2015年全国硕士研究生招生考试英语(一)试题

Though not biologically related, friends are as "related" as fourth cousins, sharing about 1% of genes.

虽然没有生物学上的亲属关系，朋友在“关系”上与四等亲一样，共享约1%的基因。

That is 1 a study, published from the University of California and Yale University in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, has 2 .

这1是一项研究，由加州大学和耶鲁大学发表于《美国国家科学院院刊》，有2。

The study is a genome-wide analysis conducted 3 1,932 unique subjects which 4 pairs of unrelated friends and unrelated strangers.

这项研究是对1,932名独特受试者进行的全基因组分析，其中包含4对无血缘关系的朋友和陌生人。

The same people were used in both 5 .

同样的人在两个 5中都被使用了。

While 1% may seem 6 , it is not so to a geneticist.

虽然1%看起来可能很小，但对遗传学家来说并非如此。

As James Fowler, professor of medical genetics at UC San Diego, says, "Most people do not even 7 their fourth cousins but somehow manage to select as friends the people who 8 our kin.

正如加州大学圣地亚哥分校医学遗传学教授James Fowler所说，大多数人甚至不认识他们的第四代堂表亲，但不知何故设法选为朋友的人却是我们的亲属。

The study 9 found that the genes for smell were something shared in friends but not genes for immunity.

研究9发现，嗅觉基因是朋友间共享的，但免疫基因则不是。

Why this similarity exists in smell genes is difficult to explain, for now.

目前尚难以解释为何这种相似性存在于嗅觉基因中。

10 , as the team suggests, it draws us to similar environments but there is more 11 it.

10 ，正如团队所建议的，它引导我们进入相似的环境，但还有更多 11 的地方。

There could be many mechanisms working together that 12 us in choosing genetically similar friends 13 "functional kinship" of being friends with 14 !

可能存在多种机制共同作用，12我们选择基因相似的朋友，13‘功能性亲属关系’的交友方式与14！

One of the remarkable findings of the study was that the similar genes seem to be evolving 15 than other genes.

该研究的一个显著发现是，相似的基因似乎正在进化得比其他基因快15。

Studying this could help 16 why human evolution picked pace in the last 30,000 years, with social environment being a major 17 factor.

研究这可能有助于16人类进化在最近3万年中为何加快了步伐，社会环境是主要的17因素。

The findings do not simply explain people's 18 to befriend those of similar 19 backgrounds, say the researchers.

研究人员表示，这些发现不仅仅是解释人们第 18 空的倾向去与具有相似第 19 空背景的人交朋友。

Though all the subjects were drawn from a population of European extraction, care was taken to 20 that all subjects, friends and strangers, were taken from the same population.

尽管所有受试者均来自欧洲血统的人群，但采取了措施确保所有受试者，包括朋友和陌生人，都来自同一群体。

King Juan Carlos of Spain once insisted "kings don't abdicate, they die in their sleep.

西班牙国王胡安·卡洛斯曾坚持说："国王不会退位，他们会在睡梦中去世。"

But embarrassing scandals and the popularity of the republican left in the recent Euro-elections have forced him to eat his words and stand down.

但令人尴尬的丑闻以及近年来欧洲选举中共和左派的高人气迫使他收回了这番话并辞职下台。

So, does the Spanish crisis suggest that monarchy is seeing its last days?

那么，西班牙的危机是否意味着君主制正在走向终结？

Does that mean the writing is on the wall for all European royals, with their magnificent uniforms and majestic lifestyles?

这是否意味着所有欧洲王室，连同他们华丽的制服和宏伟的生活方式，都将面临末日？

The Spanish case provides arguments both for and against monarchy.

西班牙的情况为君主制提供了正反两方面的论据。

When public opinion is particularly polarised, as it was following the end of the Franco regime, monarchs can rise above "mere" politics and "embody" a spirit of national unity.

当公众舆论特别两极分化时，比如在佛朗哥政权结束后，君主们可以超越"纯粹"的政治，"体现"国家统一的精神。

It is this apparent transcendence of politics that explains monarchs' continuing popularity as heads of state.

正是这种看似超越政治的特质，解释了君主们作为国家元首仍持续受欢迎的原因。

And so, the Middle East excepted, Europe is the most monarch-infested region in the world, with 10 kingdoms (not counting Vatican city and Andorra).

因此，除了中东地区，欧洲是世界上君主制最盛行的地区，拥有10个王国（不包括梵蒂冈城和安道尔）。

But unlike their absolutist counterparts in the Gulf and Asia, most royal families have survived because they allow voters to avoid the difficult search for a non-controversial but respected public figure.

但与海湾和亚洲那些专制君主不同，大多数王室家族之所以能够幸存下来，是因为他们允许选民避免寻找一位既无争议又受人尊敬的公众人物的困难过程。

Even so, kings and queens undoubtedly have a downside.

