写作Directions:for this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write a short essay entitled the way to success by commenting on Abraham Lincoln’s famous remark ,‖give me six hours to chop down a tree ,and I will spend the first four hours sharpening the axe‖ y ou should write at least 150 words but no more than 200 words.快速阅读Google's plan for world's biggest online library: philanthropy or act of piracy?Google has already scanned 10 million books in its bid to digitise the contents of the world's major libraries, but a copyright battle now threatens the project, with Amazon an d Microsoft joining authors and publishers opposed to the scheme.In recent years the world's most venerable libraries have played host to some incongr uous visitors. In dusty nooks and far-flung stacks, teams of workers dispatched by Google have been beavering away to make digital copies of books. So far, Google has scanned more than 10 million titles from libraries in America and Europe –including half a millio n volumes held by the Bodleian in Oxford. The exact method it uses is unclear; the com pany does not allow outsiders to observe the process.Why is Google undertaking such a venture, so seemingly out-of-kilter with its snazzy, hi-tech image? Why is it even interested in all those out-of-print library books, most of which have been gathering dust on forgotten shelves for decades? The company claims its motives are essentially public-spirited. Its overall mission, after all, is to "organise the w orld's information", so it would be odd if that information did not include books. Like theAncient Egyptians who attempted to build a library at Alexandria containing all the kno wn world's scrolls, Google executives talk of constructing a universal online archive, a tre asure trove of knowledge that will be freely available –or at least freely searchable –for all.The company likes to present itself as having lofty, utopian aspirations. "This really i sn't about making money" is a mantra. "We are doing this for the good of society." As S antiago de la Mora, head of Google Books for Europe, puts it: "By making it possible to search the millions of books that exist today, we hope to expand the frontiers of human knowledge."Dan Clancy, the chief architect of Google Books, offers an analogy with the inventio n of the Gutenberg press –Google's book project, he says, will have a similar democratis ing effect. He talks of people in far-flung parts being able to access knowledge as never before, of search queries leading them to the one, long out-of-print book they need.And he does seem genuine in his conviction that this is primarily a philanthropic exe rcise. "Google's core business is search and find, so obviously what helps improve Google' s search engine is good for Google," he says. "But we have never built a spreadsheet out lining the financial benefits of this, and I have never had to justify the amount I am spen ding to the company's founders."It is easy, talking to Clancy and his colleagues, to be swept along by their missionar y zeal. But Google's book-scanning project is proving controversial. Several opponents hav e recently emerged, ranging from rival tech giants such as Microsoft and Amazon to smal l bodies representing authors and publishers across the world. In broad terms, these oppon ents have levelled two sets of criticisms at Google.First, they have questioned whether the primary responsibility for digitally archiving t he world's books should be allowed to fall to a commercial company. In a recent essay i n the New York Review of Books, Robert Darnton, the head of Harvard University's libra ry, argued that because such books are a common resource –the possession of us all –o nly public, not-for-profit bodies should be given the power to control them.The second, related criticism is that Google's scanning of books is actually illegal. Th is allegation has led to Google becoming mired in a legal battle whose scope and comple xity makes the Jarndyce and Jarndyce case in Bleak House look straightforward.At its centre, however, is one simple issue: that of copyright. The inconvenient fact a bout most books, to which Google has arguably paid insufficient attention, is that they are protected by copyright. Copyright laws differ from country to country, but in general pro tection extends for the duration of an author's life and for a substantial period afterwards, thus allowing the author's heirs to benefit. (In Britain and America, this post-death period is 70 years.) This means, of course, that almost all of the books published in the 20th c entury are still under copyright –and last century saw more books published than in all previous centuries combined. Of the roughly 40 million books in US libraries, for example, an estimated 32 million are in copyright. Of these, some 27 million are out of print.Outside the US, Google has made sure only to scan books that are out of copyright and thus in the "public domain" (works such as the Bodleian's first edition of Middlemarc h, which anyone can read for free on Google Books Search).But, within the US, the company has scanned both in-copyright and out-of-copyright works. In its defence, Google points out that it displays only snippets of books that are i n copyright –arguing that such displays are "fair use". But critics allege that by makingelectronic copies of these books without first seeking the permission of copyright holders, Google has committed piracy."The key principle of copyright law has always been that works can be copied only once authors have expressly given their permission," says Piers Blofeld, of the Sheil Land literary agency in London. "Google has reversed this –it has simply copied all these wo rks without bothering