考研英語閱讀理解命題思路透析和真題揭秘(37)

　　2008年Text 2

　　It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in the laboratory would submit the results of their research to a journal. A journal editor would then remove the authors' names and affiliations from the paper and send it to their peers for review. Depending on the comments received, the editor would accept the paper for publication or decline it. Copyright rested with the journal publisher, and researchers seeking knowledge of the results would have to subscribe to the journal.

　　No longer. The Internet-and pressure from funding agencies, who are questioning why commercial publishers are making money from government-funded research by restricting access to it- is making access to scientific results a reality. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has just issued a report describing the far-reaching consequences of this. The report, by John Houghton of Victoria University in Australia and Graham Vickery of the OECD, makes heavy reading for publishers who have, so far, made handsome profits. But it goes further than that. It signals a change in what has, until now, been a key element of scientific endeavor.

　　The value of knowledge and the return on the public investment in research depends, in part, upon wide distribution and ready access. It is big business. In America, the core scientific publishing market is estimated at between $7 billion and $11 billion. The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers says that there are more than 2,000 publishers worldwide specializing in these subjects. They publish more than 1.2 million articles each year in some 16,000 journals.

　　This is now changing. According to the OECD report, some 75% of scholarly journals are now online. Entirely new business models are emerging; three main institutional subscribers pay for access to a collection of online journal titles through site-licensing agreements. There is open-access publishing, typically supported by asking the author (or his employer) to pay for the paper to be published. Finally, there are open-access archives, where organizations such as universities or international laboratories support institutional repositories. Other models exist that are hybrids of these three, such as delayed open-access, where journals allow only subscribers to read a paper for the first six months, before making it freely available to everyone who wishes to see it. All this could change the traditional form of the peer-review process, at least for the publication of papers.

　　26. In the first paragraph, the author discusses

　　[A] the background information of journal editing.

　　[B] the publication routine of laboratory reports.

　　[C] the relations of authors with journal publishers.

　　[D] the traditional process of journal publication.

　　[答案] B

　　[解題思路]

　　本題對應(yīng)于文章第一段。該段指出，"A journal editor would then remove the authors' names and affiliations from the paper and send it to their peers for review. Depending on the comments received, the editor would accept the paper for publication or decline it"(這家刊物的編輯會抹去文章的作者和所在機構(gòu)，然后把文章寄給這些研究人員的同行們進行審閱。編輯會根據(jù)得到的審閱評論而決定是否發(fā)表這篇文章)。很明顯，此段講述的是實驗室報告的出版程序。選項A刊物編輯的背景信息、選項C作者與出版商的關(guān)系、以及選項D刊物出版的傳統(tǒng)流程等選項都未能準確概括本段的含義。

　　[題目譯文]

　　在文章第一段中，作者討論了

　　[A] 期刊編輯的背景信息

　　[B] 實驗報告的出版程序

　　[C] 作者們與期刊出版商的關(guān)系

　　[D] 期刊出版的傳統(tǒng)流程

　　27. Which of the following is true of the OECD report?

　　[A] It criticizes government-funded research.

　　[B] It introduces an effective means of publication.

　　[C] It upsets profit-making journal publishers.

　　[D] It benefits scientific research considerably.

　　[答案] C

　　[解題思路]

　　本題的對應(yīng)信息在文章的第二段。該段第二句話指出"The Internet-and pressure from funding agencies, who are questioning why commercial publishers are making money from government-funded research by restricting access to it- is making access to scientific results a reality"(網(wǎng)絡(luò)--那些提供資金的機構(gòu)也在施壓，他們質(zhì)疑為什么商業(yè)運作的刊物能夠通過限制政府投資的研究得到其資源而賺錢--使得閱讀科學研究的成果變?yōu)楝F(xiàn)實)，而下一句話指出OECD的報告正是關(guān)于這個內(nèi)容的，因此A選項不符合原文的意思，因為批評的不是政府資助的研究，而是那些期刊。B也選項與原文不符，可以排除。D選項提高的內(nèi)容與該報告無關(guān)。C選項則對應(yīng)于該段第四句話"makes heavy reading for publishers who have, so far, made handsome profits"(其內(nèi)容使得那些到目前為止利潤豐厚的出版商們都非常汗顏)，因此可見正確答案為C選項。

　　[題目譯文]

　　下面的哪一項正確地描述了OECD的報告?

　　[A] 該報告批評了政府資助的研究。

　　[B] 該報告介紹了一種有效的出版方式。

　　[C] 該報告讓以盈利為目的的刊物出版商們感到擔憂。

　　[D] 該報告在很大程度上使得科學研究獲益。

　　29. With the open-access publishing model, the author of a paper is required to

　　[A] cover the cost of its publication.

　　[B] subscribe to the journal publishing it.

　　[C] allow other online journals to use it freely.

　　[D] complete the peer-review before submission.

　　[答案] A

　　[解題思路]

　　本題對應(yīng)于最后一段的第三句話"There is open-access publishing, typically supported by asking the author (or his employer) to pay for the paper to be published"(第二種是開放式出版模型，這種方式的典型特點就是要求作者(或其雇主)付錢發(fā)表文章)，很顯然A選項是正確答案。其他三個選項都與對應(yīng)信息無關(guān)。

　　[題目譯文]

　　在開放式出版模型下，論文作者們被要求

　　[A] 支付出版的成本

　　[B] 訂購出版該文章的期刊

　　[C] 允許其他期刊免費使用其論文

　　[D] 在提交之前完成文章的同事評審