2014鑰冪爺鑻辮涓€鐪熼璇曢鍙?qiáng)绛旀锛堥槄璇籄B錛塤璺ㄨ€冪綉
銆€銆€[絳旀]2014騫磋€冪爺鑻辮絳旀
銆€銆€[浼板垎]2014騫磋€冪爺鑻辮鍦ㄧ嚎浼板垎
銆€銆€[瑙ｆ瀽]2014騫磋€冪爺鑻辮鐪熼絳旀鍚嶅笀瑙ｆ瀽
銆€銆€[涓嬭澆]2014騫磋€冪爺鑻辮鐪熼鍙?qiáng)绛旀涓嬭?/span>
銆€銆€Part A
銆€銆€Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C, D. Mark your choice on ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points)
銆€銆€Text 1
銆€銆€In order to 鈥渃hange lives for the better鈥?and reduce 鈥渄ependency,鈥?George Orbome, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the 鈥渦pfront work search鈥? scheme. Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV register for online job search, and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit-and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly. What could be more reasonable?
銆€銆€More apparent reasonableness followed. There will now be a seven-day wait for the jobseeker鈥檚 allowance. 鈥淭hose first few days should be spent looking for work, not looking to sign on.鈥?he claimed. 鈥淲e鈥檙e doing these things because we know they help people say off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster鈥?Help? Really? On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with 鈥渞eforms鈥?to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsides laziness. What motivated him, we were to understand, was his zeal for 鈥渇undamental fairness鈥?protecting the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most deserving claimants received their benefits.
銆€銆€Losing a job is hurting: you don鈥檛 skip down to the jobcentre with a song in your heart, delighted at the prospect of doubling your income from the generous state. It is financially terrifying, psychologically embarrassing and you know that support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. You are now not wanted; you support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. You are now not wanted; you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life. Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared. Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always: a job.
銆€銆€But in Osborneland, your first instinct is to fall into dependency 鈥攑ermanent dependency if you can get it 鈥?supported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood. It is as though 20 years of ever-tougher reforms of the job search and benefit administration system never happened. The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and receive unconditional payments if the disaster happens. Even the very phrase 鈥渏obseeker鈥檚 allowance鈥?鈥?invented in 1996 鈥?is about redefining the unemployed as a 鈥渏obseeker鈥?who had no mandatory right to a benefit he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions.Instead, the claimant receives a time-limited 鈥渁llowance,鈥?conditional on actively seeking a job; no entitlement and no insurance, at 攏71.70 a week, one of the least generous in the EU.
銆€銆€鐪熼瑙ｆ瀽錛氭枃绔犳鎷細(xì)鏀垮簻澶ц嚕Grorge Osbome鎻愬嚭浜?jiǎn)涓€涓」鐩府鍔╁け涓氱殑浜烘壘宸ヤ綔銆?/strong>
銆€銆€21.George Osborne鈥檚 scheme was intended to
銆€銆€[A]provide the unemployed with easier access to benefits.
銆€銆€[B]encourage jobseekers鈥?active engagement in job seeking.
銆€銆€[C]motivate the unemployed to report voluntarily.
銆€銆€[D]guarantee jobseekers鈥?legitimate right to benefits.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欱 緇嗚妭棰樸€傛湰閬撻鐨勫叧閿槸intended to闂殑鏄洰鐨勶紝鎵€浠ユ垜浠篃搴旇鍘誨鎵句綋鐜扮洰鐨勬€х殑璇嶆眹錛屾墍浠ュ湪棣栨棣栧彞鐪嬪埌浜?jiǎn)in order to ,鍒欏悗闈㈢殑鍐呭鍗充負(fù)鏈絳旀錛岀粨鍚堝悗闈㈡壘宸ヤ綔鐨勫唴瀹瑰垯閫夋嫨B閫夐」銆?/p>
銆€銆€22.The phrase 鈥渢o sign on鈥?Line 3,Para.2) most probably means
銆€銆€[A]to check on the availability of jobs at the jobcentre.
銆€銆€[B]to accept the government鈥檚 restrictions on the allowance.
銆€銆€[C]to register for an allowance from the government.
銆€銆€[D]to attend a governmental job-training program.
銆€銆€絳旀錛?C 璇嶄箟鍙ユ剰棰樸€傚厛鏍規(guī)嵁棰樺共瀹氫綅鍒扮浜屾絎笁琛岋紝to sign on鍓嶉潰鏈変竴涓緢鏄庢樉鐨刵ot錛屽垯鎴戜滑鍙互鎺ㄧ煡錛岃繖涓€瀹氭槸鍓嶉潰鐨勫弽涔夛紝鎴戜滑鍙璇繪噦鍓嶉潰鍗婇儴鍒嗗氨鍙互浜?jiǎn)锛屽墠闈㈣搴旇spend looking for work錛屾濂藉拰A閫夐」鐩哥錛屾墍浠ユ垜浠彧瑕侀€夋嫨涓€涓浉鍙嶇殑閫夐」鍗沖彲錛屽垯閫夋嫨C閫夐」銆?/p>
銆€銆€23.What promoted the chancellor to develop his scheme?
銆€銆€[A]A desire to secure a better life for all.
銆€銆€[B]An eagerness to protect the unemployed.
銆€銆€[C]An urge to be generous to the claimants.
銆€銆€[D]A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayers.
銆€銆€絳旀:A 緇嗚妭棰樸€傛湰閬撻鐨勫叧閿槸棰樼洰涓殑prompted鍜宑hancellor錛屾牴鎹甤hancellor鑳藉畾浣嶅埌浜屾絎簲琛岋紝鍐嶅悜涓嬪鎵懼垯鍙彂鐜癿otivate鍜宲rompt鏄搴旂殑錛屾墍浠ョ湅鏈彞鍗沖彲鍙戠幇鍜孉閫夐」鏄搴旂殑銆?/p>
銆€銆€24.According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one one feel
銆€銆€[A]uneasy.
銆€銆€[B]enraged.
銆€銆€[C]insulted.
銆€銆€[D]guilty.
