council.But changes in the UN’s working practices are crucial too.
  Everyone agrees that the Security Council is an unrepresentative relic: of its 15 seats, five are occupied by permanent, veto-wielding members (America, Russia, China, Britain and France) and ten go to countries that rotate every two years and have no veto.But that the council’s composition is a throwback to the world order immediately after the Second World War has been agreed on for decades, without any success in changing it. Japan and Germany, the second-and third-biggest contributors to the UN budget, believe they are entitled to permanent seats.So does India, the world’s second-most-populous country, and Brazil, Latin America’s biggest.Unlike in previous efforts, these four have finally banded together to press their case.And they are joined in spirit by the Africans, who want two seats for their continent.
  But each aspirant has opponents.China mistrusts Japan.Italy opposes a permanent seat for Germany, which would make Italy the only biggish European power without one.(It instead proposes a single seat for the European Union, a non-starter since this would require Britain and France to give up theirs, and regional institutions cannot be UN members under the current UN Charter.)Spanish-speaking Mexico and Argentina do not think Portuguese-speaking Brazil should
  represent Latin America, and Pakistan strongly opposes its rival India’s bid.As for potential African seats.Egypt claims one as the representative of the Muslim and Arab world.That would Leave Nigeria, the continent’s most populous country, and South Africa, which is richer and a more stable democracy, fighting for the other.
  The panel has proposed two alternatives.The first would give six countries(none is named but probably Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and two African countries) permanent seats without a veto, and create three extra non-permanent seats.bringing the total number of council members to 24.The second, which would expand the council by the same number of seats, creates a new middle tier of members who would serve for four years and could be immediately re-elected, above the current lower tier of two-year members, who cannot be re-elected.The rivals to the would-be permanent members favour this option.
  While Security Council reform may be the most visible of the proposals, the panel has also shared its views on the guidelines on when members may use force legally.Under the UN Charter, they can do so in two circumstances only:Article 51 allows force in a clear case of self-defence, and Chapter VII permits its use when the Security Council agrees.While the panellists have not proposed major changes to these two parts of the Charter, they have offered refinements.
  Though the Charter was written to govern war between countries, the panel argues that even without revision, Chapter VII lets the Security Council authorise force for more controversial, modern reasons like fighting terrorists and intervention in states committing humanitarian horrors.It even considers "preventive" wars against serious but non—imminent threats potentially justifiable.
  But the panel also says any decision to use force must pass five tests:the threat must be grave;the primary purpose must be to avert the threat; force must be a last resort; means must be proportional;and there must be a reasonable chance that force will succeed without calamitous consequences.All common-sense stuff, but the panel proposes making these tests explicit (if subjective and unofficial), thus raising the quality of debate about any decision to go to war.
  On top of this, the report urges the UN to make better use of its assets in the fight against terrorism.One of the obstacles to an effective counter-terrorism strategy has been UN members’ inability to agree on a definition of terrorism.The panel tries to help by defining it as “any action that is intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants”;Arab countries may continue to press for exemptions in the case of“foreign occupation”.The report also deals with what it sees as a possible “cascade of nuclear proliferation”in the near future.It recommends creating more incentives for countries to stop enriching uranium.
  1.Explain the following sentences or phrases in English, bringing out the implied meaning, if there is any.(40 points, 4 points each)
  1) This week , a blue-ribbon panel commissioned by the body’s secretary-general, Kofi Annan.released its report on what to do about it.
  2) Recognizing the danger of irrelevance, ...
  3) Everyone agrees that the Security Council is an unrepresentative relic:…
  4) But that the council’s composition is a throwback to the world order immediately after the Second World War has been agreed on for decades, without any success in changing it.
  5) Unlike in previous efforts, these four have finally banded together to press their case.
  6) But each aspirant has opponents.
  7) ...a non-starter since this would require Britain and France to give up theirs, …
  8) While the panelists have not proposed major changes to these two parts of the Charter, they have offered refinements.
  9) It even considers “preventive” wars against serious but non-imminent threats potentially justifiable.
  10) the primary purpose must be to avert the threat;force must be a last resort, means must be
  proportional, and there must be a reasonable chance that force will succeed without calamitous consequences.
  2.Give a brief answer to each of the following questions in your own words.(15 points, 5 points each)
  1) How does the Iraq war reflect the state of the UN?
  2) What are the proposals for structural changes of the UN?
  3) What are the major contents of the panel report?
 

