Part II Reading Comprehension (35 minutes)

Directions: There are 4 reading passages in this part. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A), B), C)and D). You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on the Answer Sheet with a single line through the centre.

Passage 1It is hard to predict how science is going to turn out, and if it is really good science it is impossible to predict. If the things to be found are actually new, they are by definition unknown in advance. You cannot make choices in this matter. You either have science or you don't, and if you have it you are obliged to accept the surprising and disturbing pieces of information, along with the neat and promptly useful bits.

The only solid piece of scientific truth about which I feel totally confident is that we are profoundly ignorant about nature. Indeed, I regard this as the major discovery of the past hundred years of biology. It is, in its way, an illuminating piece of news. It would have amazed the brightest minds of the 18th century Enlightenment to be told by any of us how little we know and how bewildering seems the way ahead. It is this sudden confrontation with the depth and scope of ignorance that represents the most significant contribution of the 20th century science to the human intellect. In earlier times, we either pretended to understand how things worked or ignored the problem, or simply made up stories to fill the gaps. Now that we have begun exploring in earnest, we are getting glimpses of how huge the questions are, and how far from being answered. Because of this, we are depressed. It is not so bad being ignorant if you are totally ignorant; the hard thing is knowing in some detail the reality of ignorance, the worst spots and here and there the not-so-bad spots, but no true light at the end of the tunnel nor even any tunnels that can yet be trusted.

But we are making a beginning, and there ought to be some satisfaction. There are probably no questions we can think up that can't be answered, sooner or later, including even the matter of consciousness. To be sure, there may well be questions we can't think up, ever, and therefore limits to the reach of human intellect, but that is another matter. Within our limits, we should be able to work our way through to all our answers, if we keep at it long enough, and pay attention.

21. According to the author, really good science . A. would surprise the brightest minds of the 18th century Enlightenment B. will produce results which cannot be foreseen C. will help people to make the right choice in advanceD. will bring about disturbing results

22. It can be inferred from the passage that scientists of the 18th century .A. thought that they knew a great deal and could solve most problems of science B. were afraid of facing up to the realities of scientific research C. knew that they were ignorant and wanted to know more about natureD. did more harm than good in promoting man's understanding of nature

23. Which of the following statements is NOT true of scientists in earlier times? A. They invented false theories to explain things they didn't understand. B. They falsely claimed to know all about nature. C. They did not believe in results from scientific observation. D. They paid little attention to the problems they didn't understand.

24. What is the author's attitude towards science? A. He is depressed because of the ignorance of scientists. B. He is doubtful because of the enormous difficulties confronting it. C. He is confident though he is aware of the enormous difficulties confronting it. D. He is delighted because of the illuminating scientific findings.

25. The author believes that . A. man can find solutions to whatever questions concerning nature he can think up B. man cannot solve all the problems he can think up because of the limits of human intellect C. sooner or later man can think up all the questions concerning nature and answer them D. questions concerning consciousness are outside the scope of scientific research

Passage 2Archaeology has long been an accepted tool for studying prehistoric cultures. Relatively recently the same techniques have been systematically applied to studies of more immediate past. This has been called“historical archaeology". A term that is used in the United States to refer to any archaeological investigation into North American sites that postdate the arrival of Europeans.

Back in the 1930s and 1940s, when restoration was popular, historical archeology was primarily a tool of architectural reconstruction. The role of archaeologists was to find the foundations of historic buildings and then take back seat to architects.

The maina for reconstruction had largely subsided by the 1950s and 1960s. Most people entering historical archaeology during this period came out of university anthropology departments where they had studied prehistoric cultures. They were, by training, social scientists, not historians, and their work tended to reflect this bias. The questions they framed and the techniques they used were designed to help them understand, as scientists, how people behaved. But because they were treading on historical ground for which there was often extensive written documentation and because their own knowledge of these periods was usually limited, their contributions to American history remained circumscribed. Their reports, highly technical and sometimes poorly written, went unread.

More recently, professional archaeologists have taken over. These researchers have sought to demonstrate that their work can be a valuable tool not only of science but also of history, providing fresh insights into the daily lives of ordinary people whose existences might not otherwise be so well documented. This newer emphasis on archaeology as social history has shown great promise, and indeed work done in this area has led to a reinterpretation of the United States past.

In Kingston, New York, for example, evidence has been uncovered that indicates that English goods were being smuggled into that city at a time when the Dutch supposedly controlled trading in the area. And in Sacramento an excavation at the site of a fashionable nineteenth-century hotel revealed that garbage had been stashed in the building's basement despite sanitation laws to the contrary.

26. What is the main topic of the passage?A. How the purpose and the methods of historical archaeology have changed. B. How archaeology has been applied to studies of prehistoric cultures.C. The attitude of professional archaeologists hold toward historical archaeology. D. The contributions make to historical archaeology.

27. According to the passage, what is a relatively new focus in archaeology?A. Studying prehistoric cultures. B. Investigating ancient sites in what is now the United States. C. Comparing the culture of North America to that of Europe.D. Studying the recent past.

28. According to the passage, when had historical archaeologists been trained as anthropologists?A. Before the 1930sB. During the 1930s and 1940sC. During the 1950s and 1960sD. After the 1960s

29. In the third paragraph, the author implies the questions and techniques of history and those of social science are . A. of equal value in studying prehistoric cultures B. quite different from each otherC. all aiming to understand people's behaviorD. all highly technical and poorly written

30. The equivalent of the“supposedly" in the last paragraph is .A. rigidlyB.