銆€銆€絳旀: A 緇嗚妭棰樸€傛湰閬撻鏍規(guī)嵁unemployed鍥炲埌鏂囦腑瀹氫綅鍦ㄧ涓夋鐨勬渶鍚庝竴鍙ワ紝娌℃湁鎰熻鐩稿叧鍐呭錛屾墍浠ラ渶瑕佸悜鍓嶆壘絳旀錛屽啀鏍規(guī)嵁鏈絎竴鍙ヨ瘽涓殑losing a job鍗沖彲鍒ゅ畾絳旀鍦ㄧ浜屽彞錛屽洜姝ら€夋嫨A閫夐」銆傚彟鎴戜滑浼?xì)鍙戠幇BCD涓変釜閫夐」瓚嬩簬寮虹儓鍜岃礋闈紝鎵€浠ワ紝鎴戜滑閫夋嫨A閫夐」銆?/p>
銆€銆€25.To which of the following would the author most probably agree?
銆€銆€[A]The British welfare system indulges jobseekers鈥?laziness.
銆€銆€[B]Osborne鈥檚 reforms will reduce the risk of unemployment.
銆€銆€[C]The jobseekers鈥?allowance has met their actual needs.
銆€銆€[D]Unemployment benefits should not be made conditional.
銆€銆€絳旀:B 緇嗚妭棰樸€傛湰棰橀鏍規(guī)嵁閫夐」瀹氫綅銆侫閫夐」鏍規(guī)嵁澶у啓瀛楁瘝The British welfare system瀹氫綅鍒版渶鍚庝竴孌電殑絎笁鍙ワ紝鍘熸枃鏄€渘o longer鈥濓紝閫夐」涓庡師鏂囧弽鍚戝共鎵般€侭閫夐」鏍規(guī)嵁Osborne鈥檚 reforms
銆€銆€瀹氫綅鍒扮涓€孌電浜屽彞錛屽彲浠ュ緱鍑?guó)櫙骞鐩彲鍑彏畱澶变笟鍗遍櫓锛屾墍浠涓烘紜瓟妗堛€侰閫夐」鏍規(guī)嵁棰樺共鈥渢he jobseekers鈥? allowance鈥濆畾浣嶅埌鏈€鍚庝竴孌靛€掓暟絎簩鍙ワ紝璇ュ彞鎻愬埌鈥渘o fundamental right鈥濓紝鎭頒笌C閫夐」琛ㄦ剰鐩稿弽錛屾墍浠鏄弽鍚戝共鎵般€侱閫夐」鏍規(guī)嵁棰樺共鈥渃onditional鈥濆畾浣嶅埌鏈€鍚庝竴孌墊渶鍚庝竴鍙ワ紝鍏朵腑鍙彁鍒扳€渃onditional on actively seeking a job鈥︹€濓紝騫舵病鏈夎璇翠互鍚庡簲璇ユ€庢牱錛屾墍浠ュ睘浜庢棤涓敓鏈夈€?/p>
銆€銆€Text 2
銆€銆€All around the world, lawyers generate more hostility than the members of any other profession---with the possible exception of journalism. But there are few places where clients have more grounds for complaint than America.
銆€銆€During the decade before the economic crisis, spending on legal services in America grew twice as fast as inflation. The best lawyers made skyscrapers-full of money, tempting ever more students to pile into law schools. But most law graduates never get a big-firm job. Many of them instead become the kind of nuisance-lawsuit filer that makes the tort system a costly nightmare.
銆€銆€There are many reasons for this. One is the excessive costs of a legal education. There is just one path for a lawyer in most American states: a four-year undergraduate degree at one of 200 law schools authorized by the American Bar Association and an expensive preparation for the bar exam. This leaves today鈥檚 average law-school graduate with $100,000 of debt on top of undergraduate debts. Law-school debt means that they have to work fearsomely hard.
銆€銆€Reforming the system would help both lawyers and their customers. Sensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them. One idea is to allow people to study law as an undergraduate degree. Another is to let students sit for the bar after only two years of law school. If the bar exam is truly a stern enough test for a would-be lawyer, those who can sit it earlier should be allowed to do so.Students who do not need the extra training could cut their debt mountain by a third.The other reason why costs are so high is the restrictive guild-like ownership structure of the business. Except in the District of Columbia, non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm. This keeps fees high and innovation slow. There is pressure for change from within the profession, but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.
銆€銆€In fact,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鈥?efficiency. After all, other countries, such as Australia and Britain, have started liberalizing their legal professions. America should follow.
銆€銆€26.a lot of students take up law as their profession due to
銆€銆€[A]the growing demand from clients.
銆€銆€[B]the increasing pressure of inflation.
銆€銆€[C]the prospect of working in big firms.
銆€銆€[D]the attraction of financial rewards.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欴銆傝棰樻槸鍥犳灉緇嗚妭棰橈紝鑰冨療緇嗚妭銆傞鍏堬紝鏍規(guī)嵁孌佃惤瀹氫綅鍘熷垯妯＄硦瀹氫綅錛屽畾浣嶅埌鍓嶅嚑孌點(diǎn)€傚叾嬈★紝鍐嶇簿紜畾浣嶏紝棰樺共涓湁鍏抽敭璇嶁€渟tudents鈥濃€渓aw鈥濃€減rofession鈥濓紝鍥炲埌鍘熸枃瀵繪壘鐩稿叧淇℃伅銆傜涓€孌墊湭鍙戠幇鐩稿叧淇℃伅錛岀劧鍚庡埌絎簩孌電湅鍒扳€淭he best lawyers made skyscrapers-full of money, tempting ever more students to pile into law schools.鈥濅笌棰樺共鏈夐噸鍚堜箣澶勶紝閫夐」D鏄鍙ョ殑鍚屼箟鏇挎崲銆侫銆丅銆丆涓変釜閫夐」鏍規(guī)嵁鍘熸枃涓埆璇嶆眹鈥渃lients鈥濃€渋nflation鈥濃€渂ig-firm鈥濈瓑榪涜騫叉壈銆傛敞鎰忥紝絎竴孌電殑But鏄釜鍋囪漿鎶樿瘝錛屽茍闈炵瓟妗堝銆?/p>
銆€銆€27.Which of the following adds to the costs of legal education in most American states?
銆€銆€[A]Higher tuition fees for undergraduate studies.
銆€銆€[B]Admissions approval from the bar association.
銆€銆€[C]Pursuing a bachelor鈥檚 degree in another major.
