Question

    I have been wondering lately why I should teach my newborn son English. Everyone I know speaks English, but would Peter be better off learning a more sensible, mellifluous（流畅的）language, like maybe Italian? It is, I admit, a stupid question. But stupid questions can contain the seeds of great insights. This particular stupid question leads to the frontier of economic theory, as well as to the intellectual foundation            for the government's antitrust（反垄断）case against Microsoft.

Why are American children taught English? The answer is that everyone learns English because everyone else learns it. In this respect, language is a perfect example of what economic theorists call a network. In a network, the benefit one person gets from using some good - in this case, English -- depends on the number of other people using it.

Networks fascinate economic theorists because they don't fit nearby into the standard model of how markets work. In most cases, economists are defenders of free markets. People left to their own devices, we argue, will typically achieve an outcome that is good society as a whole - the vaunted（被大肆吹捧的）invisible hand.

In the case of networks, however, this logic doesn't seem to work. It is easy to imagine that people might get stuck with a network that, once established, is hard to replace. Parents deciding what language to teach their children, for instance, don't really have much choice. How else can we explain why the Chinese keep speaking Chinese when less complicated languages are available?

For a while supporters of the new economics of networks pointed to what seemed to be a compelling example of the problem - the QWERTY keyboard. As the story goes, this arrangement of letters was originally designed to prevent typists from jamming the keys on early typewriters. Despite the availability of superior designs and the fact that jamming keys is no longer an issue, QWERTY remains the standard. This, theorists argued, was a network-driven market failure: People still type on this inefficient keyboard just because that's what everybody else does.

This debate over networks, keyboards, and market failure might seem like arcana（奥秘）only economists can love, but it is having a profound influence on public policy. Many academics who have written about the theory of networks have worked for the Justice Department and other federal agencies. A frequent claim is that computer operating system are like languages: Once a standard becomes dominant, it is practically impossible for anyone to consider an alternative, even a better one. The only difference between English and Windows, the argument goes, is that English is free.

1.Which of the following examples best illustrates the idea "network" mentioned in the passage?

A.Microsoft limits reasonable competition through its aggressive pricing mechanism.

B.Some scholars speak out against the fundamental economic theory in a journal.

C.Peter chooses to learn Italian for the purpose of an early promotion in his company.

D.Families sit together to watch the Spring Festival Gala on New Year's Eve.

2.The underlined phrase "this logic" in Paragraph 4 refers to the idea that ________.

A.networks don't fit into the standard model of how markets work

B.less governmental intervention is good for society

C.what language we learn depends on the environment we live in

D.the market wouldn't operate properly without the "invisible hand"

3.What can we infer from the passage?

A.Free market contributes most to a prosperous economy.

B.The QWERTY keyboard reflects a network failure in business.

C.Convenience gave way to efficiency in the design of the keyboard.

D.Personal preferences may well be determined by how others act.

4.Which of the following can be the best title for this passage?

A.The Dominance of Microsoft Is to Blame

B.Networks Make Substitutes Impossible

C.The Language We Use Depends on Networks

D.Policy-making Is Subject to Public Opinions

Answer

1.D

2.B

3.D

4.B

【解析】

这是一篇议论文，文章论述了网络会使占主导地位的事物不动摇，被替代品取代变得不可能。

1.

推理判断题。由文章第二段“In a network, the benefit one person gets from using some good - in this case, English - depends on the number of other people using it.”在一个网络中，一个人从使用一些好的东西中——在这里是英语——获得的好处取决于使用它的其他人的数量。可知，在网络这个概念中，使用者的数量很重要。收看春节联欢晚会是中国人在除夕夜的重要活动，所以能说明文章中提到的“网络”这个概念。故选D项。

2.

词句猜测题。根据前文的“People left to their own devices, we argue, will typically achieve an outcome that is good society as a whole - the vaunted（被大肆吹捧的）invisible hand. ”我们认为，人们放任自用，通常会得到一个有利于整个社会的结果——被吹嘘为“看不见的手”。以及“In the case of networks, however, this logic doesn't seem to work.”然而，在网络的情况下，这种逻辑似乎行不通。可以推断，“this logic”指的是“看不见的手”，即指市场机制的调节作用，是较少的政府干预对社会有利的想法。故选B项。

3.

细节理解题。由文章第二段“Why are American children taught English? The answer is that everyone learns English because everyone else learns it.”为什么要教美国孩子英语?答案是，每个人都学习英语，因为其他人都学习它；“People still type on this inefficient keyboard just because that's what everybody else does.”人们仍然在这种低效的键盘上打字，仅仅是因为其他人都这么做；以及“Once a standard becomes dominant, it is practically impossible for anyone to consider an alternative, even a better one.”一旦一种标准占据主导地位，实际上任何人都不可能考虑另一种标准，甚至更好的标准。可知，人们的选择会受到他人影响，可以推断，个人偏好很可能是由他人的行为决定的。故选D项。

4.

主旨大意题。文章以为什么要教孩子学英语开篇，并通过QWERTY键盘的例子论述了网络会使人们的选择受到他人影响，倾向于选择占主导地位的事物；尤其是最后一段“Once a standard becomes dominant, it is practically impossible for anyone to consider an alternative, even a better one.”一旦一种标准占据主导地位，实际上任何人都不可能考虑另一种标准，甚至更好的标准。可知，网络会使占主导地位的事物不动摇，被替代品取代变得不可能。所以这篇文章最好的标题是“网络让替代品变得不可能”，故选B项。