即便如此，国王和王后无疑也有其不利之处。

Symbolic of national unity as they claim to be, their very history - and sometimes the way they behave today - embodies outdated and indefensible privileges and inequalities.

正如他们所声称的那样，象征着国家统一，但他们的历史——有时甚至是今天的行为——却体现了过时且无法辩护的特权和不平等。

At a time when Thomas Piketty and other economists are warning of rising inequality and the increasing power of inherited wealth, it is bizarre that wealthy aristocratic families should still be the symbolic heart of modern democratic states.

在托马斯·皮凯蒂和其他经济学家警告收入不平等加剧以及继承财富力量日益增强的时刻，富有的贵族家庭仍然是现代民主国家象征性核心的事实显得非常奇怪。

The most successful monarchies strive to abandon or hide their old aristocratic ways.

最成功的君主制努力放弃或隐藏其旧有的贵族传统。

Princes and princesses have day-jobs and ride bicycles, not horses (or helicopters).

王子和公主们现在都有正经的工作，骑自行车而不是骑马（或直升机）。

Even so, these are wealthy families who party with the international 1%, and media intrusiveness makes it increasingly difficult to maintain the right image.

即便如此，这些家族仍然是与国际1%群体一起聚会的富裕家庭，而媒体的过度关注使得维持正确的形象变得越来越困难。

While Europe's monarchies will no doubt be smart enough to survive for some time to come, it is the British royals who have most to fear from the Spanish example.

虽然欧洲的君主制无疑会聪明地生存一段时间，但英国王室从西班牙的例子中受到的威胁最大。

It is only the Queen who has preserved the monarchy's reputation with her rather ordinary (if well-heeled) granny style.

只有女王以她相对普通的（尽管衣着考究的）祖母风格，成功地维护了王室的声誉。

The danger will come with Charles, who has both an expensive taste of lifestyle and a pretty hierarchical view of the world.

危险将来自查尔斯，他既有着昂贵的生活方式品味，又有着相当等级森严的世界观。

He has failed to understand that monarchies have largely survived because they provide a service - as non-controversial and non-political heads of state.

他未能理解君主制之所以大多得以存续，是因为它们提供了一种服务——作为非争议性和非政治性的国家元首。

Charles ought to know that as English history shows, it is kings, not republicans, who are the monarchy's worst enemies.

查尔斯应该知道，正如英国历史所显示的，是国王们，而不是共和党人，才是君主制的最坏敌人。

Just how much does the Constitution protect your digital data?

宪法究竟在多大程度上保护你的数字数据？

The Supreme Court will now consider whether police can search the contents of a mobile phone without a warrant if the phone is on or around a person during an arrest.

最高法院现在将考虑，如果在逮捕过程中，手机在被捕者身上或附近，警方是否可以在没有搜查令的情况下搜索手机内容。

California has asked the justices to refrain from a sweeping ruling, particularly one that upsets the old assumption that authorities may search through the possessions of suspects at the time of their arrest.

加利福尼亚州已要求法官们避免做出广泛的裁决，尤其是那些颠覆了旧有假设的裁决，即警方在逮捕嫌疑人时可以搜查其随身物品。

It is hard, the state argues, for judges to assess the implications of new and rapidly changing technologies.

该州认为，法官们很难评估新兴且迅速变化的技术所带来的影响。

The court would be recklessly modest if it followed California's advice.

如果最高法院采纳加利福尼亚州的建议，那将是极其轻率和谦逊的。

Enough of the implications are discernable, even obvious, so that the justices can and should provide updated guidelines to police, lawyers and defendants.

即使有足够多的影响是显而易见的，法官们也应当并能够为警方、律师和被告提供更新的指导方针。

They should start by discarding California's lame argument that exploring the contents of a smartphone - a vast storehouse of digital information - is similar to, say, going through a suspect's purse.

他们应该从摒弃加利福尼亚州提出的拙劣论点开始，即探索智能手机的内容——一个巨大的数字信息存储库——类似于翻查嫌疑人的手提包。

The court has ruled that police don't violate the Fourth Amendment when they go through the wallet or pocketbook of an arrestee without a warrant.

法院裁定，警察在没有搜查令的情况下检查被捕者的钱包或手提包时，并不违反第四修正案。

But exploring one's smartphone is more like entering his or her home.

但检查一个人的智能手机则更类似于进入他的家。

A smartphone may contain an arrestee's reading history, financial history, medical history and comprehensive records of recent correspondence.

智能手机可能包含被捕者的阅读记录、财务记录、医疗记录以及近期通信的综合记录。

The development of "cloud computing", meanwhile, has made that exploration so much the easier.

与此同时，"云计算"的发展使得这种检查变得更加容易。

Americans should take steps to protect their digital privacy.

美国人应该采取措施保护自己的数字隐私。

But keeping sensitive information on these devices is increasingly a requirement of normal life.