銆€銆€[D]Receiving training by professional associations.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欳銆傝棰樻槸緇嗚妭棰橈紝鑰冨療緇嗚妭銆傞鍏堟牴鎹钀藉畾浣嶅師鍒欏畾浣嶅埌絎笁孌點(diǎn)€傚叾嬈★紝鏍規(guī)嵁棰樺共鍏抽敭璇嶁€渢he costs of legal education鈥濈簿紜畾浣嶅埌絎笁孌電浜屽彞璇濃€淥ne is the excessive costs of a legal education.鈥濋棶棰樻槸鈥渨hich of the following adds to the costs of legal education鈥濓紝鍥犳瀹氫綅鍙ョ殑涓嬩竴鍙ュ氨鏄瓟妗堬紝鍗斥€淭here is just one path for a lawyer in most American states: a four-year undergraduate degree in some unrelated subject, then a three-year law degree at one of 200 law schools accredited by the American Bar Association and an expensive preparation for the bar exam.鈥濆垎鏋愰€夐」鍙煡錛岄€夐」C鎭板綋姒傚喌浜?jiǎn)璇ュ彞瀛愮殑娑典箟銆侫閫夐」鍒╃敤涓夋鏈熬鐨勨€淭his leaves today鈥檚 average law-school graduate with $100,000 of debt on top of undergraduate debts.鈥濊繘琛屽共鎵般€侭閫夐」鏃犱腑鐢熸湁銆侱閫夐」鏍規(guī)嵁鍥涙鏈€鍚庝竴鍙ュ嚭鐜扮殑鈥渢raining鈥濅釜鍒瘝姹囪繘琛屽共鎵般€?/p>
銆€銆€28.Hindrance to the reform of the legal system originates from
銆€銆€[A]lawyers鈥?and clients鈥?strong resistance.
銆€銆€[B]the rigid bodies governing the profession.
銆€銆€[C]the stem exam for would-be lawyers.
銆€銆€[D]non-professionals鈥?sharp criticism.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欱銆傝棰樻槸鍘熷洜緇嗚妭棰橈紝闂潵婧愩€傞鍏堟钀藉畾浣嶅師鍒欏畾浣嶅埌絎洓孌點(diǎn)€傚叾嬈★紝鏍規(guī)嵁棰樺共鍏抽敭璇嶁€渢he reform of the legal system鈥濆畾浣嶅埌絎簩鍙モ€淪ensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them.鈥濋€夐」B鍗充負(fù)璇ュ彞鐨勫悓涔夋浛鎹€?/p>
銆€銆€29.The guild-like ownership structure is considered 鈥渞estrictive鈥?partly because it
銆€銆€[A]bans outsiders鈥?involvement in the profession.
銆€銆€[B]keeps lawyers from holding law-firm shares.
銆€銆€[C]aggravates the ethical situation in the trade.
銆€銆€[D]prevents lawyers from gaining due profits.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欰銆傝棰樹負(fù)鍥犳灉緇嗚妭棰橈紝闂師鍥犮€傛牴鎹钀藉畾浣嶅師鍒欏畾浣嶈嚦鍊掓暟絎簩孌點(diǎn)€傚叾嬈★紝棰樺共涓嚭鐜扳€渢he guild-like ownership structure鈥濓紝綺劇‘瀹氫綅鍒扮浜屽彞鈥淓xcept in the District of Columbia, non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm. This keeps fees high and innovation slow.鈥濇澶栵紝鍦ㄨ孌墊渶鍚庝竴鍙ユ彁鍒扳€溾€eeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.鈥濅粠鑰屽彲浠ュ緱鍑虹瓟妗堥€堿銆?/p>
銆€銆€30.In this text, the author mainly discusses
銆€銆€[A]flawed ownership of America鈥檚 law firms and its causes.
銆€銆€[B]the factors that help make a successful lawyer in America.
銆€銆€[C]a problem in America鈥檚 legal profession and solutions to it.
銆€銆€[D]the role of undergraduate studies in America鈥檚 legal education.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欳銆傝棰樹負(fù)鏂囩珷涓繪棬棰橈紝鑰冨療鏂囩珷涓績(jī)銆傝綃囨枃绔犲睘浜庨棶棰樿В鍐沖瀷鏂囩珷錛屽墠5孌靛潎鍦ㄨ緹庡浗娉曞緥鑱屼笟瀛樺湪鐨勯棶棰橈紝鏈€鍚庝竴孌墊彁鍑轟簡(jiǎn)瑙ｅ喅鎺柦鈥渁llowing 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鈥? efficiency.鈥濄€傚洜姝わ紝璇ョ瘒灞炰簬闂瑙ｅ喅鍨嬫枃绔狅紝閫塁銆傚叾浠栧嚑涓€夐」鍧囦負(fù)鏂囦腑鐨勪釜鍒粏鑺傦紝浠ュ亸姒傚叏銆?/p>
銆€銆€Text 3
銆€銆€The US$3-million Fundamental physics prize is indeed an interesting experiment, as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year鈥檚 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.
銆€銆€What鈥檚 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.
銆€銆€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.
銆€銆€As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes鈥攂oth new and old鈥攁re distributed. The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include.But the Nobel Foundation鈥檚 limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research鈥攁s 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.
銆€銆€As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards, two things seem clear. First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere, It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism鈥攖hat is the culture of research, after all鈥攂ut it is the prize-givers鈥? money to do with as they please. It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
銆€銆€鐪熼瑙ｆ瀽錛?/p>
銆€銆€鏂囩珷涓婚鍙?qiáng)鑳屾櫙鐭ヨ瘑锛?xì)姝ょ瘒闃呰鐨勪富棰樺唴瀹逛負(fù)鈥滃熀紜€鐗╃悊瀛﹀鈥濓紝濡傛灉瀵逛簬榪欎竴鑳屾櫙淇℃伅鏈夋墍浜?jiǎn)瑙ｅQ岃繖綃囨枃绔犱究鍙交鏉劇湅鎳傦紝鍋氶鏇存槸鍗佹嬁涔?jié)绋?涓?013騫寸浉姣旓紝2014鑰冪爺闃呰鏂囩珷鍚屾牱娉ㄩ噸鏃舵晥鎬э紝Text3渚挎槸鍙嶅簲浜?013騫?鏈堜喚鐨勪竴嬈″疄鏃朵簨浠訛細(xì)鍩虹鐗╃悊瀛﹀熀閲戜細(xì)浜?鏈?0鏃ユ櫄鍦ㄧ憺澹棩鍐呯摝鎻檽浜?013騫村熀紜€鐗╃悊瀛﹀!鎵€浠?015鑰冪爺鐨勫悓瀛︿滑涓€瀹氳澶氬鍏蟲敞紺句細(xì)鐑偣璇濋錛屾嫇灞曡閲庯紝涓板瘜鑷繁鐨勬枃鍖栬儗鏅煡璇嗭紝榪欐牱鎵嶈兘鍙栧緱浜嬪崐鍔熷€嶇殑鏁堟灉!
