12月cet6深度阅读原文及答案（上海提供）

　　2011年12月cet6深度阅读原文及答案(上海提供)

　　Passage one

　　Whats the one word of advice a well-meaning professional would give to a recent college graduate today? China? India? Hedge fund ? Plastic surgery? How about trade?

　　Advertisement

　　When the Commerce Department reported last week that the trade deficit in June spiked to nearly $50 billion, it set off a new round of economic doomsaying. Imports, which soared to $200.3 billion in the month, are subtracted in the calculation of gross domestic product. The larger the trade deficit, the smaller the GDP. ①Should such imbalances continue, pessimists say, they could contribute to a slowdown in growth.

　　②But theres another way of looking at the trade data. Over the past two years, the figures on imports and exports seem not to signal a double-dip recession-i.e., a renewed decline in the broad level of economic activity in the United States-but an economic expansion.

　　In June, imports were $200.3 billion and exports were $150.5 billion-total trade in goods and services of $350.8 billion. In June 2009, by contrast, imports were $155 billion and exports were $128 billion-a total trade in goods and services of $283 billion. In other words, the volume of U.S. trade with other countries in June was up nearly 24 percent from the year before, with exports up 17.5 percent and imports up 29 percent. Trade is nowhere near its peak-in July 2008, when exports were $165 billion and imports were $232 billion, the monthly total was nearly $400 billion. But over the course of 2010, as the rate of economic growth has slowed, trade has gained momentum. In June, exports were 5 percent higher than they were in December 2009, and imports were up 10.5 percent.

　　The rising volume of trade-more goods and services shuttling in and out of the United States-is good news for many sectors. Companies engaged in shipping, trucking, rail freight, delivery, and logistics have all been reporting better than expected results. The rising numbers signify growing vitality in foreign markets-when we import more stuff, it puts more cash in the hands of people around the world, and U.S. exports are rising because more foreigners have the ability to buy the things we produce and market. ③The rising tide of trade is also good news for people who work in trade-sensitive businesses, especially those that produce commodities for which global demand sets the price-agricultural goods, mining, metals, oil.

　　And while exports always seem to lag, U.S. companies are becoming more involved in the global economy with each passing month. General Motors sells as many cars in China as it does in the United States each month. While that may not do much for imports, it does help GMs balance sheet-and hence makes the jobs of U.S.-based executives more stable.

　　④One great challenge for the U.S. economy is slack domestic consumer demand. Americans are paying down debt, saving more, and spending more carefully. Thats to be expected, given what weve been through. But theres a bigger challenge. Can U.S.-based businesses, large and small, figure out how to get a piece of growing global demand? Unless you want to pick up and move to India, or Brazil, or China, the best way to do that is through trade. It may seem obvious, but its no longer enough simply to do business with our friends and neighbors here at home.

　　As they figure out how to monetize eyeballs in the United States, for example, smart media companies should also be figuring out how they can invest in and promote new ventures in other countries-a la Slate.fr. Newsweeks domestic struggles have been well-documented, but several foreign publishers license the magazines name and content to produce local, foreign-language versions. Newsweek Pakistan is about to launch. Its a mystery to me that every U.S. print media company doesnt have an aggressive strategy to become heavily involved in India. Resorts and hotels that dont have a plan to appeal to the growing legions of Chinese people who have the ability and desire to travel to the United States are similarly missing out on a large potential opportunity.

　　Companies and individuals who dont have a strategy to export more, or to get more involved in foreign markets, or to play a role in global trade, are shutting themselves out of the lions share of economic opportunity in our world.

　　题目：

　　52. How do pessimists interpret the U.S. Trade deficit in June?

　　A) It could lead to slower growth of the national economy.

　　B) It reflects Americans preference for imported goods.

　　C) It signifies a change in American economic structure.

　　D) It is the result of Americas growing focus on domestic market.

　　53. What does the author say about the trade data of the past two years?

　　A) It indicates that economic activities in the U.S. Have increased.

　　B) It reflects the fluctuations in the international market.

　　C) It shows that U.S. Economy is slipping further into recession.

　　D) It signals decreasing domestic demand for goods and services.

　　54. Who particularly benefit from the rising volume of trade?

　　A) People who have expertise in international trade.

　　B) Producers of agricultural goods and raw materials.

　　C) Consumers who favor imported goods and services.

　　D) Retailers dealing in foreign goods and services.

　　55. What is one of the challenges facing the American economy?

　　A) Decreasing productivity

　　B) Peoples reluctance to spend.

　　C) Competition from overseas.

　　D) Slack trade activities.

　　56. What is the authors advice to U.S. Companies and individuals?

　　A) To import more cheap goods from developing countries.