但将敏感信息保存在这些设备上，正日益成为正常生活中的一个必要条件。

Citizens still have a right to expect private documents to remain private and protected by the Constitution's prohibition on unreasonable searches.

公民仍然有权期望私人文件保持私密，并受到宪法禁止不合理搜查条款的保护。

As so often is the case, stating that principle doesn't ease the challenge of line-drawing.

正如经常发生的情况一样，阐明这一原则并不会减轻划清界限这一挑战的难度。

In many cases, it would not be overly burdensome for authorities to obtain a warrant to search through phone contents.

在许多情况下，执法机关获取搜查手机内容的搜查令并不会带来过重的负担。

They could still invalidate Fourth Amendment protections when facing severe, urgent circumstances, and they could take reasonable measures to ensure that phone data are not erased or altered while waiting for a warrant.

在面对严重而紧急的情况时，他们仍然可以推翻第四修正案的保护措施，并且在等待搜查令期间，他们可以采取合理措施确保手机数据不会被删除或篡改。

The court, though, may want to allow room for police to cite situations where they are entitled to more freedom.

然而，法院可能希望为警方留出空间，让他们能够引用那些他们有权享有更多自由的情形。

But the justices should not swallow California's argument whole.

但法官们不应全盘接受加利福尼亚州的论点。

New, disruptive technology sometimes demands novel applications of the Constitution's protections.

新的、具有颠覆性的技术有时需要对宪法保护进行新颖的应用。

Orin Kerr, a law professor, compares the explosion and accessibility of digital information in the 21st century with the establishment of automobile use as a virtual necessity of life in the 20th: The justices had to specify novel rules for the new personal domain of the passenger car then; they must sort out how the Fourth Amendment applies to digital information now.

法律教授奥林·凯尔将21世纪数字信息的爆炸式增长和易于获取性，与20世纪汽车使用成为生活必需品的情况进行了类比：当时法官们不得不为私家车这一新的个人领域制定新的规则；如今，他们也必须厘清第四修正案如何适用于数字信息。

The journal Science is adding an extra round of statistical checks to its peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt announced today.

《科学》杂志主编玛尔西娅·麦克努特今天宣布，该杂志将在同行评审流程中增加一轮额外的统计检查。

The policy follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings.

这一政策是在其他期刊采取类似措施之后推出的，因为人们普遍担忧数据分析中的基本错误正在导致许多已发表的研究成果无法被重复验证。

"Readers must have confidence in the conclusions published in our journal," writes McNutt in an editorial.

读者必须对我们期刊上发表的结论有信心，”麦克纳特在一篇社论中写道。

Working with the American Statistical Association, the journal has appointed seven experts to a statistics board of reviewing editors (SBoRE).

该期刊与美国统计协会合作，已任命七位专家组成统计审稿编辑委员会（SBoRE）。

Manuscripts will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the journal's internal editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer reviewers.

期刊的内部编辑，或现有的审稿编辑委员会，或外部同行评审人员，将对这些稿件进行额外的审查。

The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these manuscripts.

SBoRE小组随后将寻找外部统计学家来评审这些稿件。

Asked whether any particular papers had impelled the change, McNutt said: "The creation of the 'statistics board' was motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis in scientific research and is part of Science's overall drive to increase reproducibility in the research we publish.

当被问及是否有特定的论文促使了这一变化时，麦克纳特表示："建立‘统计审稿委员会’的动机是广泛地关注统计学和数据分析在科学研究中的应用，并且是《科学》杂志推动我们发表的研究提高可重复性的整体努力的一部分。

Giovanni Parmigiani, a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, a member of the SBoRE group, says he expects the board to "play primarily an advisory role.

哈佛大学公共卫生学院的生物统计学家、SBoRE小组成员乔瓦尼·帕尔米吉亚尼表示，他预计该委员会将‘主要发挥顾问作用’。

He agreed to join because he "found the foresight behind the establishment of the SBoRE to be novel, unique and likely to have a lasting impact.

他同意加入是因为他‘认为SBoRE的建立背后有远见，这种远见是新颖、独特且可能产生持久影响的’。

This impact will not only be through the publications in Science itself, but hopefully through a larger group of publishing places that may want to model their approach after Science.

这种影响不仅将通过《科学》杂志本身的出版物体现出来，也希望能在更多出版机构中产生影响，这些机构可能会以《科学》为榜样来改进自己的做法。

John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology, says that the policy is "a most welcome step forward" and "long overdue".

研究方法学家约翰·伊奥尼迪斯（John Ioannidis）表示，这一政策是"一个非常受欢迎的进步"，并且"早就应该实施了"。

"Most journals are weak in statistical review, and this damages the quality of what they publish.