銆€銆€鏂囩珷璁插埌鐨勬槸鍏充簬鍜岃璐濆皵濂栦竴鏍風(fēng)殑濂栭噾涓板帤鐨勫欏瑰嚭鐜幫紝榪欎簺濂栭」灝辨槸鐢變竴浜涚綉緇滅殑鍏徃鎴栬€呮槸涓€浜涙柊璐典滑浠栦滑寰楀嚭榪欐牱澶ч噺鐨勯挶錛屽綋鐒朵細(xì)閬嚭涓€浜涙壒璇勶紝榪欎簺濂栭」榪樻槸娌℃硶鍜岃璐濆皵濂栫浉姣旂殑錛岄樁綰ф槸娌℃硶鏀瑰彉鐨勶紝鍚嶆湜鏄病娉曡喘涔扮殑銆傚綋鐒惰繖涓€緋誨垪鐨勪笢瑗匡紝鍦ㄥ墠涓夋褰撲腑璋堝埌涔嬪悗錛屽埌浜?jiǎn)鏈€鍚庝竴孌碉紝浣滆€呰〃鏄庝粬鐨勮鐐癸紝綰電劧榪欎簺瀵圭瀛﹀鐨勫鍔卞湪濂栭」涓婂瓨鍦ㄧ潃涓€浜涚憰鐤碉紝瀛樺湪鐫€涓€浜涗笉鍚堢悊鐨勫湴鏂廣€備絾鏄浜庣瀛﹀鏉ヨ錛屾湁浜虹粰浣犻挶鏀寔浣犵殑鐮旂┒錛岀粓褰掓槸濂界殑銆備篃灝辨槸璇翠粠31鍒?5棰樺熀鏈笂娌℃湁闅鵑錛屼篃娌℃湁鍙互鍘諱簤璁殑錛屼篃鏄棦鎵€寰楃殑鏂囩珷銆?/p>
銆€銆€31.The Fundamental Physical Prize is seen as
銆€銆€[A]a symbol of the entrepreneurs鈥檚 wealth.
銆€銆€[B]a possible replacement of the Nobel Prize.
銆€銆€[C]an example of bankers鈥?investment.
銆€銆€[D]a handsome reward for researchers.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欰涓虹粏鑺傞銆傛牴鎹騫蹭腑鐨凢undamental Physics Prize鍙互瀹氫綅鍒扮涓€孌碉紝浣嗛櫎姝や箣澶栧氨娌℃湁鍏朵粬緇嗚妭鎻愮ず淇℃伅浜?jiǎn)锛屾墍浠ユ垜浠彧鑳芥牴鎹嚑涓€夐」鍘誨畾浣嶏紝鍒嗗埆鏍規(guī)嵁閫夐」涓殑entrepreneurs銆丯obel Prize銆乮nvestment銆乺eward鍘誨畾浣嶏紝鍦ㄧ涓€孌墊湯鍙ユ壘鍒頒簡(jiǎn)涓嶢閫夐」鐩鎬竴鑷寸殑鍙ュ瓙錛屽垯鍒ゅ畾A閫夐」姝ｇ‘銆?/p>
銆€銆€32.The phrase 鈥渢o sign on鈥?Line 3,Para.2) most probably means
銆€銆€[A]the profit-oriented scientists.
銆€銆€[B]the founders of the new award.
銆€銆€[C]the achievement-based system.
銆€銆€[D]peer-review-led research.
銆€銆€絳旀錛欱 涓虹粏鑺傞銆傛牴鎹騫蹭腑鐨刢ritics瀹氫綅鍒扮涓夋錛屽彲鐭ョ浜屾娌℃湁鍑洪錛屼粠絎笁孌電浜屽彞鍙互寰楀嚭鏈亾棰樼殑姝ｇ‘閫夐」錛寃ho have made their careers in research鍗充負(fù)B閫夐」涓殑The founders銆?/p>
銆€銆€33.What promoted the chancellor to develop his scheme?
銆€銆€[A]controversies over the recipients鈥?status.
銆€銆€[B]the joint effort of modern researchers.
銆€銆€[C]legitimate concerns over the new prize.
銆€銆€[D]the demonstration of research findings.
銆€銆€絳旀錛?D 涓虹粏鑺傞銆傛湰閬撻濡傛灉浠庨騫蹭腑鐪嬫洿鍍忔槸渚嬭瘉棰橈紝浣嗛鐩腑璇撮亾the case involves鍗抽棶渚嬪瓙鏈韓錛屾墍浠ヤ負(fù)涓€閬撶粏鑺傞銆傛垜浠湪絎洓孌靛€掓暟絎笁鍙ヤ腑鎵懼埌浜?jiǎn)Higgs boson錛屽畾浣嶅埌鏈彞鍙互寰楃煡nature of modern research---as well as demonstrated by鈥︹€﹀嵆涓烘湰閬撻姝ｇ‘絳旀銆?/p>
銆€銆€34.According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one one feel
銆€銆€[A]Their endurance has done justice to them.
銆€銆€[B]Their legitimacy has long been in dispute.
銆€銆€[C]They are the most representative honor.
銆€銆€[D]History has never cast doubt on them.
銆€銆€絳旀錛?A 涓哄垽鏂銆傛綾婚鍨嬫槸鑰冭瘯涓殑涓€涓毦鐐癸紝鍦ㄩ騫蹭腑鎻愮ず淇℃伅闈炲父灝戯紝鎵€浠ユ垜浠渶瑕佹牴鎹瘡涓€夐」鍒嗗埆瀹氫綅銆侫閫夐」鐨刣urance瀹氫綅鍒版湰孌墊渶鍚庝竴鍙ime銆侭閫夐」鏍規(guī)嵁legitimacy瀹氫綅鍒扮涓€鍙ャ€侰閫夐」娌℃湁鎻愬埌銆侱閫夐」浠庢渶鍚庝竴孌靛彲浠ラ獙璇佺‘瀹炴槸鏀跺埌浜?jiǎn)璐ㄧ枒锛孊閫夐」鍜屽師鏂囦笉絎︼紝鍙互寰楃煡絳旀涓篈銆?/p>
銆€銆€35.To which of the following would the author most probably agree?