to ask."In 2005, the Authors Guild of America, together with a group of US publishers and publishers, launched a class action suit against Google that, after more than two years of wrangling, ended with an announcement last October that Google and the claimants had re ached an out-of-court settlement. The full details are staggeringly complicated –the text al one runs to 385 pages –and trying to summarise it is no easy task. "Part of the problem is that it is basically incomprehensible," says Blofeld, one of the settlement's most vocal British critics.Broadly, the deal provides a mechanism for Google to reimburse authors and publishe rs whose rights it has breached (including giving them a share of any future revenue it g enerates from their works). In exchange for this, the rights holders agree not to sue Googl e in future.The settlement stipulates that a body known as the Books Rights Registry will repres ent the interests of US copyright holders. Authors and publishers with a copyright interest in a book scanned by Google who make themselves known to the registry will be entitle d to receive a payment –in the region of $60 per book –as compensation.听力理解Section ADirections: In this section, you will hear 8 short conversations and2 long conversation s. At the end of each conversation, one or more questions will be asked about what was said. Both the conversation and the questions will be spoken only once. After each questi on there will be a pause. During the pause, you must read the four choices marked A), B), C) and D), and decide which is the best answer. Then mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.11.M: I don’t know what to do. I have to drive to Chicago next Friday for my cousin’s wedding, but I have got a Psychology test to prepare for.W: Why don’t you record your notes so you can study on the way?Q: What does the woman suggest the man do?12.M: Professor Wright, you may have to find another student to play this role, the line s are so long and I simply can’t remember them all.W: Look, Tony. It is still a long time before the first show. I don’t expect you to k now all the lines yet. Just keep practicing.Q: What do we learn from the conversation?13.M: Hello, this is Dr. Martin from the Emergency Department. I have a male patient with a fractured ankle.W: Oh, we have one bed available in ward 3, send him here and I will take care of him.Q: What are the speakers talking about?14.W: Since Simon will graduate this May, the school paper needs a new editor. So if you are interested, I will be happy to nominate you.M: Thanks for considering me. But the baseball team is starting up a new season. A nd I’m afraid I have a lot on my hands.Q: What does the man mean?15. W: Have you heard the news that Jame Smeil has resigned his post as prime mi nister?M: Well, I got it from the headlines this morning. It’s reported th at he made public at this decision at the last cabinet meeting.Q: what do we learn about Jame Smeil?16. W: The morning paper says the space shuttle is taking off at 10 a.m. tomorrow.M: Yeah, it’s just another one of this year’s routine missions. T he first mission was undertaken a decade ago and broadcast live then worldwide.Q: what can we infer from this conversation?17. M: We do a lot of camping in the mountains. What would you recommend for t wo people?W: You’d probably be better off with the four real drive vehicle. We have several of f-road trucks in stock, both new and used.Q: Where does the conversation most probably take place?18. W: I hear you did some serious shopping this past weekend.M: Yeah, the speakers of my old stereo finally gave out and there was no way to re pair them.Q: What did the man do over the weekend?W: Now, could you tell me where the idea for the business first came from?M: Well, the original shop was opened by a retired printer by the name of Gruby. Mr Gruby being left-handed himself, thought of the idea to try to promote a few products for left-handers.W: And how did he then go about actually setting up the business?M: Well, he looked for any left-handed products that might already be on the market which were very few. And then contacted the manufactures with the idea of having prod ucts produced for him, mainly in the scissors range to start with.W: Right. So you do commission some part of your stock.M: Yes, very much so. About 75 percent of our stock is specially made for us.W: And the rest of it?M: Hmm, the rest of it now, some 25, 30 years after Mr. Gruby’s initial efforts, ther e are more left-handed product actually on the market. Manufactures are now beginning to see that there is a market for left-handed products.W: And what’s the range of your stock?M: The range consists of a variety of scissors from children scissors to scissors for t ailors, hairdressers etc. We also have a large range of kitchen ware.W: What’s the competition like? Do you have quite a lot of competition?M: There are other people in the business now in specialists, but only as mail-order outlets. But we have a shop here in central London plus a mail-order outlet. And we are without any doubt the largest supplier of the left-handed items.Q19: What kind of business does the man engaged in?Q20: What does the man say about his stock of products?Q21: What does the man say about other people in his line of business?M: Can we make you an offer? We would like to run the campaign for four extra weeks.W: well, can we summarize the problem from my point of view? First of all, the ca mpaign was late. It missed two important trade affairs. The ads also did not appear into key magazines. As a result, the campaign failed. Do you accept that summary of what ha ppened?M: well, the delay wasn’t entirely our fault. You did in fact make late changes to th e