5. Henrietta must have had sharp elbows in order to _____.

[A] maintain good temper when serving the royal family

[B] survive the complicated disputes

[C] have herself accepted by all the people she met

[D] make friends with reasonable people

5. Henrietta手腕必须强硬，以便于 _____。

[A] 保持好脾气，以更好地服务王室

[B] 在复杂纷繁的斗争中生存下来

[C] 为所有她见到的人所接受

[D] 和理智的人交朋友

答案：B　难度系数：☆☆☆

分析：推理题。文章第五段提到，虽然她非常审慎、性格很好，但是手腕需要强硬些，原文的“肘部尖锐些”应当是一个比喻。下文又说这是因为宫廷是一个是非之地，因此可以推断，这个引申义是指运用这种手段来保护自己、使自己能够在复杂纷繁的皇室斗争中生存下来，因此选项B为正确答案。其余三个选项都是文章中提到的一些细节内容，与本题题干无关。





参考译文


Tracy Borman是个讲故事的好手，必须承认，她选取的题材是不同凡响的。Henrietta Howard，这位乔治二世的情人生活在一大群人物中间，他们许多人都和18世纪宫廷生活的复杂政治纠结在一起，但Borman女士却能沉静地描述这些人以及他们的世界。

虽然18世纪被称为理性时代，但事实却恰恰相反。Henrietta出生于1689年，而在1688年，英国的政权由君主转向了议会，但没有摒弃男性对女性的专制，Henrietta的大部分生活都是由一些暴力、非理性的男性控制着。8岁时，她的父亲，一个贪图享乐、性格暴躁的诺福克Blickling Hall乡绅，因为一位邻居质疑他不勇猛，就向邻居提出了决斗。他最终因为伤痛死去，留下了妻子、八个孩子和一堆债务。八年后，也许是希望可以帮助当时已失去母亲的兄弟姐妹们，Henrietta嫁给了比她大14岁的表哥Charles Howard，条件是免于出嫁妆钱。

这段婚姻是个灾难。Charles是个没有自制力的赌徒，还经常殴打妻子，他们的生活颠沛流离，几近饿死。就在这时，25岁的Henrietta给自己下了个令人震惊的赌注。1714年，安妮皇后去世，Henrietta和Charles一起到了汉诺威，在那里，英国王位的假定继承人George Louis继位。Henrietta成了那些希望通过一些手段引起George Louis或是他儿子George Augustus和儿媳Caroline注意的人之一。

Henrietta赌赢了，尽管她得留意煎锅和火苗。她成为了Caroline公主的卧室女仆，这就意味着她每天都得应付那些单调、严格的礼节，比如屈膝端着洗脸盆到某一高度，这是Caroline在Henrietta成为她丈夫的情妇后恶意坚持的。并不是说做George Augustus的情妇是什么舒服的事情。他是个粗野的男人，而且也厌烦了。但无论如何，Henrietta从没有真正取代过Caroline。既然这样，作王室情人更多的是一个职位，而不是什么浪漫的事情，但这个职位却适合Henrietta，因为这能够使她免于受到丈夫的伤害，而这正是法律不能给予她的。

Henrietta因她的审慎和温和的性格而著称，但是她一定有强硬的手腕。正像Borman女士生动地描写的那样，宫廷是个谣言肆虐、感情淡薄的地方，受政治的党派之争驱动，加上王室内部公开的争吵，这一直是个水深火热之地。而这就是Henrietta生活的地方，但她却让人人都喜欢她。即使是尖酸刻薄的诗人Alexander Pope也把她形容为理智、风趣、机敏，最重要的是Pope把她当成了朋友。

Borman女士用迷人笔触描述了Henrietta的朋友们，有诗人、作家还有像Lord Chesterfield和 Horace Walpole那样的才子，以及他们在为设计Henrietta位于Twickenham大理石山上的Palladian别墅时的快乐。在丈夫死后，Henrietta就可以安全地退隐了，她开始享乐，然后再嫁人，拥有了一个家。经历过这一切杂乱的生活之后，辛苦得来的家庭生活感觉就像是英雄史诗一般壮美。





TEXT THREE


For most of his life Chuck Feeney has guarded his privacy obsessively. When he became a philanthropist, his gifts came on condition that his name never appeared on any press release or plaque; all donations would cease if confidentiality was breached. But when he decided to co-operate with Conor O'Clery on this book, many of the people in his life, released from their Trappist vows, let themselves go. The result is gripping.