銆€銆€[A]acceptable despite the criticism.
銆€銆€[B]harmful to the culture of research.
銆€銆€[C]subject to undesirable changes.
銆€銆€[D]unworthy of public attention.
銆€銆€絳旀錛?A 涓轟富鏃ㄩ銆傛湰棰樺睘浜庝綔鑰呰鐐癸紝鍑哄湪鏈€鍚庝竴孌靛垯璇存槑鏇村浣撶幇浜?jiǎn)鏂囩珷鐨勪咐L棬錛屽洜涓鴻繕鏈変竴涓钀藉搴旓紝鍒欐垜浠彲浠ュ湪鏈€鍚庝竴孌墊壘絳旀錛屾牴鎹騫蹭腑鐨刟ward鎴戜滑鍙互寰楃煡鍏ㄦ枃鐨勬渶鍚庝竴鍙ユ槑紜綋鐜頒簡(jiǎn)浣滆€呯殑瑙傜偣錛屾晠閫堿銆?/p>
銆€銆€Text 4
銆€銆€鈥淭he Heart of the Matter,鈥?the just-released report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, deserves praise for affirming the importance of the humanities and social sciences to the prosperity and security of liberal democracy in America. Regrettably, however, the report's failure to address the true nature of the crisis facing liberal education may cause more harm than good.
銆€銆€In 2010, leading congressional Democrats and Republicans sent letters to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences asking that it identify actions that could be taken by "federal, state and local governments, universities, foundations, educators, individual benefactors and others" to "maintain national excellence in humanities and social scientific scholarship and education."
銆€銆€In response, the American Academy formed the Commission on the Humanities and Social Sciences, with Duke University President Richard Brodhead and retired Exelon CEO John Rowe as co-chairmen. Among the commission's 51 members are top-tier-university presidents, scholars, lawyers, judges, and business executives, as well as prominent figures from diplomacy, filmmaking, music and journalism.
銆€銆€The goals identified in the report are generally admirable. Because representative government presupposes an informed citizenry, the report supports full literacy; stresses the study of history and government, particularly American history and American government; and encourages the use of new digital technologies.
銆€銆€To encourage innovation and competition, the report calls for increased investment in research, the crafting of coherent curricula that improve students' ability to solve problems and communicate effectively in the 21st century, increased funding for teachers and the encouragement of scholars to bring their learning to bear on the great challenges of the day. The report also advocates greater study of foreign languages, international affairs and the expansion of study abroad programs.
銆€銆€One of the more novel ideas in the report is the creation of a "Culture Corps" in cities and town across America to "transmit humanistic and social scientific expertise from one generation to the next."
銆€銆€Unfortunately, despite 2陸 years in the making, "The Heart of the Matter" never gets to the heart of the matter: the illiberal nature of liberal education at our leading colleges and universities.
銆€銆€The commission ignores that for several decades America's colleges and universities have produced graduates who don't know the content and character of liberal education and are thus deprived of its benefits. Sadly, the spirit of inquiry once at home on campus has been replaced by the use of the humanities and social sciences as vehicles for disseminating "progressive," or left-liberal propaganda.
銆€銆€Today, professors routinely treat the progressive interpretation of history and progressive public policy as the proper subject of study while portraying conservative or classical liberal ideas鈥攕uch as free markets, self-reliance and a distrust of central planning鈥攁s falling outside the boundaries of routine, and sometimes legitimate, intellectual investigation.
銆€銆€The AAAS displays great enthusiasm for liberal education. Yet its report may well set back reform by obscuring the depth and breadth of the challenge that congress asked it to illuminate.
銆€銆€36. According to Paragraph 1, what is the author鈥檚 attitude toward the AAAS鈥檚 report?
銆€銆€[A] Critical
銆€銆€[B] Appreciative
銆€銆€[C] Contemptuous
銆€銆€[D] Tolerant
銆€銆€鏈瘒鏂囩珷閫夎嚜鍗庡皵琛楁棩鎶ャ€備富瑕佽鐨勬槸闈炶嚜鐢辨暀鑲蹭互鍙?qiáng)鈥濋棶棰樻牳蹇?jī)鈥濊繖涓姤鍛娿€?/p>
銆€銆€絳旀瑙ｆ瀽錛?/p>
銆€銆€36.閫堿錛岃棰樻槸緇嗚妭鎬佸害棰樸€傚茍闈炶€冨療鍏ㄦ枃鐨勬€佸害錛屼篃灝辨槸璇磋緇嗚妭瀹氫綅銆傛牴鎹騫插畾浣嶅師鍒欙紝瀹氫綅絎竴孌礎(chǔ)AAS鍑虹幇涔嬪錛屽茍涓斾竴瀹氳鎵懼埌琛ㄧず璇勪環(huán)鐨勯儴鍒嗐€傝棰樿糠鎯戞€у緢寮猴紝鍥犱負(fù)鏂囩珷鍦ˋAAS鍚庨潰灝卞張鈥漰raise鈥濇墍浠ュ鏄撹瀵煎ぇ瀹墮€夋嫨絳旀B 鈥渁ppreciative(嬈ｈ祻鐨?鈥濓紝浣嗘槸鎴戜滑搴旇鐪嬪埌鏈塰owever錛屾垜浠煡閬撳鏋滅涓€孌靛嚭鐜拌漿鎶橈紝閭ｆ杞姌涓€瀹氳窡涓繪棬鏈夊叧銆傚悓鏃跺悇涓閮戒笌涓繪棬鐩稿叧錛屾墍浠ヨ繖閬撻搴旇浜庝富鏃ㄧ浉鍏籌紝鍚庢枃涓殑鈥渕ay cause more harm than good.鈥濊鎴戜滑鐭ラ亾瀹冪殑榪樺浣欏埄錛屾墍浠ョ瓟妗堥€夋嫨A錛屾壒鍒ゆ€х殑銆?/p>