specifications of the advertisements.W: Uh, actually, you were late with the initial proposals so you have very little time and in fact, we only asked for small changes.M: Well whatever, can we repeat our offer to run the campaign for 4 extra weeks?W: That’s not really the point. The campaign missed two key t rade affairs. Because of this, we are asking you either to repeat the campaign next year for free, or we only p ay 50% of the fee for this year.M: Could we suggest a 20% reduction to the fee together with the four week sustent ion to the campaign.W: We are not happy. We lost business.M: I think we both made mistakes. The responsibility is on both sides.W: Ok, let’s suggest a new solution. How about a 40% cut in fee, or a free repeat campaign?M: Well, let’s take a break, we’re not getting very f ar. Perhaps we should think abo ut this.22: What do we learn about the man’s company?23: Why was the campaign delayed according to the man?24: What does the woman propose as a solution to the problem?25: What does the man suggest they do at the end of the conversation?Section BPassage OneThe University of Tennessee’s Walters Life Sciences building, is a model animal facil ity, spotlessly clean, careful in obtaining prior approval for experiments from an animal ca re committee. Of the 15,000 mice house there in a typical year, most give their lives for humanity. These are good mice and as such won the protection of the animal care commi ttee. At any given time however some mice escape and run free. These mice are pests. T hey can disrupt experiments with the bacteria organisms they carry. They are bad mice an d must be captured and destroyed. Usually, this is accomplished by means of sticky traps, a kind of fly paper on which they become increasingly stuck. But the real point of the cautionary tale, says animal behaviorist Herzau, is that the labels we put on things can aff ect our moral responses to them. Using stick traps or the more deadly snap traps would b e deemed unacceptable for good mice. Yet the killing of bad mice requires no prior appr oval. Once the research animal hits the floor and becomes an escapee, says Herza, its mo ral standard is instantly diminished. In Herzau’s own home, there was more ironic exampl e when his young son’s pet mouse Willy died recently, it was accorded a tearful cer emon ial burial in garden. Yet even as they mourned Willy, says Herzau, he and his wife were setting snap traps to kill the pest mice in their kitchen with the bare change in labels fr om pet to pest, the kitchen mice obtained totally different moral standards Questions:26, What does the passage say about most of the mice used for experiments?27, Why did the so-called bad mice have to be captured and destroyed?28, When are mice killed without prior approval?29, Why does the speaker say what the Her zau’s did at home is ironical?Passage TwoThere are roughly three New Yorks. There is, first, the New York of the man or wo man who was born here, who takes the city for granted and accepts its size and its turbu lence as natural and inevitable. Second, there is the New York of the commuter —the ci ty that is swallowed up by locusts each day and spat out each night. Third, there is the New York of the person who was born somewhere else and came to New York in quest of something. Of these three trembling cities the greatest is the last, the city of final desti nation, the city that has a goal. It is this third city that accounts for New York’s high-str ung disposition, its poetical deportment, its dedication to the arts, and its incomparable ac hievements. Commuters give the city its tidal restlessness; natives give it solidity and cont inuity; but the settlers give it passion. And whether it is a farmer arriving from Italy to s et up a small grocery store in a slum, or a young girl arriving from a small town in Mis sissippi to escape the indignity of being observed by her neighbors, or a boy arriving fro m the Corn Belt with a manuscript in his suitcase and a pain in his heart, it makes no d ifference: each embraces New York with the intense excitement of first love, each absorbs New York with the fresh eyes of an adventurer, each generates heat and light to dwarf t he Consolidated Edison Company.Questions 30 to 32 are based on the passage you have just heard.30. What does the speaker say about the natives of New York?31. What does the speaker say commuters give to New York?32. What do we learn about the settlers of New York?Passage Three―If you asked me television is unhealthy‖, I said to my roommate Walter, as I walked into the living room.―While y ou are sitting passively in front of the TV set, your muscl es are turning to fat, your complexion is fading, and your eyesight is being ruined.‖―Shh~‖Walter put his finger to his lips, ―This is an intriguing murder mystery.‖―Really?‖ I replied.―Bu t you know, the brain is destroyed by TV viewing. Creativity is killed by that bo x. And people are kept from communicating with one another. From my point of view, T V is the cause of the declining interest in school and the failure of our entire educational system.‖―Ah ha, I can’t see your point.‖ Walter said softly. ―But see? The woman on the wit ness stand in this story is being questioned about the murder that was committed one hun dred years ago.‖Ignoring his enthusiastic description of the plot, I went on with my argument.―As I see it,‖ I explained, ―not only are most TV programs badly written and produc ed, but viewers are also manipulated by the mass media. As far as I am concerned, TV watchers are cut off from reality from nature, from the other people, from life itself! I w as confident in my ability to persuade.After a short silence, my roommate said, ―Anyway, I’ve been planning to watch the football game. I am going to change the channel.