英語二完形填空文章來源及淺析

歷年來，考研英語二的完形填空、閱讀理解原文大都出自于英語國家原版報刊書籍，如Economist,Nature,Scientific American,News Week,Washington Post等，去年和今年英語二的閱讀題型仍沒超出這個范圍。

 去年（2016）考研英語二的完形填空文章來源于Harvard Business Review《哈佛商業(yè)評論》2015年6月9日的文章Companies in Happy Cities Invest More for the Long Term.而今年（2017）的完形填空則來自The Atlantic《大西洋月刊》2016年6月28日的一篇文章：Would a Work-Free World Be So Bad?

 MBA加油站老師分析發(fā)現(xiàn)，從時間上可以看，每年的英語考題都是極為新鮮熱乎的，一般出自當年的外文雜志；而從文章題材上看，也都是時下關(guān)注度頗高且與生活相關(guān)度極高的一些話題。比如今年的這篇a future without work.隨著社會的發(fā)展，科技的進步，大量的勞力被機器所替代，這類主題的文章曾引發(fā)過激烈的討論，網(wǎng)上搜索相關(guān)關(guān)鍵字會發(fā)現(xiàn)這樣的文章不計其數(shù)。前幾年考試出現(xiàn)的“電子貨幣”、“瘦并不見得比胖好”也都是如此。

針對這樣的特點，老師一直提倡，考研英語復(fù)習(xí)一定要以外文雜志為閱讀練習(xí)內(nèi)容，以便能更好的閱讀、理解文章，同時適應(yīng)地道的英語寫作風(fēng)格，為寫作打下基礎(chǔ)。

很多MBA加油站的學(xué)員最初閱讀量比較少，寫出的作文邏輯混亂，言之無物，表達非常chinglish（中國式英語），也不會分析現(xiàn)象背后的原因。而通過大量地閱讀原版外文雜志，我們不僅可以學(xué)到地道的英文表達，還能夠讓你在英語寫作時有話想說，有話可說。

 下面我們來看下今年的完形填空及原文。

　這篇文章原文大約2000字，此次完形填空選取了開頭4段（加粗的部分），約388字。大家可以看到文中有三處灰色陰影部分，第二處做了改寫，malaise改為unease，其它兩處刪掉，剩余部分則完全沒有變化，完全迎合了大綱的詞匯要求，把超綱的詞匯進行簡單改寫，把沒有必要的插入語，從句刪掉，以便降低閱讀難度。

　文中劃線的詞語即為此次考試的題目設(shè)置點。從詞匯的選擇上來看都不是什么過難的詞匯，整體難度與這幾年考試持平。完形填空歷來是考生們比較頭大的一個題型，考的不僅是詞匯，更是對上下文的邏輯理解，所以并不是單純的認識幾個詞語就行了，這就要求考生們在復(fù)習(xí)的時候一定要學(xué)會句子及篇章的閱讀而不是只記句子中單個的詞匯。就從這篇文章開啟你的英語閱讀之路吧！

　Would a Work-Free World Be So Bad?

　Fears of civilization-wide idleness are based too much on the downsides of being unemployed in a society premised on the concept of employment.

　People have speculated for centuries about a future without work,and today is no different,with academics,writers,and activists once again warning that technology is replacing human workers.Some imagine that the coming work-free world will be defined by inequality:A few wealthy people will own all the capital,and the masses will struggle in an impoverished wasteland.

　A different,less paranoid ,and not mutually exclusive prediction holds that the future will be a wasteland of a different sort,one characterized by purposelessness:Without jobs to give their lives meaning,people will simply become lazy and depressed.Indeed,today’s unemployed don’t seem to be having a great time.One Gallup poll found that 20 percent of Americans who have been unemployed for at least a year report having depression,double the rate forworking Americans.Also,some research suggests that the explanation for rising rates of mortality,mental-health problems,and addiction among poorly-educated,middle-aged people is a shortage of well-paid jobs.Another study shows that people are often happier at work than in their free time.Perhaps this is why many worry about the agonizing dullness of a jobless future.

　But it doesn’t necessarily follow from findings like these that a world without work would be filled withmalaise. Such visions are based on the downsides of being unemployed in a society built on the concept of employment.In theabsence of work,a society designed with other ends in mind could yield strikingly different circumstances for the future of labor and leisure.Today,the virtue of work may be a bit overblown.“Many jobs are boring,degrading,unhealthy,and a squandering of human potential,”says John Danaher,a lecturer at the National University of Ireland in Galwaywho has written about a world without work.“Global surveys find that the vast majority of people are unhappy at work.”

　These days,because leisure time is relatively scarce for most workers,people use their free time to counterbalance the intellectual and emotional demands of their jobs.“When I come home from a hard day’s work,I often feel tired,”Danaher says,adding,“In a world in which I don’t have to work,I might feel rather different”―perhaps different enough to throw himself into a hobby or a passion project with the intensity usually reserved for professionalmatters.

　Having a job can provide a measure of financial stability,but in addition to stressing over how to cover life’s necessities,today’s jobless are frequently made to feel like social outcasts.“People who avoid work are viewed as parasites and leeches,”Danaher says.Perhaps as a result of this cultural attitude,for most people,self-esteem and identity are tied up intricately with their job,or lack of job.