銆€銆€37. Influential figures in the Congress required that the AAAS report on how to
銆€銆€[A] retain people鈥檚 interest in liberal education
銆€銆€[B] define the government鈥檚 role in education
銆€銆€[C] keep a leading position in liberal education
銆€銆€[D] safeguard individuals rights to education
銆€銆€37錛岄€塁錛岀粏鑺傞銆傛牴鎹嚜鐒舵瀹氫綅鍘熷垯錛?6棰樺湪絎竴孌靛嚭棰橈紝38棰樺湪絎笁孌靛嚭棰橈紝閭?7棰樺湪絎簩孌靛嚭棰樼殑鍙兘鎬у氨寰堝ぇ銆傚悓鏃墮騫插畾浣嶁€滻nfluential figures in the Congress鈥濅笌鈥渓eading congressional Democrats and Republicans鈥濆悓涔夋浛鎹€傚畾浣嶇殑絳旀鏄痑sking that it identify actions that could be taken by "federal, state and 鈥?., individual benefactors and others" to "asking that it identify actions that could be taken by "federal, state and local governments, universities, foundations, educators, individual benefactors and others" to "maintain national excellence in humanities and social scientific scholarship and education. 鈥淚n humanities and social scientific scholarship and education. 鈥滀篃灝辨槸璇寸瓟妗堥噸鐐瑰湪maintain national excellence 鍒氬ソ涓庨€夐」C 涓殑leading position 榪涜鍚屼箟鏇挎崲銆侫BD涓庢枃绔犱笉絎﹀悎銆?/p>
銆€銆€38. According to Paragraph 3, the report suggests
銆€銆€[A] an exclusive study of American history
銆€銆€[B] a greater emphasis on theoretical subjects
銆€銆€[C] the application of emerging technologies
銆€銆€[D] funding for the study of foreign languages
銆€銆€38錛岄€塁錛屾帹鐞嗛銆係uggest 鏄帹鐞嗛鐨勬爣蹇椼€傚厛鍖栭€夐」鍏抽敭璇嶏紝鍙戠幇閫夐」A鏄American history閫夐」B; 鏄theoretical subjects;閫夐」C]emerging technologies;閫夐」Dfunding foreign languages銆傝繑鍥炲師鏂囧畾浣嶇殑鏃跺€欙紝A 閫夐」涓殑鈥渆xclusive 鎺掑鈥濆茍娌℃湁鍦ㄢ€渟tresses the study of history and government, particularly American history and American government;鈥濊繖鍙ヨ瘽涓綋鐜般€侭閫夐」涓殑鐞嗚瀛︾娌℃湁瀹氫綅鐐廣€侱閫夐」涓庡師鏂団€渋ncreased funding for teachers鈥濅互鍙?qiáng)鈥済reater study of foreign languages,鈥濅笉絎︺€傚睘浜庡紶鍐犳潕鎴淬€傗€渆ncourages the use of new digital technologies.鈥濅笌閫夐」C 鍚屼箟鏇挎崲銆?/p>
銆€銆€39. The author implies in Paragraph S that professors are
銆€銆€[A] supportive of free markets
銆€銆€[B] cautious about intellectual investigation
銆€銆€[C] conservative about public policy
銆€銆€[D] biased against classical liberal ideas
銆€銆€39棰橀€塀錛屽睘浜庢帹鐞嗛銆侷mplies鏄帹鐞嗛鐨勬爣蹇椼€傚悓鏃舵牴鎹彁棰樺共瀹氫綅絎簲孌碉紝鎵緋rofessor. 鈥減rofessors routinely treat the progressive interpretation of history and progressive public policy as the proper subject of study while portraying conservative or classical liberal ideas鈥攕uch as free markets, self-reliance 鈥攁s falling outside the boundaries of routine, and sometimes legitimate, intellectual investigation.鈥滱 閫夐」涓殑free markets鍓嶉潰鐨勪慨楗拌瘝璇槸conservative or liberal ideas 娌℃湁浣撶幇A 閫夐」涓殑supportive銆侰閫夐」涓殑conservative 涓庢枃涓璸rogressive public policy 涓嶇鍚堛€侱閫夐」涓璪iased 娌℃湁浣撶幇錛屾晠鎺掗櫎銆傛墍浠ラ€塀銆?/p>
銆€銆€40. Which of the following would be the best title for the text?
銆€銆€[A] Ways to Grasp 鈥淭he Heart of the Matter鈥?/p>
銆€銆€[B] Illiberal Education and 鈥淭he Heart of the Matter鈥?/p>
銆€銆€[C] The AAAS鈥檚 Contribution to Liberal Education
銆€銆€[D] Progressive Policy vs. Liberal Education
銆€銆€40.棰橀€夋嫨B銆備富鏃ㄥぇ鎰忛銆傚厛鐪嬪叾浠栭棰樺共錛屾垜浠攣瀹氬叧閿瘝鏄痳eport 錛岃€宺eport 灝辨槸鈥渢he heart of the matter 鈥? 鏁呮帓闄鍜孌.鑰屾垜浠湅A 鍙戠幇鏂囩珷騫舵病鏈夎濡備綍鎶撲綇鈥滈棶棰樻牳蹇?jī)鈥濈殑鍚勪釜鏂規(guī)硶銆傛帓闄錛岄€夋嫨B
銆€銆€Part B
銆€銆€Directions錛?/p>
銆€銆€The following paragraphs are given in a wrong order. For Questions 41-45, you are required to reorganize into a coherent text by choosing from the list A-G and filling them into the numbered boxes .Paragraphs A and E have been correctly placed. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET.(10 points)
銆€銆€[A] Some archaeological sites have always been easily observable鈥攆or example, the Parthenon in Athens, Greece; the pyramids of Giza in Egypt; and the megaliths of Stonehenge in southern England. But these sites are exceptions to the norm .Most archaeological sites have been located by means of careful searching, while many others have been discovered by accident. Olduvai Gorge, fell into its deep valley in 1911.Thousands of Aztec artifacts came to light during the digging of the Mexico City subway in the 1970s.
銆€銆€[B] In another case, American archaeologists Rene million and George Cowgill spent years systematically mapping the entire city of Teotihuacan in the valley of Mexico near what is now Mexico City .at its peak around AD 600, this city was one of the largest human settlements in the word. The researchers mapped not only the city鈥檚 vast and ornate ceremonial areas, but also hundreds of simpler apartment complexes where common people lived.