  Passage Two
  The trade and investment relationship between the European Union and the United States is the most important in the world.Despite the emergence of competitors, Europe and America are the dynamo of the global economy.
  This economic relationship is a foundation of our political partnership, which we all know has been through a difficult patch.The identity of interest between Europe and America is less obvious than during the cold war.But while the trans—Atlantic relationship is becoming more complex, that does not make it less important.As European commissioner for trade.I do not agree that European and American values are fundamentally diverging, or that our interests on longer coincide.
  We still share a belief in democracy and individual freedoms, and in creating opportunity and economic openness.We face the same security challenges.We look ahead to shared global problems:poverty, migration, resource crises, climate change.
  We need commitment and vision to redefine our, relationship.I want to see a stronger and more balanced partnership—one in which Europe is more united, more willing to take its role in global leadership and one where the United States is more inclined to share leadership with Europe.We need to find ways to complement each other, not compete in the political arena.
  We will not achieve either side of this equation without the other.Europe needs to build stronger foreign policies and to be ready to act on the world stage.But equally, the body language we see from America has a huge impact on how Europeans view the partnership.Our common interest requires a strong Europe, not a weak and divided one.I hope that the United States will reinforce its historical support for European integration.
  I am fortunate now to take over an area of policy in which Europe is highly effective:trade.Our top trade priority on both sides of the Atlantic must be to put our weight behind the multilateral Doha development agenda. Concluding this negotiation in a way that lives up to its ambition will bring enormous benefits.
  Collectively, we took a major step in reaching the framework agreement in Geneva last July, following the lead taken by the EU on agriculture export subsidies.We now look to the United States and others to follow that lead, and we need to accelerate work in other areas——on industrial tariffs and services—to achieve a balanced result.
  The Doha round of talks differs from any other in its focus on development.Europe and the United States must ensure that poorer countries are fully engaged and derive benefits.But the issues we need to tackle to stimulate growth and innovation in trans-Atlantic trade are not those on the Doha agenda.Our markets are relatively open and highly developed.We need to concentrate on removing regulatory and structural barriers that inhibit activity.
  This is about cutting international red tape.Our regulatory systems and cultures are different.but that is where real gains can be made.
  As EU trade commissioner I want to develop an ambitious but practical trans-Atlantic agenda.I am not inclined to set rhetorical targets or launch lofty initiatives.I want a set of achievable goals.
  Work on trans-Atlantic deregulation will also contribute to the central goal of the new European Commission:promoting growth and jobs in Europe.
  I am not naive.I am not turning a blind eye to the inevitable disputes in trans-Atlantic trade.They are relatively small as a proportion of total trade, but they make the headlines.
  They reflect the huge volume of our trade and investment flows.That is good.They also reflect our readiness to settle disputes in the World Trade Organization.That is also good.The WTO is the best example of effective multilateralism that the world has so far invented.I hope we will work together to uphold it.If multilateralism is to be worthwhile, it has to be effective—and that goes for every part of the relationship between Europe and America.
  1.Explain the following sentences or phrases in English, bringing out the implied meaning, if there is any.(24 points, 4 points each)
  1)he identity of interest between Europe and America is less obvious than during the cold war.
  2)European and American values are fundamentally diverging, or that our interests, no longer coincide.
  3) We will not achieve either side of this equation without the other.
  4) …to put our weight behind the multilateral Doha development agenda.
  5) Concluding this negotiation in a way that lives up to its ambition will bring enormous benefits.
  6)This is about cutting international red tape.
  2.Give a brief answer to each of the following questions in your own words.(15 points, 5 points each)
  1) What does the author call on the United States to do to strengthen the bond in the trans-Atlantic partnership?
  2) What does the author think are the issues the EU and US should work on in trans-Atlantic trade?
  3)cording to the author, what is the role of WTO in solving trans-Atlantic trade disputes?

下一页
本文共 3 页,第  [1]  [2]  [3]  页


英语专业考研 最新资讯
· 1998年北京外国语大学英语专业考研同声翻译真题
· 北外英语专业考研真题之1999年同声翻译
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2000年同声翻译真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2001基础英语试题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2002基础英语真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2003年基础英语原题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2004年同声传译真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2005基础英语真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2006年基础英语真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研真题:2007年基础英语

英美者 最新资讯
· 1998年北京外国语大学英语专业考研同声翻译真题
· 北外英语专业考研真题之1999年同声翻译
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2000年同声翻译真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2001基础英语试题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2002基础英语真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2003年基础英语原题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2004年同声传译真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2005基础英语真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研2006年基础英语真题
· 北京外国语大学英语专业考研真题:2007年基础英语
· 美国网络控制猪肉竟成敏感词汇:英语新闻报道
美国网络控制猪肉竟成敏感
英国孩子爱用美式英语:双
母亲节时不能送的礼物
双语新闻:展现真我不利职