《2022河南考研英语考试真题卷（9）.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《2022河南考研英语考试真题卷（9）.docx（108页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、2022河南考研英语考试真题卷（9）本卷共分为1大题50小题，作答时间为180分钟，总分100分，60分及格。一、单项选择题（共50题，每题2分。每题的备选项中，只有一个最符合题意） 1.Text 3Europe is desperate to succeed in business. Two years ago, the European Union’s Lisbon summit set a goal of becoming the world’s leading economy by 2010. But success, as any new-age execut
2、ive coach might tell you, requires confronting the fear of failure. That is why Europe’s approach to bankruptcy urgently needs reform.In Europe, as in the United States, many heavily indebted companies are shutting up shop just as the economy begins to recover. Ironically, the upturn is often
3、the moment when weak firms finally fail. But America’s failures have a big advantage over Europe’s weaklings: their country’s more relaxed approach to bankruptcy.In the United States the Chapter 11 law makes going bust an orderly and even routine process. Firms in trouble simply ap
4、ply for breathing space from creditors. Managers submit a plan of reorganization to a judge, and creditors decide whether to give it a go or to come up with one of their own. Creditors have a say in whether to keep the firm running, or to liquidate it. If they keep it running, they often end up with
5、 a big chunk of equity, if not outright control.But shutting a bust European company is harder in two other ways. First, with no equivalent of Chapter 11, bankruptcy forces companies to stop trading abruptly. That dam ages the value of the creditors’ potential assets, and may also cause havoc
6、for customers. Second, a company that trades across the European Union will find that it has to abide by different bankruptcy laws in the 15 member states, whose courts and administrators may make conflicting and sometimes incompatible stipulations.The absence of provision for negotiations between c
7、ompanies and creditors increases the temptation for government to step in. When governments do not come to the rescue, the lack of clear rules can lead to chaos. As a result of all this, Europe’s teetering firms miss the chance to become more competitive by selling assets to others who might m
8、anage them more efficiently. Their sickly American rivals survive, transformed, to sweep the field.An opportunity now exists to think again about Europe’s approach to bankruptcy. The European Union is expected to issue a new directive on the subject in May. Germany has begun to update its inso
9、lvency law. And last year Britain produced a white paper saying that a rigid approach to bankruptcy could stifle the growth needed to meet Lisbon’s goals.The word weaklings (Paragraph 2) most probably means （）Airrational creditors.Bcompetitive rivals.Cefficient negotiators.Dindebted firms.2.Te
10、xt 3Europe is desperate to succeed in business. Two years ago, the European Union’s Lisbon summit set a goal of becoming the world’s leading economy by 2010. But success, as any new-age executive coach might tell you, requires confronting the fear of failure. That is why Europe’s a
11、pproach to bankruptcy urgently needs reform.In Europe, as in the United States, many heavily indebted companies are shutting up shop just as the economy begins to recover. Ironically, the upturn is often the moment when weak firms finally fail. But America’s failures have a big advantage over
12、Europe’s weaklings: their country’s more relaxed approach to bankruptcy.In the United States the Chapter 11 law makes going bust an orderly and even routine process. Firms in trouble simply apply for breathing space from creditors. Managers submit a plan of reorganization to a judge, and
13、 creditors decide whether to give it a go or to come up with one of their own. Creditors have a say in whether to keep the firm running, or to liquidate it. If they keep it running, they often end up with a big chunk of equity, if not outright control.But shutting a bust European company is harder i
14、n two other ways. First, with no equivalent of Chapter 11, bankruptcy forces companies to stop trading abruptly. That dam ages the value of the creditors’ potential assets, and may also cause havoc for customers. Second, a company that trades across the European Union will find that it has to
15、abide by different bankruptcy laws in the 15 member states, whose courts and administrators may make conflicting and sometimes incompatible stipulations.The absence of provision for negotiations between companies and creditors increases the temptation for government to step in. When governments do n
16、ot come to the rescue, the lack of clear rules can lead to chaos. As a result of all this, Europe’s teetering firms miss the chance to become more competitive by selling assets to others who might manage them more efficiently. Their sickly American rivals survive, transformed, to sweep the fie
