According to the passage, a bright
part of a galaxy typically includes
dwarf galaxies and clusters of stars
a balanced mixture of old and new stars
a large portion of the galaxy s mass
part of the corona of the galaxy
gases such as hydrogen and carbon
monoxide
————————————————————————
答案：(E)
现在，这已成为一个不争的事实：银河系要比迄今为止所想象的要来得远为浩
瀚广阔，并具有远高得多的质量。然而，在银河系的冕（即外缘，该星系的很大一
部分质量均位于此处）的各组成部分中，全部可见物质仅仅是冕的微不足道的一小
部分。因此，银河系的绝大部分边远物质必定是暗黑无光的。
为什么？三个事实赫然显著。第一，矮星星系和球状星团——银河系冕的绝大
多数星星可能汇集于其中——主要由古老的星星组成。第二，古老的星星不会显得
特别的亮。第三，没人在冕中发现诸如氢气和一氧化碳之类的气体物质构成的云团。
因此，有关冕的黑暗，目前最好的解释——尽管仍带有相当的推测性，是，冕主要
是由古老的、燃料已耗竭了星星构成的。
It can be inferred from the passage
that, compared with what they now think,
until fairly recently, astronomers
believed that the Milky Way
was much darker
was much smaller
was moving much more slowly
had a much larger corona
had much less gaseous matter
————————————————————————
答案：(B)
现在，这已成为一个不争的事实：银河系要比迄今为止所想象的要来得远为浩
瀚广阔，并具有远高得多的质量。然而，在银河系的冕（即外缘，该星系的很大一
部分质量均位于此处）的各组成部分中，全部可见物质仅仅是冕的微不足道的一小
部分。因此，银河系的绝大部分边远物质必定是暗黑无光的。
为什么？三个事实赫然显著。第一，矮星星系和球状星团——银河系冕的绝大
多数星星可能汇集于其中——主要由古老的星星组成。第二，古老的星星不会显得
特别的亮。第三，没人在冕中发现诸如氢气和一氧化碳之类的气体物质构成的云团。
因此，有关冕的黑暗，目前最好的解释——尽管仍带有相当的推测性，是，冕主要
是由古老的、燃料已耗竭了星星构成的。
The passage presents which of the
following as incontrovertible?
I. The low luminosity of old stars
II. The absence of clouds of gaseous
matter from the corona of the Milky Way
III. The predominance of globular
clusters and dwarf galaxies in the corona
of the Milky Way
I only
III only
I and II only
II and III only
I, II, and III
————————————————————————
答案：(A)
现在，这已成为一个不争的事实：银河系要比迄今为止所想象的要来得远为浩
瀚广阔，并具有远高得多的质量。然而，在银河系的冕（即外缘，该星系的很大一
部分质量均位于此处）的各组成部分中，全部可见物质仅仅是冕的微不足道的一小
部分。因此，银河系的绝大部分边远物质必定是暗黑无光的。
为什么？三个事实赫然显著。第一，矮星星系和球状星团——银河系冕的绝大
多数星星可能汇集于其中——主要由古老的星星组成。第二，古老的星星不会显得
特别的亮。第三，没人在冕中发现诸如氢气和一氧化碳之类的气体物质构成的云团。
因此，有关冕的黑暗，目前最好的解释——尽管仍带有相当的推测性，是，冕主要
是由古老的、燃料已耗竭了星星构成的。
One of the principal of Walzer s
critique of liberal capitalism is
that it is insufficiently egali-
tarian. Walzer s case against the
(5) economic inequality generated by
capitalism and in favor of "a
radical redistribution of wealth"
is presented in a widely cited
essay entitled "In Defense of
(10) Equality."
The most striking feature of
Waizer s critique is that, far
from rejecting the principle of
reward according to merit,Walzer
(15) insists,on its validity. People
who excel should receive the
superior benefits appropriate to
their excellence. But people exhibit
a great variety of qualities-"intelli-
(20) gence, physical strength. agility and
grace. artistic creativity, mechanical
skill. leadership, endurance, memory,
psychological insight. the capacity
for hard work-even moral strength,
(25) sensitivity. the ability to express
compassion." Each deserves its proper
recompense. and hence a proper distri-
bution of material goods should reflect
human differences as measured on all
(30) these different scales. Yet, under
capitalism, the ability to make money
("the green thumb of bourgeois society")
enables its possessor to acquire almost
"every other sort of social good."
(35) such as the respect and esteem of
others.
The centerpiece of Walzer s argument
is the invocation of a quotation from
Pascal s Pensees, which concludes:
(40) "Tyranny is the wish to obtain by
one means what can only be had by
another." Pascal believes that we
owe different duties to different
qualities. So we might say that
(45) infatuation is the proper response
to charm, and awe the proper response
to strength. In this light, Walzer
characterizes capitalism as the
tyranny of money (or of the ability
(50) to make it) And Walzer advocates as
the means of eliminating this tyranny
and of restoring genuine equality
"the abolition of the power of money
outside its sphere" What Walzer envi-
(55) sions is a society in which wealth is
no longer convertible into social goods
with which it has no intrinsic connection.
Walzer s argument is a puzzling one.
After all, why should those qualities
(60) unrelated to the production of material
goods be rewarded with material goods?
Is it not tyrannical, in Pascal s sense,
to insist that those who excel in "sensi-
tivity" or "the ability to express
(65) compassion" merit equal wealth with
those who excel in qualities (such as
"the capacity for hard work") essential
in producing wealth? Yet Waiz
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] 下一页