An Irish-American, born in New Jersey in 1931, Mr. Feeney made a fortune by co-founding Duty Free Shoppers (DFS) which first sold tax-exempt goods to American soldiers abroad and then tapped into the rise of mass tourism. When DFS was sold in 1997, it had delivered nearly $8 billion to its four main shareholders, of which Mr. Feeney was the joint biggest, with 38.75% .

Tax avoidance is the flip side to Mr. Feeney's philanthropic coin. He is addicted to it. “Chuck hates taxes. He believes people can do more with money than governments can,” says a friend. In 1964 a young New York lawyer, Harvey Dale, told Mr. Feeney that changes in the tax laws threatened his business, which was running risks that could put the founders in jail. On his advice, Mr. Feeney and his co-founder, Robert Miller, transferred ownership to their foreign-born wives, from France and Ecuador, respectively. In 1974, through a deal with the American government, the firm turned the Pacific island of Saipan into a tax haven. Then, in 1978, Mr. Feeney grouped his various investments, including his shares of DFS, in a holding company, General Atlantic Group Limited, in tax-free Bermuda. To escape the American taxman, everything was still registered in his wife's name.

Mr. Feeney carefully shunned all outward evidence of wealth. But as soon as DFS became reliably profitable, he started the practice of giving 5% of his pre-tax profits to good causes. In 1982 he created a foundation, the Atlantic Philanthropies, based in Bermuda. Two years later he signed over his fortune to the foundation, except for sums set aside for his wife and children. His net worth fell below $5m. When he broke the news to his children, he gave them each a copy of Andrew Carnegie's essay on wealth, written in 1889.

Mr. Feeney has given his alma mater, Cornell University, more than $600m, dwarfing all other donations from a single alumnus to an American university. He has contributed hundreds of millions of dollars towards higher education in Ireland, South Africa and Australia. He has helped with health care in Vietnam. In 2004 he went to Cuba, where he met Fidel Castro, who seemed only too happy to accept his capitalist-tax-avoided dollars. But it was his support for the Irish peace process that caused the most controversy, including accusations (without foundation, it turned out) that he had financed the IRA.

Mr. Feeney is committed to giving away all the money in his foundation by a fixed date—thought to be in about ten years—but his investment prowess makes this difficult. Currently, Atlantic Philanthropies is worth $4 billion (up from $3.5 billion in 2001) even though, over its lifetime, it has given away about $4 billion in increasing amounts. The trouble for Mr. Feeney is that the foundation's assets are growing as fast as he tries to get rid of them.

1. When Chuck decided to co-operate with Conor O'Clery on this book, many of the people in his life _____.

[A] left Chuck for ever

[B] broke their previous promises of maintaining confidentiality

[C] talked about what they knew about Chuck

[D] felt surprised and then disappointed about Chuck

2. Mr. Feeney was dedicated to avoiding tax because _____.

[A] he wanted to make more money

[B] he wanted to give more money to good causes

[C] he thought the government was corrupted

[D] he thought people could manage the society with their own money by themselves

3. Pacific island of Saipan _____ through a deal with the American government in 1974.

[A] made favorable tax policy for Mr. Feeney's firm

[B] established a branch of DFS

[C] became a tax-free place

[D] became a heaven for tax-free business

4. Which one of the following statements is NOT true of Mr. Feeney's charity activities?

[A] He made huge donations to Cornell University.

[B] He contributed money to higher education.

[C] He supported the health care in Vietnam.

[D] He financed the IRA for the Irish peace process.

