2023年河北考研英语考试真题卷本卷共分为2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49题，每题2分每题的备选项中，只有一个最符合题意） 1.Text 3 The next big workout craze is one even a couch potato could love. It starts with a warm-up: a trip to the supermarket. Then there’s a large dinner, followed by some leisurely hours spent doing crossword puzzles. Finally, there’s the cool-down, a long bubble bath. Keep this up, and you’ll be buff in no time. Mentally buff, at any rate. This is a workout for your brain--an example of neurobics, a movement that’s gaining momentum among those looking to stay sharp as they age. Some psychologists claim that by adjusting your routine in small ways (like taking a different route to the grocery store or stimulating your senses with a new fragranced bath product), you can encourage neurons to build more connections to each other. Though scientists know little about the early stages of Alzheimer’s, clinical evidence is starting to show that mental exercises like these may ward it off. Neurobics got started with the 1999 book Keep Your Brain Alive by Duke University neurobiologist Larry Katz and writer Manning Rubin. Since then, the term has entered common usage (it’s defined in at least one slang dictionary) and inspired numerous imitators. Entrepreneurs now offer courses that teach neurobic exercises alongside more traditional seminars on handling stress and expressing emotions. Corporate trainers like Mind Gym run employees through 90 minute workouts designed to in crease productivity. There’s also the MyBrainTrainer. com site, a paid service that provides access to games like those used in psychological experiments to test cognitive ability. There’s no evidence that these games are any better for you than, say, scrabble. But MyBrainTrainer creator Bruce Friedman says he gets a neural buzz from them--and he’s taken each more than 1,600 times. Still, it’s a good bet that a simple change in routine will be just as effective. If that doesn’t seem mentally wearing, consider how you go about most neurobic activities in ordinary life. Most likely, you’re going through the motions--driving on roads you know by heart, swallowing down dinner with out savoring its taste or texture. Changing things will force you to pay attention to what you’re doing. Even those who are skeptical about neurobics’ potential for preventing Alzheimer’s have to admit that isn’t a bad thing.It can be inferred from the passage that the book Keep Your Brain Alive（）A．inspired numerous imitators.B．was written to increase productivity.C．described psychological games.D．pioneered the idea of neurobics.2.Text 3 The next big workout craze is one even a couch potato could love. It starts with a warm-up: a trip to the supermarket. Then there’s a large dinner, followed by some leisurely hours spent doing crossword puzzles. Finally, there’s the cool-down, a long bubble bath. Keep this up, and you’ll be buff in no time. Mentally buff, at any rate. This is a workout for your brain--an example of neurobics, a movement that’s gaining momentum among those looking to stay sharp as they age. Some psychologists claim that by adjusting your routine in small ways (like taking a different route to the grocery store or stimulating your senses with a new fragranced bath product), you can encourage neurons to build more connections to each other. Though scientists know little about the early stages of Alzheimer’s, clinical evidence is starting to show that mental exercises like these may ward it off. Neurobics got started with the 1999 book Keep Your Brain Alive by Duke University neurobiologist Larry Katz and writer Manning Rubin. Since then, the term has entered common usage (it’s defined in at least one slang dictionary) and inspired numerous imitators. Entrepreneurs now offer courses that teach neurobic exercises alongside more traditional seminars on handling stress and expressing emotions. Corporate trainers like Mind Gym run employees through 90 minute workouts designed to in crease productivity. There’s also the MyBrainTrainer. com site, a paid service that provides access to games like those used in psychological experiments to test cognitive ability. There’s no evidence that these games are any better for you than, say, scrabble. But MyBrainTrainer creator Bruce Friedman says he gets a neural buzz from them--and he’s taken each more than 1,600 times. Still, it’s a good bet that a simple change in routine will be just as effective. If that doesn’t seem mentally wearing, consider how you go about most neurobic activities in ordinary life. Most likely, you’re going through the motions--driving on roads you know by heart, swallowing down dinner with out savoring its taste or texture. Changing things will force you to pay attention to what you’re doing. Even those who are skeptical about neurobics’ potential for preventing Alzheimer’s have to admit that isn’t a bad thing.Researchers have come to believe that neurobics（）A．