　　B) To be alert to fluctuations in foreign markets.

　　C) To increase their market share overseas.

　　D) To move their companies to where labor is cheaper.

　　Passage Two

　　A recurring criticism of the UKs university sector is its perceived weakness in translating new knowledge into new products and services.

　　①Recently, the UK National Stem Cell Network warned the UK could lose its place among the world leaders in stem cell research unless adequate funding and legislation could be assured, despite an annual ?40m spend by the Department of Health on all kinds of research.

　　We should take this concern seriously as universities are key in the national innovation system and, in the face of the current economic turmoil, one of the few get out of jail cards still held by the nation.

　　However, we do have to challenge the unthinking complaint that the sector does not do enough in taking ideas to market. ②The most recent comparative data on the performance of universities and research institutions in Australia, Canada, USA and UK shows that, from a relatively weak starting position, the UK now leads on many indicators of commercialisation activity.

　　Our weaknesses show up in the rates of US patenting and license income arising from our efforts, but these have improved and there is no reason to believe that this trend will not be continued.

　　③When viewed at the national level, the policy interventions of the past decade, such as the sharp increase in research funding, the evolution of the Higher Education Innovation Fund and the continuation of the Research Assessment Exercise have helped transform the performance of UK universities. The evidence suggests the UKs position is much stronger than in the recent past and is still showing improvement.

　　Now for the health warning. National data masks the very large variation in the performance of individual universities. The evidence shows that a large number of universities have fallen off the back of the pack, a few perform strongly and the rest chase the leaders.

　　This type of skewed distribution is not peculiar to the UK and is mirrored across other economies. In the UK, research is concentrated: less than 25% of universities are in receipt of 75% of the research funding. These same universities are also the institutions producing the greatest share of PhD graduates, science citations, patents and license income. ④The effect of policies generating long-term resource concentration has also created a distinctive set of universities which are research-led and commercially active.

　　As part of the debate on the future of higher education, John Denham, the innovation, universities and skills secretary, challenged authors to take a 10-15 year outlook on the direction of the sector.

　　My report, Intellectual Property and Research Benefits, highlights the interrelationships which have evolved around research funding, graduate schools and the effective creation, management and exploitation of intellectual property. It seems clear that the concentration of research and commercialisation work creates differences between universities.

　　A consequence of more than two decades of policy recognising and rewarding research excellence is further differentiation in the sector. At the same time, we need to increase the number of PhD students across a broad range of disciplines. This will generate an opportunity to develop the graduate schools at those universities with higher numbers of PhD registrations, to invest in more scholarships and to expand the training opportunities for PhD students by promoting courses linked to commercialisation skills and business development practices.

　　The core objective for universities which are research-led must be to maximise the impact of their research efforts. Their purpose is not to generate funds to add to the bottom line of the university or to substitute other income streams. Rather, these universities should be generating the widest range of social, economic and environmental benefits. In return for the scale of investment, they should share their expertise in order to build greater confidence in the sector.

　　Part of the economic recovery of the UK will be driven by the next generation of research commercialisation spilling out of our universities. On the evidence presented in my report, there are three dozen universities in the UK which are actively engaged in advanced research training and commercialisation work.

　　⑤If there was a greater coordination of technology transfer offices within regions and a simultaneous investment in the scale and functions of our graduate schools, universities could, and should, play a key role in positioning the UK for the next growth cycle.

　　题目：

　　57. What does the author think of UK universities in terms of commercialisation?

　　A) They have lost their leading position in many ways.

　　B) They fail to convert knowledge into money.

　　C) They do not regard it as their responsibility.

　　D) They still have a place among the world leaders.

　　58. What does the author say about the national data on UK universities performance in commercialisation?

　　A) It does not rank UK universities in a scientific way.

　　B) It does not reflect the differences among universities.

　　C) It indicates their ineffective use of government resources.

　　D) It masks the fatal weaknesses of government policy.

　　59. We can infer from Paragraph 5 that policy interventions refers to______.

　　A) concentration of resourcces in a linmited number of universities.

　　B) government aid to non-research-oriented universities.

　　C) compulsory cooperation between universities and inductries.

　　D) Fair distribution of funding for universities and research institutions.

　　60. What does the author suggest research-led universities do?

　　A) Spread their influence among top research institutions.

　　B) Generously share their facilities with those short of funds.

　　C) Publicise their research to win international recognition.

　　D) Fully utilise their to benefit all sectors of society.

　　61. How can the university sector play a key role in the UKs economic growth?

　　A) By promoting technology transfer and graduate school education.

　　B) By establishing more regional technology transfer offices.

　　C) By increasing the efficiency of technology transfer agencies.

　　D) By asking the government to invest in technology transfer research.