17、ld.An opportunity now exists to think again about Europe’s approach to bankruptcy. The European Union is expected to issue a new directive on the subject in May. Germany has begun to update its insolvency law. And last year Britain produced a white paper saying that a rigid approach to bankrup
18、tcy could stifle the growth needed to meet Lisbon’s goals.One of goals set by the European Unions Lisbon summit is（）Ato strive for the lead in the world's economy.Bto subject more companies to bankruptcy.Cto revise an approach to bankrupt stipulations.Dto have advantage over American firms
19、.3.Text 3Europe is desperate to succeed in business. Two years ago, the European Union’s Lisbon summit set a goal of becoming the world’s leading economy by 2010. But success, as any new-age executive coach might tell you, requires confronting the fear of failure. That is why Europe&rsqu
20、o;s approach to bankruptcy urgently needs reform.In Europe, as in the United States, many heavily indebted companies are shutting up shop just as the economy begins to recover. Ironically, the upturn is often the moment when weak firms finally fail. But America’s failures have a big advantage
21、over Europe’s weaklings: their country’s more relaxed approach to bankruptcy.In the United States the Chapter 11 law makes going bust an orderly and even routine process. Firms in trouble simply apply for breathing space from creditors. Managers submit a plan of reorganization to a judge
22、, and creditors decide whether to give it a go or to come up with one of their own. Creditors have a say in whether to keep the firm running, or to liquidate it. If they keep it running, they often end up with a big chunk of equity, if not outright control.But shutting a bust European company is har
23、der in two other ways. First, with no equivalent of Chapter 11, bankruptcy forces companies to stop trading abruptly. That dam ages the value of the creditors’ potential assets, and may also cause havoc for customers. Second, a company that trades across the European Union will find that it ha
24、s to abide by different bankruptcy laws in the 15 member states, whose courts and administrators may make conflicting and sometimes incompatible stipulations.The absence of provision for negotiations between companies and creditors increases the temptation for government to step in. When governments
25、 do not come to the rescue, the lack of clear rules can lead to chaos. As a result of all this, Europe’s teetering firms miss the chance to become more competitive by selling assets to others who might manage them more efficiently. Their sickly American rivals survive, transformed, to sweep th
26、e field.An opportunity now exists to think again about Europe’s approach to bankruptcy. The European Union is expected to issue a new directive on the subject in May. Germany has begun to update its insolvency law. And last year Britain produced a white paper saying that a rigid approach to ba
27、nkruptcy could stifle the growth needed to meet Lisbon’s goals.Which of the following is TRUE according to the text（）AThe achievement of Lisbon's goals would precede the elimination of chaos.BThe best way to help European firms may be to make it easier for them to fail.CIt is high time tha
28、t the rigid bankruptcy laws in the U. S. were radically changed.DShutting a weak American company means ending up with a big chunk of assets.4.Text 3Europe is desperate to succeed in business. Two years ago, the European Union’s Lisbon summit set a goal of becoming the world’s leading ec
29、onomy by 2010. But success, as any new-age executive coach might tell you, requires confronting the fear of failure. That is why Europe’s approach to bankruptcy urgently needs reform.In Europe, as in the United States, many heavily indebted companies are shutting up shop just as the economy be
30、gins to recover. Ironically, the upturn is often the moment when weak firms finally fail. But America’s failures have a big advantage over Europe’s weaklings: their country’s more relaxed approach to bankruptcy.In the United States the Chapter 11 law makes going bust an orderly and
31、 even routine process. Firms in trouble simply apply for breathing space from creditors. Managers submit a plan of reorganization to a judge, and creditors decide whether to give it a go or to come up with one of their own. Creditors have a say in whether to keep the firm running, or to liquidate it
32、. If they keep it running, they often end up with a big chunk of equity, if not outright control.But shutting a bust European company is harder in two other ways. First, with no equivalent of Chapter 11, bankruptcy forces companies to stop trading abruptly. That dam ages the value of the creditors&r
33、squo; potential assets, and may also cause havoc for customers. Second, a company that trades across the European Union will find that it has to abide by different bankruptcy laws in the 15 member states, whose courts and administrators may make conflicting and sometimes incompatible stipulations.Th