　Plus,in many modern-day societies,unemployment can also be downright boring.American towns and cities aren’t really built for lots of free time:Public spaces tend to be small islands in seas of private property,and there aren’t many places without entry fees where adults can meet new people or come up with ways to entertain one another.

　The roots of this boredom may run even deeper.Peter Gray,a professor of psychology at Boston College who studies the concept of play,thinks that if work disappeared tomorrow,people might be at a loss for things to do,growing bored and depressed because they have forgotten how to play.“We teach children a distinction between play and work,”Gray explains.“Work is something that you don’t want to do but you have to do.”He says this training,which starts in school,eventually“drills the play”out of many children,who grow up to be adults who are aimless when presented with free time.

　“Sometimes people retire f[FS:PAGE]rom their work,and they don’t know what to do,”Gray says.“They’ve lost the ability to create their own activities.”It’s a problem that never seems to plague young children.“There are no three-year-olds that are going to be lazy and depressed because they don’t have a structured activity,”he says.

　But need it be this way?Work-free societies are more than just a thought experiment―they’ve existed throughout human history.Consider hunter-gatherers,who have no bosses,paychecks,or eight-hour workdays.Ten thousand years ago,all humans were hunter-gatherers,and some still are.Daniel Everett,an anthropologist at Bentley University,in Massachusetts,studied a group of hunter-gathers in the Amazon called the Pirahãfor years.According to Everett,while some might consider hunting and gathering work,hunter-gatherers don’t.“They think of it as fun,”he says.“They don’t have a concept of work the way we do.”

　“It’s a pretty laid-back life most of the time,”Everett says.He described a typical day for the Pirahã:A man might get up,spend a few hours canoeing and fishing,have a barbecue,go for a swim,bring fish back to his family,and play until the evening.Such subsistence living is surely not without its own set of worries,but the anthropologist Marshall Sahlins argued in a 1968 essay that hunter-gathers belonged to“the original affluent society,”seeing as they only“worked”a few hours a day;Everett estimates that Pirahãadults on average work about 20 hours a week(not to mention without bosses peering over their shoulders).Meanwhile,according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics,the average employed American with children works about nine hours a day.

　Does this leisurely life lead to the depression and purposelessness seen among so many of today’s unemployed?“I’ve never seen anything remotely like depression there,except people who are physically ill,”Everett says.“They have a blast.They play all the time.”While many may consider work a staple of human life,work as it exists today is a relatively new invention in the course of thousands of years of human culture.“We think it’s bad to just sit around with nothing to do,”says Everett.“For the Pirahã,it’s quite a desirable state.”

　Gray likens these aspects of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle to the carefree adventures of many children in developed countries,who at some point in life are expected to put away childish things.But that hasn’t always been the case.According to Gary Cross’s 1990 book A Social History of Leisure Since 1600,free time in the U.S.looked quite different before the 18th and 19th centuries.Farmers―which was a fair way to describe a huge number of Americans at that time―mixed work and play in their daily lives.There were no managers or overseers,so they would switch fluidly between working,taking breaks,joining in neighborhood games,playing pranks,and spending time with family and friends.Not to mention festivals and other gatherings:France,for instance,had 84 holidays a year in 1700,and weather kept them from farming another 80 or so days a year.

　This all changed,writes Cross,during the Industrial Revolution,which replaced farms with factories and farmers with employees.Factory owners created a more rigidly scheduled environment that clearly divided work from play.Meanwhile,clocks―which were becoming widespread at that time―began to give life a quicker pace,and religious leaders,who traditionally endorsed most festivities,started associating leisure with sin and tried to replace rowdy festivals with sermons.

　As workers started moving into cities,families no longer spent their days together on the farm.Instead,men worked in factories,women stayed home or worked in factories,and children went to school,stayed home,or worked in factories too.During the workday,families became physically separated,which affected the way people entertained themselves:Adults stopped playing“childish”games and sports,and the streets were mostly wiped clean of fun,as middle-and upper-class families found working-class activities like cockfighting and dice games distasteful.Many such diversions were soon outlawed.

　With workers’old outlets for play having disappeared in a haze of factory smoke,many of them turned to new,more urban ones.Bars became a refuge where tired workers drank and watched live shows with singing and dancing.If free time means beer and TV to a lot of Americans,this might be why.

　At times,developed societies have,for a privileged few,produced lifestyles that were nearly as play-filled as hunter-gatherers’.Throughout history,aristocrats who earned their income simply by owning land spent only a tiny portion of their time minding financial exigencies.According to Randolph Trumbach,a professor of history at Baruch College,18th-century English aristocrats spent their days visiting friends,eating elaborate meals,hosting salons,hunting,writing letters,fishing,and going to church.They also spent a good deal of time participating in politics,without pay.Their children would learn to dance,play instruments,speak foreign languages,and read Latin.Russian nobles frequently became intellectuals,writers,and artists.“As a 17th-century aristocrat said,‘We sit down to eat and rise up to play,for what is a gentleman but his pleasure?’”Trumbach says.

責(zé)任編輯：