1.A
 2. C
 3. D
 4. D
 5. B
 6. D
7. A
 8. B
 9. B
 10. C
 11. C
 12. C
13. D
 14. D
 15. C
 16. function
 17. intimidate
18. infirmities
19. response
 20. pleasure
21. cheer
22. otherwise
 23. hypothesis
 24. speech
25. development
 26. preventing改為prevent
 27. complicated改為complexing
 28. sight后加into
 29. neuroscientist改為a neuroscientist
 30. pursuing后加in
31. later改為latter
 32. similar改為similarly
 33. 去掉is
 34. times改為time
 35. if改為whether
 36. A
37. B
 38. C
 39. D
 40. D
 41. B
 42. D
43. C
 44. A
 45. C
 46. D
 47. B
 48. C
49. D
 50. D
 51. C
 52. D
 53. B
 54. D
55. D
 56. A
 57. C
 58. D
 59. C
 60. B
61. According to legend, the compass vehicle was invented by the Yellow Emperor. It was first formally recorded in the Han Dynasty, and it is an outstanding example of ancient Chinese science and technology. The compass vehicle has always been widely valued by scholars both in China and abroad. It is a pity that there has not been a single compass vehicle handed down to us in history. People, however, have studied its structure and principles and restored it according to various historical data. Many well-known Chinese scholars have been devoted to such work. In the 1930s Mr. Wang Zhenduo worked on a model for the compass vehicle. In the 1950s, another model was made by the Chinese History Museum under his direction. Abroad, essays on the compass vehicle were published in Britain dating back to the 1920s. A model was also produced by the British Museum.,,,,,
,,,,,		 62. 我多次在這個小山上看這月亮生起，每次月亮生起的心境都不一樣。秋天的月亮，交接明亮，充滿了豐收的信心；春天的月亮羞澀，朦朧；冬日，漆黑的夜晚，萬籟俱寂，一輪明月，孤獨(dú)的掛在夜空；夏季，煙霧繚繞的橙紅色月亮高懸在干涸的大地上。每次月亮的升起，猶如一曲曲優(yōu)美的旋律，使我砰然心動，撫慰我的靈魂。觀月是一門古老的藝術(shù)，對于生活在史前時代的獵人門來說，他們了解頭頂上高懸的明月，真如了解心臟跳動一樣準(zhǔn)確無誤。我們知道：每過二十九天，會出現(xiàn)一次燦爛輝煌的滿月，隨后逐漸變虧直至消失，然后一輪新月從又出現(xiàn)。他們知道上弦月每經(jīng)過一次日落，會變得大一些，升得高一些，而下弦月每過一晚都要遲一些，直至消失于晨曦之中。憑著經(jīng)驗(yàn)掌握月亮的升落規(guī)律一定是很深奧的?？墒俏覀冞@些生活在室內(nèi)的人們，失去了與月亮的交流，眩目的路燈和遭到污染的塵埃使夜空變得朦朦朧朧，盡管人們已經(jīng)登上了月球，但她卻變得日漸陌生，我們沒有幾個能說出當(dāng)晚幾時會生起。景觀如此，月戀依然牽動著我們的心，如果我們偶爾碰到說大的議論經(jīng)黃色元月在地平線冉冉升起，我們所能做的，肯定是回頭仰望它那氣勢宏偉的風(fēng)姿。,,,,,
,,,,,		 63. Adult Education Booming Every Tuesday and Friday evening sees Miss Li, a secretary in a company, after a hard day's work, gulp down her meals and then hurry out to catch the bus for her computer class. Miss Li's case is not unique. Now more and more city adults spend their leisure time trying to improve themselves at school or college. Even in the countryside, farmers crowd into the stuffy, shabby village school classrooms in the evenings to listen to the lectures given by local agro-technicians about scientific farming. There are a number of reasons for people to go back for their education. Some people, like Miss Li, are doing it to acquire another degree or diploma to impress the society, or to meet the needs of their work, or to be more competitive. To them, more knowledge means more opportunities for better jobs and quicker promotion. Other people, especially those who are laid off or out of employment, go to vocational school for a better chance at the job market. They are eager for new skills and other professional trainings so that they can be qualified in retail trade and other service categories to which they are strange because most of them were blue-collar workers in the factory. As for the farmers, they want to acquire more techniques to use manpower and land more rationally. There are also people who come to take such courses as traditional Chinese medicine, painting, calligraphy and photography. As they have fewer working weeks, they can afford time to fulfill their old dream or their heart's desire. Out of necessity or out of interest, people go back to school for the common goal -- to improve themselves, and this boom in adult education, in turn, helps to raise the intellectual standard of the whole society.,,,,,
,,,,,		 ? ? ?
以下是試題解析
TYPESCRIPT
PART ONE LISTENING COMPREHENSION(40 MIN.)
In Section A, B and C you will hear everything ONLY ONCE. Listen carefully and then answer the questions that follow. Mark the correct response to each question on the Colored Answer Sheet.