34、e absence of provision for negotiations between companies and creditors increases the temptation for government to step in. When governments do not come to the rescue, the lack of clear rules can lead to chaos. As a result of all this, Europe’s teetering firms miss the chance to become more co
35、mpetitive by selling assets to others who might manage them more efficiently. Their sickly American rivals survive, transformed, to sweep the field.An opportunity now exists to think again about Europe’s approach to bankruptcy. The European Union is expected to issue a new directive on the sub
36、ject in May. Germany has begun to update its insolvency law. And last year Britain produced a white paper saying that a rigid approach to bankruptcy could stifle the growth needed to meet Lisbon’s goals.According to what is beyond the ability of Europes firms now is（）Ato have access to more re
37、laxed approach to bankruptcy.Bto submit a plan of reorganization to a judge on request.Cto negotiate with their creditors when going bankrupt.Dto sell assets to others who might manage them efficiently.5.Text 4For Tony Blair, home is a messy sort of place, where the prime minister’s job is not
38、 to uphold eternal values but to force through some unpopular changes that may make the country work a bit better. The area where this is most obvious, and where it matters most, is the public services. Mr. Blair faces a difficulty here which is partly of his own making. By focusing his last electio
39、n campaign on the need to improve hospitals, schools, transport and policing, he built up expectations. Mr. Blair has said many times that reforms in the way the public services work need to go alongside increases in cash.Mr. Blair has made his task harder by committing a classic negotiating error.
40、Instead of extracting concessions from the other side before promising his own, he has pledged himself to higher spending on public services without getting a commitment to change from the unions. Why, given that this pledge has been made, should the health unions give ground in return In a speech o
41、n March 20th, Gordon Brown, the chancellor of the exchequer, said that the something-for-nothing days are over in our public services and there can be no blank cheques. But the government already seems to have given health workers a blank cheque.Nor are other ministries conveying quite the same mess
42、age as the treasury. On March 19th, John Hutton, a health minister, announced that cleaners and catering staff in new privately funded hospitals working for the National Health service will still be government employees, entitled to the same pay and conditions as other health-service workers. Since
43、one of the main ways in which the government hopes to reform the public sector is by using private providers, and since one of the main ways in which private providers are likely to be able to save money is by cutting labor costs, this move seems to undermine the government’s strategy.Now the
44、government faces its hardest fight. The police need reforming more than any other public service. Half of them, for instance, retire early, at a cost of 1 billion ( $ 1.4 billion) a year to the taxpayer. The police have voted 10-1 against proposals from the home secretary, David Blunkett, to reform
45、their working practices.This is a fight the government has to win. If the police get away with it, other public-service workers will reckon they can too. And, if they all get away with it, Mr. Blair’s domestic policy-which is what voters are most likely to judge him on the next election-will b
46、e a failure.The conclusion can be drawn from the text that Britains public services may be （）Aat a dangerous stage.Bfor lack of investment.Cin the interests of workers.Don the verge of collapse.6.Text 4For Tony Blair, home is a messy sort of place, where the prime minister’s job is not to upho
47、ld eternal values but to force through some unpopular changes that may make the country work a bit better. The area where this is most obvious, and where it matters most, is the public services. Mr. Blair faces a difficulty here which is partly of his own making. By focusing his last election campai
48、gn on the need to improve hospitals, schools, transport and policing, he built up expectations. Mr. Blair has said many times that reforms in the way the public services work need to go alongside increases in cash.Mr. Blair has made his task harder by committing a classic negotiating error. Instead
49、of extracting concessions from the other side before promising his own, he has pledged himself to higher spending on public services without getting a commitment to change from the unions. Why, given that this pledge has been made, should the health unions give ground in return In a speech on March 20th, Gordon Brown, the chancellor of the exchequer, said that the something-for-nothing days are over in our public services and there can be no blank cheques. But the government alre