is suitable for people's brain.B．may help the mind stay sharp.C．prevent the risk of Alzheimer's.D．build connection among neurons.3.Text 3 The next big workout craze is one even a couch potato could love. It starts with a warm-up: a trip to the supermarket. Then there’s a large dinner, followed by some leisurely hours spent doing crossword puzzles. Finally, there’s the cool-down, a long bubble bath. Keep this up, and you’ll be buff in no time. Mentally buff, at any rate. This is a workout for your brain--an example of neurobics, a movement that’s gaining momentum among those looking to stay sharp as they age. Some psychologists claim that by adjusting your routine in small ways (like taking a different route to the grocery store or stimulating your senses with a new fragranced bath product), you can encourage neurons to build more connections to each other. Though scientists know little about the early stages of Alzheimer’s, clinical evidence is starting to show that mental exercises like these may ward it off. Neurobics got started with the 1999 book Keep Your Brain Alive by Duke University neurobiologist Larry Katz and writer Manning Rubin. Since then, the term has entered common usage (it’s defined in at least one slang dictionary) and inspired numerous imitators. Entrepreneurs now offer courses that teach neurobic exercises alongside more traditional seminars on handling stress and expressing emotions. Corporate trainers like Mind Gym run employees through 90 minute workouts designed to in crease productivity. There’s also the MyBrainTrainer. com site, a paid service that provides access to games like those used in psychological experiments to test cognitive ability. There’s no evidence that these games are any better for you than, say, scrabble. But MyBrainTrainer creator Bruce Friedman says he gets a neural buzz from them--and he’s taken each more than 1,600 times. Still, it’s a good bet that a simple change in routine will be just as effective. If that doesn’t seem mentally wearing, consider how you go about most neurobic activities in ordinary life. Most likely, you’re going through the motions--driving on roads you know by heart, swallowing down dinner with out savoring its taste or texture. Changing things will force you to pay attention to what you’re doing. Even those who are skeptical about neurobics’ potential for preventing Alzheimer’s have to admit that isn’t a bad thing.From the text we can conclude that the author（）A．does not favor neurobics.B．encourages people to try nenrobics.C．is enthusiastic about neurobics.D．thinks much of neurobics.4.Text 4 Judging by the $ 23 billion it earned last year, these should be the best of times for Shell, the Anglo-Dutch energy giant that ranks third among the top five Western oil companies. But Wall Street isn’t celebrating. Instead, analysts are worried that buried beneath the record profit figures are worrying signs of a business in decline. That’s because Shell hasn’t been able to find nearly as much oil and gas as it’s now pumping out of the ground. In fact, it hasn’t even come close--replacing only 60% to 70% of what it produced in 2005 and only 19% in 2004. Shell has had reserve problems for years--a controversy over improperly booked assets forced it to reduce estimated reserves by roughly 30% and led to the resiguation of its CEO, Phil Watts, in 2004. But what’s troubling now is that Shell is falling way behind rivals like Exxon and BP despite spending billions more each year on exploring and drilling new wells. Last year Exxon replaced 112% of production; BP came up with 95%. I have never seen anything like this, says Fadel Gheit, a veteran energy analyst with Oppenheimer Co. Shell used to represent the gold standard in this industry, but lately they can’t get their act together. To be sure, Shell still has huge assets--nearly 12 billion barrels. But in the oil and gas industry, reserve replacement is the best guide to whether a company will be able to maintain-or grow-production in the future. So not replacing what you pump, says longtime industry observer Matthew Simmons, is like eating your seed corn. If you’re not finding new oil, you’re just liquidating what you’ve got. Indeed, Shell’s daily production figures have been weak lately, falling 6. 