銆€銆€[C] How do archaeologists know where to find what they are looking for when there is nothing visible on the surface of the ground? Typically, they survey and sample (make test excavations on) large areas of terrain to determine where excavation will yield useful information. Surveys and test samples have also become important for understanding the larger landscapes that contain archaeological sites.
銆€銆€[D] Surveys can cover a single large settlement or entire landscapes.in one case, many researchers working around the ancient Maya city of Cop謾n, Honduras, have located hundreds of small rural village and individual dwellings by using aerial photographs and by making surveys on foot. The resulting settlement maps show how the distribution and density of the rural population around the city changed dramatically between AD500 and 850, when Cop謾n collapsed.
銆€銆€[E] To find their sites, archaeologists today rely heavily on systematic survey methods and a variety of high-technology tools and techniques. Airbone technologies, such as different types of radar and photographic equipment carried by airplanes or spacecraft, allow archaeologists to learn about what lies beneath the ground without digging. Aerial surveys locate general areas of interest or larger buried features, such as ancient buildings or fields.
銆€銆€[F] Most archaeological sites, however, are discovered by archaeologists who have set out to look for them. Such searches can take years. British archaeologist Howard Carter knew that the tomb of the Egyptian pharaoh Tutankhamum existed from information found in other sites. Carter sifted through rubble in the Valley of the King for seven years before he located the tomb in 1922. In the late 1800s British archaeologist Sir Arthur Eyan combed antique dealers鈥?stores in Athens, Greece. He was searching for thing engraved seals attributed to the ancient Mycenaean culture that dominated Greece from the 1400s to 1200s BC. Evas鈥檚 interpretations of those engravings eventually led them to find the Minoan palace at Knossos on the island of Crete, in 1900.
銆€銆€[G] Ground surveys allow archaeologists to pinpoint the places where digs will be successful. Most ground surveys involve a lot of walking, looking for surface clues such as small fragments of pottery. They often include a certain amounts of digging to test for buried materials at selected points across a landscape. Archaeologists also may locate buried remains by using such technologies as ground radar, magnetic-field recording, and metal detector. Archaeologists commonly use computers to map sites and the landscapes around sites. Two and three-dimensional maps are helpful tools in planning excavations, illustrating how sites look, and presenting the results of archaeological research.