SECTION A TALK
Question 1 to 5 refer to the talk in this section. At the end of the talk you will be given 15 seconds to answer each of the following five questions.
Now listen to the talk.　
Why does English have no phrase like "Bon appetit"? Has it ever occurred to you that there is no simple way of expressing your hope that someone will enjoy what he is about to eat? If you are entertaining, and say to your guests as you put his dinner before him "I hope you like it", then he will probably think one or two things: either that there is an element of doubt about him, or that the food is perhaps unusual, and he will not be enough of a gastronomic sophisticate to appreciate it. You can be certain of one thing -- he will not interpret "I hope you like it" in the same way that the Frenchman interprets "Bon appetit" -- as a wish that focuses itself on the eater, and not on what is to be eaten. Those opposed to English cooking will no doubt explain the lack by pointing to the the quality of food in this country; it's so bad, they will say, that no one ever really believes that it could be enjoyed. Hence, no need for a phrase that enjoys entertainment! But surely not even English food can be as bad all that.
Anyway, it's not only a matter of food. Have you ever felt the need for a simple, universal and socially neutral expression to use when drinking with someone? The Spaniard has his "Salud", the German has his "Prosit", Swedes say "Skaal", and the Frenchman, simply and sincerely "A votre sante". But what about the unfortunate English? It may be all right for lawyers and stockbrokers, doctors and dons, or for crusty colonels inside the four walls of a club; but in the boozer down the Old Kent Road it just sounds out of place. It is true that there is a whole string of vaguely possible alternatives that range from the mildly jocular through the awkward to the phrase-book bizarre; and if you listen carefully you may just hear people still saying "Here's mud in your eye", "Here's the skin off your nose", "Down the hatch" or "All the best" as they sink their pints or sip their sherries. But mostly they take refuge nowadays in "Cheerio" or its truncated version "Cheers". And even here, for some people there is a sneaking suspicion that the term is not quite right. That it is somehow a shade too breezy, and comes most easily from someone addicted to tweeds and the phrase "Old chap".

Even when taking our leaves it seems we English are victims of some strange deficiencies in our valedictory vocabulary. The standard term "Goodbye" is both too formal and too final. It may be just the job for ushering someone out of your life altogether; but most leave-takings -- for better or worse -- are temporary affairs. Perhaps in an attempt to escape implications of formality, many people now say "Bye-bye" instead; others try to make this particularly nauseating bit of baby-talk more acceptable by shortening it to "Bye". And in place of those many leave-takings which so easily accommodate the idea of another meeting -- "Au revoir", "Auf widersehen", "Arrivedarci", and so on, we have, allas, only such sad colloquialisms as "So long" and "I'll be seeing you".
These examples by no means exhaust the areas in which the English language doesn't exactly help social contact. They have been called "linguistic gaps" and tend to turn up in some way or another in most languages. But according to Mr. Kane -- a lecture at the University of Chester -- there seem to be more of them in English than in other languages -- at least other European languages. At the moment Mr. Kane is seeking funds to finance a small research project into the problem. He wants first of all to question a large number of people about their feelings on the matter. "After all, I must be certain that the man in the street is aware of these gaps in the same way that I think I am", says Mr. Kane. And then he proposes to compare English with several other languages in this respect, and "look for possible sociological reasons" for the differences he finds.
SECTION B CONVERSATION
Questions 6 to 10 are based on an interview. At the end of the interview you will be given 15 seconds to answer each of the following question.
Now listen to the interview.
Helen: What do you think of Potter's course?