‖―Don’t touch that dial!‖ I shouted, ―I wanted to find out how the mystery turns out!‖I am not sure I got my point to cross.Questions 33- 35 are based on the passage you have just heard.33. As the speaker walked into the living room, what was being shown on TV?34. What does the speaker say about watching television?35. What can we say about the speaker?Additionally, the settlement hands Google the power –but only with the agreement o f individual rights holders –to exploit its database of out-of-print books. It can include th em in subscription deals sold to libraries or sell them individually under a consumer licen ce. It is these commercial provisions that are proving the settlement's most controversial a spect.Critics point out that, by giving Google the right to commercially exploit its database, the settlement paves the way for a subtle shift in the company's role from provider of in formation to seller. "Google's business model has always been to provide information for f ree, and sell advertising on the basis of the traffic this generates," points out James Grim melmann, associate professor at New York Law School. Now, he says, because of the sett lement's provisions, Google could become a significant force in bookselling.Interest in this aspect of the settlement has focused on "orphan" works, where there i s no known copyright holder –these make up an estimated 5% to 10% of the books Go ogle has scanned. Under the settlement, when no rights holders come forward and register their interest in a work, commercial control automatically reverts to Google. Google will be able to display up to 20% of orphan works for free, include them in its subscription d eals to libraries and sell them to individual buyers under the consumer licence."The deal has in effect handed Google a swath of intellectual copyright. It is a mam moth potential bookselling market," says Blofeld. He adds it is no surprise that Amazon, which currently controls 90% of the digital books market, is becoming worried.But Dan Clancy of Google dismisses the idea that, by gaining control over out-of-pri nt and orphan works, Google is securing for itself a significant future revenue stream. He points out that out-of-print books represent only a tiny fraction of the books market –between 1% and 2%. "This idea that we are gaining access to a vast market here –I really don't think that is true."James Gleick, an American science writer and member of the Authors Guild, broadly agrees. He says that, although Google's initial scanning of in-copyright books made him uncomfortable, the settlement itself is a fair deal for authors."The thing that needs to be emphasised is that this so-called market over which Goo gle is being given dominance –the market in out-of-print books –doesn't currently exist. That's why they're out of print. In real life, I can't see what the damage is –it's only g ood."It is by no means certain that the settlement will be enacted –it is the subject of a fairness hearing in the US courts. But if it is enacted, Google will in effect be off the ho ok as far as copyright violations in the US are concerned. Many people are seriously con cerned by this –and the company is likely to face challenges in other courts around the world.Over the coming months, we will hear a lot more about the Google settlement and it s ramifications. Although it's a subject that may seem obscure and specialised, it concerns one of the biggest issues affecting publishing and, indeed, other creative industries –the control of digital rights.No one knows the precise use Google will make of the intellectual property it has ga ined by scanning the world's library books, and the truth, as Gleick points out, is that the company probably doesn't even know itself. But what is certain is that, in some way oranother, Google's entrance into digital bookselling will have a significant impact on the bo ok world in years to come.Section CCompound DictationIn the past, one of the biggest disadvantages of machines has been their inability to work on a micro scale. For example, doctors did not have devices allowing them to go in side the human body to detect health problems or to perform delicate surgery. Repair cre ws did not have a way of identifying broken pipes located deep within a high-rise apartm ent building. However, that’s about to change. Advances in computers and biophysics have started a micro miniature revolution that allows scientists to envision and in some cases actually build microscopic machines. These devices promise to dramatically change the wa y we live and work.Micromachines already are making an impact. At Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, research scientists have designed a 4-inch silicon chip that holds 700 ti ny primitive motors. At Lucas Nova Sensor in Fremont, California, scientists have perfecte d the world’s first microscopic blood-pressure sensor. Threaded through a person’s blood v essels, the sensor can provide blood pressure readings at the valve of the heart itself.Although simple versions of miniature devices have had an impact, advanced versions are still several years away.Auto manufacturers, for example, are trying to use tiny devices that can sense when t o release an airbag and how to keep engines and breaks operating efficiently. Some futuri sts envision nanotechnology also being used to explore the deep sea in small submarine, o r even to launch finger-sized rockets packed with micro miniature instruments.―There is an explosion of new ideas and applications,‖ So, when scientists now thinkabout future machines doing large and complex tasks, they’re thinking smaller than ever before.深度阅读2011年12月英语六级完型填空真题选自美国slate网站。
