大学英语四级模拟试题 （十）

Part　II　Reading　Comprehension　(35　minutes)
Directions:There　are　four　reading　passages　in　this　part.　Each　passage　is　followed　by　some　questions.　For　each　question　there　are　four　suggested　answers　marked　A,B,C　and　D,　you　should　choose　the　One　best　answer　and　blacken　the　corresponding　letter　on　the　ANSWER　SHEET　with　a　pencil.　
Passage　1

　　Legal　and　accounting　firms　throughout　Australia　could　streamline　their　advice　to　clients　seeking　a　divorce　with　a　new　expert　program　that　“thinks"　like　Family　Court　judges.

　　　The　software　package,　appropriately　called　“Split　UP"　was　developed　by　Dr.　John　Zeleznikow　and　a　team　of　researchers　in　La　Trobe　University's　Department　of　Computer　Science.

　　　It　is　the　first　in　the　world　designed　to　weigh　up　court　judgments　in　previous　cases　to　predict　the　way　property　would　be　divided　for　a　particular　divorce　if　proceeded　to　court.

　　　While　anyone　can　get　a　divorce,　the　rules　on　the　division　of　property　are　up　to　the　judge.　Deciding　who　gets　what　is　a　complex　procedure　based　on　future　needs　and　past　contributions.

　　　Split　up,　which　can　be　installed　on　any　PC,　asks　a　sequence　of　relevant　questions　about　the　health,　work　history,　children,　property　and　future　needs　of　the　partners　in　a　divorce.　It　then　decides　what　percentage　allocation　to　each　partner　would　be　in　court　and　provides　a　series　of　arguments　in　favour　of　the　decision.

　　　Its　major　advantage,　says　Dr.　Zeleznikow,　is　that　people　are　less　likely　to　litigate　once　they　know　the　likely　court　outcome.　“Let's　say　the　program　predicts　that　each　partner　will　get　$250　000　from　a　property　settlement.　If　they　go　to　court　the　cost　to　each　could　be　$　50　000　to　litigate.　This　is　a　powerful　incentive　to　negotiate　instead."　

　　The　La　Trobe　research　team　has　attracted　international　attention　for　its　devleopment　of　systems　which　can　reason　with　both　statutes　(rules)　and　precedents　(cases).　The　systems　are　being　used　in　fields　which　include　legal　aid　and　credit　law.　　

1.　in　the　passage　means　“previous　cases”.分析与解答
A.　Statutes　
B.　Precedents　
C.　Clients　
D.　Incentives　　

2.　What　is　not　taken　into　consideration　during　a　divorce　case?　分析与解答
A.　The　family　house.
B.　The　bank　deposit.
C.　The　time　duration　of　the　marriage.
D.　Children's　education.　　

3.　Split　Up　can　do　all　but　.　分析与解答
A.　to　persuade　the　judge　that　its　decision　is　the　right　one　
B.　to　recall　past　divorce　cases　when　necessary　
C.　to　seek　and　then　process　the　information　it　need　
D.　to　do　complex　calculation　and　reasoning　　

4.　The　second　“it"　in　ParA.　3　refers　to　.　分析与解答
A.　the　software　
B.　a　previous　case　
C.　the　way　the　property　would　be　divided　
D.　a　particular　divorce　　

5.　What　is　NOT　implied　in　the　passage?　分析与解答
A.　Family　Law　Court　judges　judge　according　to　both　rules　and　precedents.　
B.　If　the　parties　in　a　divorce　know　they　will　not　profit　from　a　lawsuit,　they　would　settle　outside　the　court.　
C.　There　is　clear-cut　law　on　how　to　divide　property　between　parties　in　a　divorce.　
D.　Split　Up　will　help　reduce　the　number　of　divorce　cases　presented　in　court.　

Passage　2

　　　The　producers　of　instant　coffee　found　their　product　strongly　resisted　in　the　market　places　despite　their　product's　obvious　advantages.　Furthermore,　the　advertising　expenditure　for　instant　coffee　was　far　greater　than　that　for　regular　coffee.　Efforts　were　made　to　find　the　cause　of　the　consumers　seemingly　unreasonable　resistance　to　the　product.　The　reason　given　by　most　people　was　dislike　for　the　taste.　The　producer　suspected　that　there　might　be　deeper　reasons,　however.　This　was　confirmed　by　one　of　motivation　research's　classic　studies,　one　often　cited　in　the　trade.

　　　Mason　Haire,　of　the　University　of　California,　constructed　two　shopping　lists　that　were　identical　except　for　one　item.　There　were　six　items　common　to　both　lists:　hamburger,　carrots,　bread,　baking　powder,　canned　peaches,　and　potatoes,　with　the　brands　or　amounts　specifieD.　The　seventh　item,　in　fifth　place　on　both　lists,　read　“one　pound　Maxwell　House　coffee"　on　the　list　and　“Nescafe　instant　coffee"　on　the　other.　One　list　was　given　to　each　one　in　a　group　of　fifty　women,　and　the　other　list　to　those　in　the　other　group　of　the　same　size.　The　women　were　asked　to　study　their　list　and　then　to　describe,　as　far　as　they　could,　the　kind