Jane: Not much.
Helen: Why, what's wrong with it?　Jane: Oh, I don't know. It's just that he ... well, because he overloads it with details. He does tend to do this kind of thing I think. That course he gave on town planning last year. It was just the same -- just a load of details, which you could have got from a book anyway, and more and more technical terms. There was no...no overall...er...　Brian: No general overview you mean.　
Jane: Yes, I suppose you could call it that. I couldn't see the town for the buildings.
Helen: But you've got to have detail in this kind of subject Jane, and anyway I think he's good. You take his first lecture for instance -- I thought that was very interesting, and not at all over-detailed.　
Jane: But that's just it Helen. That's just what I'm getting at. He starts off all right and engages your interest so that you sit back and think "I'm going to enjoy this. I'm going to get a general idea of the important points in this topic." When bang! Before you know it you're up to your neck in minute details and he's bombarding you wish technical terminology and...　
Helen: Oh, rubbish! Now you are exaggerating.　
Brian: Now, now, you two. Let's keep this on an impartial academic level. At least you both seem to agree that he starts off on the right foot with this nice interesting introduction. Wouldn't you say that was important for any lecture, Jane? -- to get the audience involved right at the beginning and then gradually increase the pressure.　
Jane: Oh yes, that's all right. I would expect that. I think anyone would agree about that. But the trouble with you two is...　
Brian: Here we go again, Helen. She's going to put us all in our places again.　
Jane: Oh shut up, Brian. What I'm trying to say is you don't see my line of argument. I don't object to an interesting start to a lecture course followed by a speeding up and more difficult material. What I'm on about is that Potter doesn't really raise the level at all, after all, after his introduction -- he piled on the detail. You know when he got to the modern bit I was submerged in certain walls, modules, mullions, cantilevered spans and reinforced concrete roof trusses I didn't know whether I was coming or going.　
Helen: Well, all right, perhaps he was just a bit disorganized towards the end. But I thought before that he was perfectly easy to follow, and although he didn't keep pushing his lecture plan under your nose it was there all the same. What about the part where he dealt with the eighteenth century developments? I thought that was very interesting -- the way he dealt with the western developments. And especially the way Bloomsbury developed from the Redford Estates. You know, it began to make sense for me for the first time -- because he made me see why there's so much a feeling of order in that part of London as compared with some of the others. And he brought all the threads together so well, and related the architecture to the idea on town planning and...er...the leasehold system and so on. I thought it was really good. Sort of...er...enlightening.
Brian: Yes, I like that part the best.
Jane: It wasn't bad, I suppose. Yes, on second thought I'm inclined to agree with you about that part, but not as regards the rest. I shall stick to what I said. It was too detailed and too formless.　Brain: She has got something there, Helen, you know. Perhaps Potter finds it difficult to lecture to undergraduates. He only does the one undergraduate course each year, and I think he tends to forget where he is. He starts off being nice and general and then tries to cram in a bit too much specialized information.
Jane: The main thing I object to is -- this lack of direction. I like to feel... well, it's a help to know you're getting somewhere.

Brian: Talking of getting somewhere, what about going for a coffee?

Helen: Yes, please. Where, the Union?

Jane: Oh, no, let's not go to the Union. It'll be too crowded at this time. What about the White Sheep? You know it, do you?
Brian: Yes. That place in Ferry Street you mean? Just past Barkers.

Jane: Yes. That's it. The coffee's pretty good there, and it's never too full in the mornings. That's all right with you Helen?
Helen: Yes, that's fine. But do you mind if I call in the library first? I've had this book our for ages, and they've been chasing me for it, so if I don't get a move on and take it back I shall really be in the soup. If you like, I'll go the back way and you two can't go across the quad. If I don't catch you before you get to the White Sheep I'll see you in there.
Brian: OK, fine.

Jane: Bye, Helen.

SECTION C NEWS BROADCAST
News Item 1　
Question 11 is based on the following news. At the end of the news item, you will be given 15 seconds to answer the question.
Now listen to the news.
A senator is urging President Clinton not to end the trade restriction against Vietnam. Republican Senator Bob Smith says the restrictions should continue until Vietnam provides more information about Americans missing from the Vietnam War. President Clinton must decide by next week if he will order the restrictions continued for another year. On Tuesday, the Defense Department released some documents from the former Soviet Union that appeared to show that North Vietnam held hundreds more of American war prisoners than it had admitted. Defense officials say the documents must be examined closely.　
News item 2　
Questions 12 and 13 are based on the following news. At the end of the news item, you will be given 15 seconds to answer the question.
Now listen to the news.
Economic Ministers of the Association of Southeastern Asian Nations have ended a week-long meeting Chiang Mai. Japan's Minister of International Trade and Industry also attended the meeting. Japan and the six Asian countries announced they would work together to improve the economies of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. They also agreed that Vietnam is not yet to join the group. ASSEAN officials say Vietnam must put into effect policies that will help meet ASSEAN's goal. That is to reduce taxes among member countries to between zero and 5% by the year 2003.
News Item 3
Questions 14 and 15 are based on the following news. At the end of the news item, you will be given 15 seconds to answer the question.
Now listen to the news.

The United States has offered medicine and help in controlling the spread of the disease pneumonic plague. The disease has hit the western city of Surat. American Ambassador Franc Wisner made the offer during a meeting Monday with India's Health Minister. Forty-four people have died in Surat since the plague was first reported there last week. However, local doctors say many more may have died from the disease. Hundreds of thousands of people have fled the city, raising fears they could spread it to other parts of India.

