2022年考研考博-考博英语-天津师范大学考试全真模拟易错、难点剖析AB卷（带答案）
一.综合题(共15题)
1.
单选题
Nanotechnology ems to hold the key that allows construction and building materials to（ ）the features of natural systems improved until perfection during millions of years.
crab问题1选项
A.replicate
B.copycat
C.pirate
D.borrow
【答案】A
【解析】考查动词辨析。replicate意为“复制，再生”；copycat意为“盲目模仿者”；pirate意为“盗窃”；borrow意为“借用”。
句意：纳米技术似乎掌握着关键，使建筑和建筑材料能够复制自然系统的特征，在数百万年中不断改善直到完美。
2.
单选题
It gave me a strange feeling of excitement to e my name in （ ）.
问题1选项
A.news小清新翻译
B.print
C.publication
organizeD.press寂静之声歌词
【答案】B
【解析】考查名词辨析。news意为“新闻，消息”；print意为“印刷业，印记”；publication意为“出版”；press意为“新闻，出版社”。in print意为“印出来”。
句意：当看到我的名字出现在出版物上时，我有一种奇怪的兴奋感。
3.
单选题
Military orders are（ ）and cannot be disobeyed.
问题1选项
A.defective
B.submissive子法
C.alternative
D.imperative
【答案】D
【解析】考查形容词辨析。defective意为“有缺陷的，不完美的”；submissive意为“顺从的”；alternative意为“替代的”；imperative意为“必要的，不可避免的”。
句意：军事命令是绝对服从的，不能违抗。
4.
单选题
Scientific journals can provide reliable information becau of the process called "peer review ", in which other scientists (peers) evaluate the value and credibility of rearch before allowing it to appear in print.
英语语音知识
mgbPeer-review is performed by knowledgeable scientists who are not directly involved with the rearch being evaluated. In fact, reviewers are often scientific competitors. To remove any bias from the review process, most manuscripts (articles prior to publication) are considered by three reviewers independently. Reviewers consider the validity of the approach, the significance and originality of the finding, its interest and timeliness to the scientific community, and the clarity of the writing. Reviewers then provide feedback on the manuscript they have read. Journal editors rely on peer-review feedback to guide their publication decisions, and authors u reviewers comments to refine the text of their manuscript and the experiments within. Journal editors must occasionally resolve issues related to conflict of interest among reviewers; reviewers identities are generally not revealed to manuscript authors. This later rule is intended to free reviewers from any social pressures, allowing them to consider only the quality of the science before them.
Reviewers are expected to keep the information in a manuscript confidential until it is published, but it is rare that the work comes as a complete surpri to the entire scientific community. This is becau peer review is integrated into almost every step of science.
Most rearch scientists request public funding for their experiments. Funding decisions are made by a committee of other scientists who debate each proposal’s likelihood of success, the validity of its approach, and the importance of the question being asked. Once funded, the experiments can begin, and preliminary data is often revealed at scientific meetings. This allows the findings to be debated and defended with colleagues prior to publication. Once the experiments are completed, a manuscript is written and circulated to all tho who contributed to the work. Manuscripts commonly undergo veral rounds of revision by the authors before being submitted to a journal for peer review, Journals vary in their lectivity and focus. Conquently, manuscripts are first nt to the most widely read journal likely to publish the work. If that journal declines to publish the manuscript, it can be nt to a different journal for consideration.
Despite the best efforts of reviewers, cas of scientific misconduct do occur and incorrect or unsubstantiated data does get published. Some cas turn out to be elaborate hoaxes. For example, in 1912 Charles Dawson showed off parts of a skull and jawbone to the public and convinced scientists that the fossils reprented the missing lin
k between man and ape Dawson's "Piltdown Man" confud the scientific community for 40 years until it was discovered that the skull was only 500 years old rather than 500,000, and the jawbone was that of an orangutan. In other instances of misconduct, data in scientific journals has been inadequately documented or improperly reported Cas of scientific misconduct are rare but important becau of the publicity they receive once they are discovered, eroding the public's trust in the peer-review system and science itlf. To keep this type of conduct in check, scientific articles include detailed descriptions of experimental protocols that enable others to reproduce experiments.
1.Scientific journals make for reliable reading owing to （ ）.
2.Qualified peer reviewers
（ ）.
cultureshock3.According to the passage, which of the following statements is true?
4.It can be inferred that scientific journals
（ ）.
5.Scientific misconduct（ ）.
问题1选项
A.the literacy rate of readers
B.the practice of peer review
C.the reputation of the editors
bacheloretteD.the cooperation among authors
问题2选项
A.should have the relevant experti and vast knowledge
moon festivalB.fully dominate the editorial decisions about publication
C.need to discuss with other reviewers for sake of fairness
D.help rewrite the submitted manuscript to improve its quality
问题3选项
A.Conflicts of interest among reviewers result from rearch grants.
B.Manuscripts are usually published as originally submitted to a journal.
C.Reviewers' identities are kept confidential to ensure objective judgment.