銆€銆€41 --- A --- 42. --- E ---43 --- 44 --- 45
銆€銆€瑙ｆ瀽錛氭湰鏂囬€夎嚜鍙戣〃浜?003騫碩he International History Project鐨勬枃绔狅紝棰樼洰涓篈rcheology.
銆€銆€41. 姝ら鏄孌碉紝鎵€浠ラ渶瑕佹壘瀵葷患榪版€х殑孌佃惤銆傚叾涓瑼鍜孍閫夐」鏄粰鍑虹殑錛屾墍浠ュ彧闇€浠庝綑涓嬮€夐」榪涜閫夋嫨銆侭閫夐」涓湁another錛屾墍浠ヤ笉浼?xì)鏄W竴孌點(diǎn)€侲閫夐」涓唬璇峵heir娌℃湁鎸囦唬瀵硅薄銆侳涓湁however,涔熶笉浼?xì)鏄W竴孌點(diǎn)€傚洜姝わ紝鍙暀涓婥鍜孌閫夐」銆傚湪C閫夐」鏈€鍚庝竴鍙ユ彁鍒皊urvey鍜宼est sample涔熷緢閲嶈銆傝€屽湪D閫夐」寮€澶村氨鎻愬埌浜?jiǎn)survey,鑰屼笖鏁存閮芥槸錛岀敱姝ゅ彲鐪嬪嚭D鏄C鐨勫垎榪般€傛墍浠鏄孌點(diǎn)€?/p>
銆€銆€42. 姝ら鎺掑湪A欏逛箣鍚庯紝鎵€浠ュ唴瀹逛笂搴旇鏄鎺ョ殑銆侫欏逛富瑕佽皥璁虹殑鏄ぇ閮ㄥ垎鑰冨彜鍦扮偣鏄€氳繃浠旂粏鎼滃涔嬪悗鎵懼埌鐨勶紝鑰屽叾浠栫殑寰堝鏄鍋剁劧鍙戠幇鐨勶紝鎺ョ潃涓句簡(jiǎn)涓€浜涗緥瀛愩€傛帴涓嬫潵鍦ㄧ湅鍚勬棣栧彞鐨勬椂鍊欙紝鍙戠幇F欏逛腑鎻愬埌澶ч儴鍒嗚€冨彜鍦扮偣鏄鑰冨彜瀛﹀浠壒鎰忓鎵懼彂鐜扮殑錛屽拰A鎻愬埌鐨勫伓鐒跺彂鐜版剰鎬濈浉鍙嶏紝鎵€浠姝ｇ‘銆?/p>
銆€銆€43. 姝ら鎺掑湪E欏逛箣鍚庛€侲閫夐」鏈€鍚庝竴鍙ユ彁鍒板ぉ絀虹殑鎼滃錛岃€屽湪G閫夐」鐨勫紑澶存彁鍒板湴闈㈡悳瀵伙紝姝ｅソ褰㈡垚瀵瑰簲錛屾墍浠ヤ負(fù)姝ｇ‘絳旀銆?/p>
銆€銆€44. 姝ゆ椂錛屽彧鐣欎笅B鍜孌閫夐」銆傚叾涓瑽閫夐」寮€澶存彁鍒頒簡(jiǎn)in another case,鎵€浠ュ墠闈竴孌典竴瀹氳鎻愬埌in one case, 鑰孌閫夐」涓湁in one case.鎵€浠ワ紝D閫夐」鍦ㄥ墠銆?/p>
銆€銆€45. 鏍規(guī)嵁涓婇潰鐨勫垎鏋愶紝姝ら鍙兘閫塀銆?/p>
銆€銆€鐩稿叧鎺ㄨ崘錛?/p>
| 2014鑰冪爺絳旀涓撻 | 2014鑰冪爺鎴愮嘩鏌ヨ涓撻 | 2014鑰冪爺鍒嗘暟綰?/a> |
| 2014鑰冪爺澶嶈瘯闈㈣瘯鐧鵑棶鐧劇瓟 | 2014鑰冪爺澶嶈瘯鍏ㄧ▼絳栧垝 | 2014鑰冪爺澶嶈瘯涓撻 |
銆€銆€2022鑰冪爺鍒濆璇曞凡緇忔帴榪戝熬澹幫紝鑰冪爺瀛﹀瓙鍏ㄩ潰榪涘叆2023灞婂鑰?/b>錛岃法鑰冧負(fù)23鑰冪爺鐨勮€冪敓鍑嗗浜?0澶ц鍖呭叏紼嬪噯澶囥€佸叏騫村涔?fàn)澶囪€冭鍒掋€佺洰鏍囬櫌鏍′笓涓氳緟瀵箋€佸叏鐪熷璇曟ā鎷熺粌涔?fàn)鍜屽叏绋嬮拡瀵规€ф寚瀵鹼紱2023鑰冪爺鐨勫皬浼欎即閽堜篃宸茬粡寮€濮嬫嫨鏍″拰澶嶄範(fàn)浜?jiǎn)锛岃法鑰冭€冪爺鐣呭5.0鐗堟湰鍏ㄦ柊鍗囩駭錛屾棤璁轟綘鍦ㄦ牎鍦ㄥ閮藉彲浠ユ洿鑷鐨勫畬鎴愪綘鐨勮€冪爺澶嶄範(fàn)錛?/a>鏆戝亣闆嗚钀?/span>甯︽潵浜?jiǎn)闄㈡牎涓撲笟鍒濇閫夋嫨錛屾槑紜柟鍚戯紱鑰冪爺澶囪€冨叏騫磋鍒掞紝鏍稿績(jī)鐭ヨ瘑鐐瑰叆闂紱涓€у寲鍒跺畾澶囪€冩柟妗堬紝鍔╀綘璧㈠湪璧瘋窇綰匡紝鏃╁嚭鍙戜竴鐐圭鎴愬姛灝辨洿榪戜竴鐐癸紒
鐐瑰嚮鍙充晶鍜ㄨ鎴?/strong>鐩存帴鍓嶅線浜?jiǎn)瑙ｆ洿澶?/strong>
| 鑰冪爺闄㈡牎涓撲笟閫夋嫨鍜岃€冪爺澶嶄範(fàn)璁″垝 | |||
| 2023澶囪€冨涔?/td> | 2023綰夸笂綰夸笅闅忔椂瀛︿範(fàn) | 34鎵€鑷垝綰塊櫌鏍¤€冪爺澶嶈瘯鍒嗘暟綰挎眹鎬?/td> | |
| 2022鑰冪爺澶嶈瘯鏈€鍏ㄤ俊鎭暣鐞?/a> | 鍏ㄥ浗鍚勬嫑鐢熼櫌鏍¤€冪爺澶嶈瘯鍒嗘暟綰挎眹鎬?/a> | ||
| 2023鍏ㄦ棩鍒跺皝闂緇?/span> | 鍏ㄥ浗鍚勬嫑鐢熼櫌鏍¤€冪爺璋冨墏淇℃伅姹囨€?/a> | ||
| 2023鑰冪爺鍏堢煡 | 鑰冪爺鑰冭瘯縐戠洰鏈夊摢浜涳紵 | 濡備綍姝ｇ‘鐪嬪緟鑰冪爺鍒嗘暟綰匡紵 | |
| 涓嶅悓闄㈡牎鐩稿悓涓撲笟濡備綍閫夋嫨鏇撮€傚悎鑷繁鐨?/a> | 浠庡氨涓氳鑰冪爺濡備綍鎷╀笓涓氾紵 | ||
| 鎵嬫妸鎵嬫暀浣犲浣曢€変笓涓氾紵 | 楂樻牎鐮旂┒鐢熸暀鑲插悇瀛︾闂ㄧ被鎺掕姒?/a> | ||
鐩稿叧鎺ㄨ崘
璺ㄨ€冭€冪爺璇劇▼
| 鐝瀷 | 瀹氬悜鐝瀷 | 寮€鐝椂闂?/td> | 楂樺畾鐝?/td> | 鏍囧噯鐝?/td> | 璇劇▼浠嬬粛 | 鍜ㄨ |
| 縐嬪闆嗚 | 鍐插埡鐝?/td> | 9.10-12.20 | 168000 | 24800璧?/td> | 灝忕彮闈㈡巿+涓撲笟璇?瀵?+涓撲笟璇懼畾鍚戣緟瀵?鍗忚鍔犲己璇劇▼(楂樺畾鐝?+涓撳睘瑙勫垝絳旂枒(楂樺畾鐝?+綺劇粏鍖栫瓟鐤?澶嶈瘯璧勬簮(楂樺畾鐝?+澶嶈瘯璇懼寘(楂樺畾鐝?+澶嶈瘯鎸囧(楂樺畾鐝?+澶嶈瘯鐝富浠?v1鏈嶅姟(楂樺畾鐝?+澶嶈瘯闈㈡巿瀵嗚(楂樺畾鐝?+澶嶈瘯1v1(楂樺畾鐝? | |
| 2023闆嗚鐣呭 | 闈炲畾鍚戯紙鏀胯嫳鐝?鏁版斂鑻辯彮錛?/td> | 姣忔湀20鏃?/td> | 22800璧?鍗忚鐝? | 13800璧?/td> | 鍏堣闃跺湪綰胯紼?鍩虹闃跺湪綰胯紼?寮哄寲闃跺湪綰胯紼?鐪熼闃跺湪綰胯紼?鍐插埡闃跺湪綰胯紼?涓撲笟璇鵑拡瀵規(guī)€т竴瀵逛竴璇劇▼+鐝富浠誨叏紼嬬潱瀛︽湇鍔?鍏ㄧ▼瑙勫垝浣撶郴+鍏ㄧ▼嫻嬭瘯浣撶郴+鍏ㄧ▼綺劇粏鍖栫瓟鐤?鎷╂牎鎷╀笓涓氳兘鍔涘畾浣嶄綋緋?鍏ㄥ勾鍏抽敭鐜妭鎸囧浣撶郴+鍒濊瘯鍔犲己璇?鍒濊瘯涓撳睘鏈嶅姟+澶嶈瘯鍏ㄧ鏍囧噯鐝湇鍔?/td> |
