1998年历年考研英语真题

Hungarians stopped just short of sending in the troops in their contention over a dam on the Danube.The huge complex willprobably have all the usual problems of big dams.But Slovakia is bidding for independence from the Czechs,and now needsa dam to prove itself.Meanwhile,in India,the World Bank has given the go-ahead to the even more wrong-headed Narmada Dam.And thebank has done this even though its advisors say the dam will cause hardship for the powerless and environmental destruction.The benefits are for the powerful,but they are far from guaranteed.Proper,scientific study of the impacts of dams and of the cost and benefits of controlling water can help to resolve theseconflicts.Hydroelectric power and flood control and irrigation are possible without building monster dams.But when youare dealing with myths,it is hard to be either proper,or scientific.It is time that the world leamed the lessons of Aswan.Youdon't need a dam to be saved.11.The third sentence of Paragraph 1 implies that[A]people would be happy if they shut their eyes to reality [B]the blind could be happier than the sighted[C]over-excited people tend to neglect vital things[D]fascination makes people lose their eyesight12.In Paragraph 5,"the powerless"probably refers to[A]areas short of electricity[B]dams without power stations[C]poor countries around India[D]common people in the Narmada Dam area13.What is the myth concerning giant dams?[A]They bring in more fertile soil.[B]They help defend the country.[C]They strengthen international ties.[D]They have universal control of the waters.14.What the author tries to suggest may best be interpreted as[A)“'It's no use crying over spilt milk”[B]"More haste,less speed"[C]"Look before you leap"[D]“He who laughs last laughs best'”Text 2Well,no gain without pain,they say.But what about pain without gain?Everywhere you go in America,you hear talesof corporate revival.What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they arepresiding over is for real.The official statistics are mildly discouraging.They show that,if you lump manufacturing and services together,productivity has grown on average by 1.2%since 1987.That is somewhat faster than the average during the previous decade.And since 1991,productivity has increased by about 2%a year,which is more than twice the 1978-87 average.The trouble isthat part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle,and so is notconclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend.There is,as Robert Rubin,the treasury secretary,says,a"disjunction"between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by thestatistics.Some of this can be easily explained.New ways of organizing the workplace --all that re-engineering and downsizing-are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy,which is driven by many other factors such as jointinvestment in equi