5. It is difficult for Mr. Feeney to give away all the money in his foundation in about ten years since _____.

[A] he has made too much investment elsewhere to take back the money

[B] the foundation's assets are increasing too fast to be completely given away

[C] he has trouble in finding reliable means to donate all the money

[D] ten years is too long for him to give away all the money





文章剖析


这篇文章介绍了一位慈善家Chuck Feeney。第一段讲述Feeney先生不愿意透露自己的隐私，最后却答应合作撰写这本书让自己的秘密公布于天下；第二段讲述Feeney先生的身世和创业经历；第三段讲述Feeney先生对免税事业的执著；第四段讲述他成立了一个基金会；第五段讲述该基金会的捐赠历史；第六段讲述他完成捐款任务的困难。





词汇注释


philanthropist n. 慈善家

plaque n. 匾额

Trappist n.（天主教西多会中的）特拉普派（此派强调缄口苦修）

gripping adj. 引起人注意的，吸引人的

alma mater 母校

prowess n. 威力，（做某事的）高超技艺





难句突破


① Then, in 1978, Mr. Feeney grouped his various investments, including his shares of DFS, in a holding company, General Atlantic Group Limited, in tax-free Bermuda.

主体句式：..., Mr. Feeney grouped... investments, ... in a holding company, ... in tax-free Bermuda.

结构分析：这是一个简单句，现在分词结构including...是前面部分的状语；General Atlantic Group Limited是前面company的同位语。

句子译文：1978年，Feeney先生把自己的各种投资都集合起来，包括他在免税店的股份，然后投进了一家在不收税的百慕大群岛成立的控股公司——通用大西洋有限公司。

② Currently, Atlantic Philanthropies is worth $4 billion (up from $3.5 billion in 2001) even though, over its lifetime, it has given away about $4 billion in increasing amounts.

主体句式：..., Atlantic Philanthropies is worth... even though, ... it has given...

结构分析：这是一个复合句，在后面的分句中，over its lifetime是分句的状语。

句子译文：目前，“大西洋慈善”价值40亿美元（而在2001年只有35亿），这是在已经累计捐出了40亿美元之后的数字。





题目分析


1. When Chuck decided to co-operate with Conor O'Clery on this book, many of the people in his life _____.

[A] left Chuck for ever

[B] broke their previous promises of maintaining confiden-tiality

[C] talked about what they knew about Chuck

[D] felt surprised and then disappointed about Chuck

1. 当Chuck决定和Conor O'Clery合作撰写这本书时，他周围的许多人 _____。

[A] 永远离开了Chuck

[B] 打破了自己曾经许下的保密诺言

[C] 谈论他们所知道的Chuck

[D] 对Chuck先是感到惊讶，然后是失望

答案：C　难度系数：☆☆☆

分析：推理题。第一段提到Chuck一直在保护自己的隐私，但提到合作写这本书时用了转折词，由此可以推断这次他并没有缄口，他周围的许多人也因此可以随意谈论他们所知道的Chunk。选项C符合题意。选项A和D是明显错误的，而选项B是一个较强的干扰选项，其错误在于，这些人不是打破了自己的诺言，而是现在已经没有必要再遵守诺言了，因此连Chunk自己都已经开金口了。

2. Mr. Feeney was dedicated to avoiding tax because _____.

[A] he wanted to make more money

[B] he wanted to give more money to good causes

[C] he thought the government was corrupted

[D] he thought people could manage the society with their own money by themselves

2. Feeney先生竭力避税，是因为 _____。

[A] 他想要赚更多的钱

[B] 他想要将更多的钱投入公益事业

[C] 他认为政府是腐败的

[D] 他认为人们可以用自己的钱自己来管理社会

答案：D　难度系数：☆☆☆☆

分析：细节题。第三段提到，Feeney先生对免税上了瘾，因为他认为人们用钱可以比政府办更多的事情，因此，选项D最为符合题意。C，作者并未提到政府腐败，只是提到人们用钱可以比政府办更多的事情。