SECTION D NOTE-TAKING AND GAP-FILLING
In this section you will hear a mini-lecture. You will hear the lecture ONLY ONCE. While listening to the lecture, take notes on the important points. Your notes will not be marked, but you will need them to complete a 15-minute gap-filling task on ANSWER SHEET ONE after the mini lecture. Use the blank sheet for note-taking.
Man is the only animal that laughs. Why is this true? What makes us respond as we do to pleasurable experiences? What is the history of this "happy convulsion", as someone once termed it, and just what is its function?

We are not short of theories to explain the mystery; for centuries, biologists, philosophers, psychologists, and medical men have sought a definitive explanation of laughter. One writer theorized that its function is to intimidate others or to gain stature over them by humiliating them. Another took the opposite view: that we laugh in order not to cry. A psychologist offered the explanation that laughter functions as a remedy for painful experiences, and that it serves to defend a person against what the psychologist termed "the many minor pains to which man exposed." In the seventeenth century a writer set forth the theory that we laugh when compare ourselves with others and found ourselves superior; in effect, we laugh at the infirmities of others.

Virtually every theory has been concerned with either the structure or the function of laughter, whereas relatively few have been devoted to the question of its origin. I propose to offer a theory which, as far as I am aware, has not been previously been set forth: that only those animals capable of speech are capable of laughter; and that therefore man, being the only animal that speaks, is the only animal that laughs.

Laughter is defined as an emotional response, expressive normally of joy, involving character sounds of the voice and movements of the features and the body. The joy may take the form of mirth, amusement, ridicule, and so on. Why should laughter be as intimately associated with the power of speech as I have suggested? Speech is the verbal, or vocal, expression of symbols and the relations between symbols. Probably at about the same time speech evolved, laughter originated too, as a kind of semi-verbalized social expression of pleasure. With the development of speech, the number of occasions producing sudden experiences of pleasure increased, and, since laughter was closely associated with speech, man had this means of expressing his pleasure. Having broken the "sound barrier", as it were, man could express with laughter what other animals could not. Since the lower animals had no speech, they encountered fewer pleasurable situations and, further-more were unable to laugh no matter what the situation.

Once the first laughter had been laughed by primitive man, with such apparently pleasurable effects all around, laughter began to take on an intrinsic value within the society of man. The person possessing the ability to communicate pleasure in a loud laugh began to enjoy social advantages over his more serious colleagues; he became a good "mixer", socially selected and liked by society. Thus the process of natural selection (the survival of the fittest) would tend to operate in favor of those able to express their pleasurable states in laughter, as compared with those not so able. Throughout the course of evolution, laughter would become established throughout the human species as a function of sociological and psychological value.

Thus laughter gradually became established as a capacity among virtually all human beings. In addition, laughter's infectious quality helped distribute it as a characteristic common to all mankind. Laughter was advantageous; therefore it survived.

Everyone likes a good laugher; he brings good cheer with him wherever he goes; the very thought of him makes life more bearable. Even today our most highly paid entertainers are not tragedians but comedians. Laughter is infectious, and most of us go out of our way to acquire the infection. We cannot think that it was otherwise in the earlier days of man's evolution, and if that was indeed so, then it would follow that the capacity to laugh would tend to become increasingly distributed as a trait common to all men.

In society, laughter became a characteristic that served to "humanize" men because it is essentially the civilization in which it takes place. The time change and the situations about which laughter is acceptable change correspondingly. A few hundred years ago it was socially acceptable to laugh at the infirmities of others; today it is unacceptable. In the Western world it is not customary to smile at the reprimands of others, as it is in Japan. Movie personalities should smile or laugh in their photographs, but college professors should look serious. Each of these examples underscores laughter's social function.

Let us now consider a second stage of our hypothesis: that nature favors those capable of expressing their pleasure in laughter. It is well known that laughter has an tonic effect on the mind and the body, suffusing the body with a feeling of well-being that few other activities are able to provide, refreshing, relieving, enlivening, and involving the whole body in its "happy convulsion". The action of the trunk and diaphragm accelerates the intake and output of air to and from the lungs. The freshening effect follows as the blood receives more oxygen and circulation becomes more efficient.

The effects experienced during laughter are likely to overflow into many segments of the body, resulting in reflex changes in muscles and glands, such as tearing of the eyes and secretion of moisture from the nose -- to assist in more rapid respiration and to prevent dehydration of nasal and throat membranes as a result of the more rapid respiration.

These effects of laughter, which scientists term its "psycho physiological" effects, appear, then, to be nature's method of conferring "survival benefits" upon these individuals capable of laughter. This presumably embraces the vast majority of mankind; should there be those incapable of laughter, it may be conversely assumed that nature's dole of "survival benefits" to such individuals is proportionately smaller.

The development of speech undeniably is an individual factor in the development of man's capacity to think and establish a mastery of his environment; it was also, I theorize, the basic condition in the development of laughter. You are laughing because nature confers benefits on the animal capable of laughter.