大多数期刊在统计审查方面都很薄弱，这损害了它们所发表内容的质量。

I think that, for the majority of scientific papers nowadays, statistical review is more essential than expert review," he says, but he noted that biomedical journals such as Annals of Internal Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet pay strong attention to statistical review.

他说："我认为，如今大多数科学论文中，统计审查比专家审查更为重要。" 但他指出，像《内科年鉴》（Annals of Internal Medicine）、《美国医学会杂志》（Journal of the American Medical Association）和《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）这样的生物医学期刊非常重视统计审查。

Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyse data, but statistical errors are alarmingly common in published research, according to David Vaux, a cell biologist.

细胞生物学家大卫·沃克斯（David Vaux）表示，专业科学家应该知道如何分析数据，但根据他的说法，已发表的研究中统计错误却令人震惊地普遍。

Researchers should improve their standards, he wrote in 2012, but journals should also take a tougher line, "engaging reviewers who are statistically literate and editors who can verify the process".

他在2012年写道，研究人员应该提高他们的标准，但期刊也应该采取更严格的态度，"聘请具有统计学素养的审稿人和能够验证这一过程的编辑"。

Vaux says that Science's idea to pass some papers to statisticians "has some merit, but a weakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify 'the papers that need scrutiny' in the first place".

沃克斯表示，《科学》杂志将一些论文交给统计学家审查的设想"有一定道理，但其弱点在于它依赖于审稿编辑委员会首先识别出"需要审查的论文"。

Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch's daughter, Elisabeth, spoke of the "unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions".

两年前，鲁珀特·默多克的女儿伊丽莎白（Elisabeth）谈到"我们许多机构中令人不安的诚信缺失"。

Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of a collective acceptance that the only "sorting mechanism" in society should be profit and the market.

她认为，诚信已经崩溃，因为社会普遍接受的唯一"筛选机制"应该是利润和市场。

But "it's us, human beings, we the people who create the society we want, not profit.

但‘是我们人类，是人民，我们要创造我们想要的社会，而不是为了利润。’

Driving her point home, she continued: "It's increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose, of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.

为了强调她的观点，她继续说道：‘越来越明显的是，政府、媒体或商业中缺乏目标感和道德语言，可能会成为资本主义和自由最危险的目标之一。’

This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International, she thought, making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.

她认为，这种同样缺乏道德目标的情况正在损害像新闻国际这样的公司，使其更容易迷失方向，就像之前因大规模非法电话窃听而发生的那样。

As the hacking trial concludes - finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World, Andy Coulson, for conspiring to hack phones, and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent of the same charge - the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.

随着窃听案审判结束——认定《世界新闻》前编辑安迪·库尔森因密谋窃听电话而有罪，而他的前任蕾贝卡·布鲁克斯则被判定无罪——更广泛的问题，即诚信的缺失，依然存在。

Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.

记者们被证实曾窃听了多达5500人的电话。

This is hacking on an industrial scale, as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.

这属于工业规模的窃听，正如《世界新闻》于2001年聘请的电话窃听负责人格伦·穆尔凯尔所承认的那样。

Others await trial.

其他人仍在等待审判。

This long story still unfolds.

这个漫长的事件仍在继续发展。

In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.

在许多方面，道德目标的缺失不仅解释了为何手机窃听现象如此普遍，也决定了此次审判所依据的条件。

One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.

令人震惊的披露之一是，丽贝卡·布鲁克斯对她在新闻编辑室发生的事情了解甚少，她几乎没有想过去询问，更没有查问过这些新闻故事是如何获得的。

The core of her successful defence was that she knew nothing.

她成功辩护的核心在于，她声称对此一无所知。

In today's world, it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organisations that they run.

在当今世界，高薪高管对其所管理的组织中发生的事情无需负责，已经成为一种常态。

Perhaps we should not be so surprised.

也许我们不应该感到如此惊讶。

For a generation, the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.

在一代人的时间里，社会的主流观念一直是，社会的筛选机制应当是利润。

The words that have mattered are efficiency, flexibility, shareholder value, business-friendly, wealth generation, sales, impact and, in newspapers, circulation.

真正重要的词汇是效率、灵活性、股东价值、亲商、财富创造、销售、影响力，以及在报纸行业中，发行量。

Words degraded to the margin have been justice, fairness, tolerance, proportionality and accountability.

被边缘化的词语则是正义、公平、宽容、适当性和问责制。

The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding, to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.

编辑《世界新闻》的目的并不是为了促进读者理解、保证所写内容的公正性或违背任何普遍的人性。

It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.

其目的是为了在追求发行量和影响力的过程中毁掉人们的生活。

Ms Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories, but she asked no questions, gave no instructions - nor received traceable, recorded answers.

布罗克斯女士可能怀疑她的记者是如何获得这些新闻线索的，但她没有提出任何问题，也没有下达任何指示——也没有得到可追溯、可记录的回答。