3. Pacific island of Saipan _____ through a deal with the American government in 1974.

[A] made favorable tax policy for Mr. Feeney's firm

[B] established a branch of DFS

[C] became a tax-free place

[D] became a heaven for tax-free business

3. 通过和美国政府于1974年达成的一个协议，太平洋 上的塞班岛 _____。

[A] 为Feeney先生的公司制定了有利的税收政策

[B] 建立了其免税店的一个分店

[C] 成为免税的地方

[D] 成为免税商业活动的天堂

答案：C　难度系数：☆☆☆☆

分析：推理题。文章第三段提到，Feeney先生为了避免法律的麻烦，把免税店转到了妻子名下，而后来又同美国政府达成协议，把塞班岛变成了一个“税收避难所”，也就是免税的地方。选项C为正确答案。选项A是错误的，因为塞班岛成为免税的地方是通过同美国政府达成的协议实现的，并没有专门为Feeney先生的公司制定政策。选项B显然是错误的，因为不仅仅是开一个免税店的分店那么简单，而是整个岛都变成了免税的地方。选项D有一定的干扰性，虽然小岛上都是免税的，但是没有证据表明它成为了免税商业活动的天堂。

4. Which one of the following statements is NOT true of Mr. Feeney's charity activities?

[A] He made huge donations to Cornell University.

[B] He contributed money to higher education.

[C] He supported the health care in Vietnam.

[D] He financed the IRA for the Irish peace process.

4. 关于Feeney先生的慈善行为，下列哪个陈述是错误的？

[A] 他为康奈尔大学捐献了巨额款项。

[B] 他为高等教育捐资。

[C] 他资助越南的卫生事业。

[D] 他因为爱尔兰的和平进程而资助了爱尔兰共和军。

答案：D　难度系数：☆☆☆

分析：细节题。选项A、B和C在文章第五段中都有所涉及，即“Feeney先生捐给自己的母校康奈尔大学的资金达六亿多美元，这个数额超过了美国所有大学毕业生个人捐款的总额。他还捐献了几亿美元用于爱尔兰、南非和澳大利亚的高等教育。此外，他也资助了越南的卫生保健事业。2004年，他来到古巴，在那里会见了菲德尔·卡斯特罗，卡斯特罗非常高兴，但并未接受Feeney先生通过避税得来的钱”。选项D，他资助了爱尔兰的和平进程，但是文章指出，说他资助了爱尔兰共和军是没有根据的。因此，选项D为正确答案。

5. It is difficult for Mr Feeney to give away all the money in his foundation in about ten years since _____.

[A] he has made too much investment elsewhere to take back the money

[B] the foundation's assets are increasing too fast to be completely given away

[C] he has trouble in finding reliable means to donate all the money

[D] ten years is too long for him to give away all the money

5. Feeney先生要在10年内将自己基金会的所有资产捐出，这有一定的难度，是因为 _____。

[A] 他在其他地方投资太多，无法把钱收回来

[B] 该基金会的资产增长过快，不能及时全部捐出

[C] 他在寻找可靠的捐钱途径方面碰到了问题

[D] 10年对于他捐出所有的资产来说太长了

答案：B　难度系数：☆☆☆

分析：细节题。文章最后一段提到，他的投资能力不断增加，基金会的资产也不断增加，所以要把钱全部捐出去还是个困难。因此选项B是符合这个意思的。其他三个选项都与文章内容无关，属于无中生有。





参考译文


Chuck Feeney在一生的大部分时间里，都竭尽全力保护自己的私生活不受干扰。在成为一个慈善家后，他在捐赠时提出的条件就是，自己的名字不能出现在任何新闻稿或匾额上。如果违反了这种机密约定，他就会终止捐赠。但是当他决定要和Conor O'Clery合作写本书时，他周围的许多人都得以打破缄口的誓言，从而可以畅所欲言了。这个结果真是够吸引人的。

Feeney先生是一位美籍爱尔兰人，1931年出生在新泽西州。他和人共同创办了免税店而发了大财，该免税店最开始是向那些在国外的美国士兵出售免税商品。后来随着旅游者的增多，其业务也转向了他们。1997年卖掉免税店时，四个大股东得到了近80亿美元，而Feeney是最大的股东，他占有的份额为38.75%。

免税只是Feeney先生慈善事业的另一面而已。他甚至对免税上了瘾。“Chuck憎恨税收。他认为人们用钱可以比政府能办更多的事情。”他的一位朋友说。1964年，一位年轻的纽约律师Harvey Dale告诉Feeney先生，税收法的改革会威胁到他的生意，甚至可能会让这些创办者们锒铛入狱。在他的建议下，Feeney和他的合伙人Robert Miller将免税店的所有权移交给了他们分别出生在法国和厄瓜多尔的妻子。1974年，通过与美国政府达成的一项协议，公司将位于太平洋上的塞班岛变成了一个免税的地方。1978年，Feeney先生把自己的各种投资都集合起来，包括他在免税店的股份，然后投进了一家在不收税的百慕大群岛成立的控股公司——通用大西洋有限公司。为了躲避美国的收税员，所有公司仍旧以他妻子的名义注册。

Feeney先生小心地抹去了自己财产的所有表面证据。但是当他确定免税店已经赢利的时候，他开始将自己税前利润的5%用于慈善事业。1982年，他创立了一个基金会——大西洋慈善事业，总部设在百慕大。两年后，他自己的财产转到该基金会，只留了一些给妻子和孩子。他的净资产从而降到了500万美元以下。当他告诉孩子们这个消息时，他送给每个孩子一篇卡耐基于1889年写的关于财富的文章。

Feeney先生捐给自己的母校康奈尔大学的资金达六亿多美元，这个数额超过了美国所有大学毕业生个人捐款的总额。他还捐献了几亿美元用于爱尔兰、南非和澳大利亚的高等教育。此外，他也资助了越南的卫生保健事业。2004年，他来到古巴，在那里会见了菲德尔·卡斯特罗，卡斯特罗非常高兴，但并未接受Feeney先生通过避税得来的钱。但是正是由于他对爱尔兰和平运动的支持，才引发了最大的争议，人们指责他资助了爱尔兰共和军（事实上毫无根据）。

Feeney先生致力于在某一固定日期前把所有财产投入其基金会（可能会在大约10年以后），但是他的投资能力却为这项任务增加了困难。目前，“大西洋慈善”价值40亿美元（而在2001年只有35亿），这是在已经累计捐出了40亿美元之后的数字。Feeney目前面临的问题是，基金会资产增长的速度和他捐钱的速度几乎是齐头并进的。





TEXT FOUR


John Kao is an innovation guru described as “Mr. Creativity” by this newspaper a decade ago. Now he is concerned about America losing its global lead and becoming “the fat, complacent Detroit of nations”. In his new book, Innovation Nation, he points to warning signs, such as America's underinvestment in physical infrastructure, its slow start on broadband, its pitiful public schools and its frostiness toward immigrants since September 11th 2001—even though immigrants provided much of America's creativity. What America needs, he reckons, is a big push by federal government to promote innovation, akin to the Apollo space project that put a man on the moon.

As head of California's Stanford Research Institute, Mr. Carlson knows the strengths of Silicon Valley from first-hand experience. And yet here he is insisting that America's information technology, services and medical-devices industries are about to be lost. “I predict that millions of jobs will be destroyed in our country, like in the 1980s when American firms refused to adopt total-quality management techniques while the Japanese surged ahead.” The only way out, he insists, is “to learn the tools of innovation” and forge entirely new, knowledge-based industries in energy technology, biotechnology and other science-based sectors.

It is natural to be sceptical of such dour arguments and calls for government action. After all, the United States still leads in innovation. Whether it is by traditional measures, like spending on research and the number of patents registered, or less tangible but more important ones, like the number of entrepreneurial start-ups, levels of venture-capital funding or the payback from new inventions, America is invariably at the top of the league. Indeed, the Council on Competitiveness recently concluded in a report that, by and large, the outlook is bright for America.