7 % in 2005, to 3.52 million barrels a day. Privately, Shell execs say the company’s decision to cut spending for exploration when oil prices bottomed out in the late 1990s is partly to blame for the anemic numbers now. Shell CEO Jeroen vander Veer insists that projects like those on Sakhalin Island off Siberia and in Nigeria and the Gulf of Mexico will enable the company to start catching up with peers in the years ahead. It won’t be easy. If you’re not adding to reserves, you have a problem, says Sanford Bernstein analyst Oswald Clint. Shell will have to run twice as hard just to stay in place.Shell "can't get their act together" ( Line 10, Paragraph 2) because（）A．it hasn't been able to find more oil and gas.B．it has an improperly booked assets.C．it is excelled by its rivals.D．it used to represent the gold standard.5.Text 4 Judging by the $ 23 billion it earned last year, these should be the best of times for Shell, the Anglo-Dutch energy giant that ranks third among the top five Western oil companies. But Wall Street isn’t celebrating. Instead, analysts are worried that buried beneath the record profit figures are worrying signs of a business in decline. That’s because Shell hasn’t been able to find nearly as much oil and gas as it’s now pumping out of the ground. In fact, it hasn’t even come close--replacing only 60% to 70% of what it produced in 2005 and only 19% in 2004. Shell has had reserve problems for years--a controversy over improperly booked assets forced it to reduce estimated reserves by roughly 30% and led to the resiguation of its CEO, Phil Watts, in 2004. But what’s troubling now is that Shell is falling way behind rivals like Exxon and BP despite spending billions more each year on exploring and drilling new wells. Last year Exxon replaced 112% of production; BP came up with 95%. I have never seen anything like this, says Fadel Gheit, a veteran energy analyst with Oppenheimer Co. Shell used to represent the gold standard in this industry, but lately they can’t get their act together. To be sure, Shell still has huge assets--nearly 12 billion barrels. But in the oil and gas industry, reserve replacement is the best guide to whether a company will be able to maintain-or grow-production in the future. So not replacing what you pump, says longtime industry observer Matthew Simmons, is like eating your seed corn. If you’re not finding new oil, you’re just liquidating what you’ve got. Indeed, Shell’s daily production figures have been weak lately, falling 6. 7 % in 2005, to 3.52 million barrels a day. Privately, Shell execs say the company’s decision to cut spending for exploration when oil prices bottomed out in the late 1990s is partly to blame for the anemic numbers now. Shell CEO Jeroen vander Veer insists that projects like those on Sakhalin Island off Siberia and in Nigeria and the Gulf of Mexico will enable the company to start catching up with peers in the years ahead. It won’t be easy. If you’re not adding to reserves, you have a problem, says Sanford Bernstein analyst Oswald Clint. Shell will have to run twice as hard just to stay in place.The 1990s' decision led Shell to（）A．reduce its reserve.B．start new projects.C．shrink its assets.D．lower the prices of oil.6.Text 4 Judging by the $ 23 billion it earned last year, these should be the best of times for Shell, the Anglo-Dutch energy giant that ranks third among the top five Western oil companies. But Wall Street isn’t celebrating. Instead, analysts are worried that buried beneath the record profit figures are worrying signs of a business in decline. That’s because Shell hasn’t been able to find nearly as much oil and gas as it’s now pumping out of the ground. In fact, it hasn’t even come close--replacing only 60% to 70% of what it produced in 2005 and only 19% in 2004. Shell has had reserve problems for years--a controversy over improperly booked assets forced it to reduce estimated reserves by roughly 30% and led to the resiguation of its CEO, Phil Watts, in 2004. But what’s troubling now is that Shell is falling way behind rivals like Exxon and BP despite spending billions more each year on exploring and drilling new wells. Last year Exxon replaced 112% of production; BP came up with 95%. I have never seen anything like this, says Fadel Gheit, a veteran energy analyst with Oppenheimer Co. Shell used to represent the gold standard in this industry, but lately they can’t get their act together. To be sure, Shell still has huge assets--nearly 12 billion barrels. But in the oil and gas industry, reserve replacement is the best guide to whether a company will be able to maintain-or grow-production in the future. So not replacing what you pump, says longtime industry observer Matthew Simmons, is like eating your seed corn. If you’re not finding new oil, you’re just liquidating what you’ve got. Indeed, Shell’s daily production figures have been weak lately, falling 6. 7 % in 2005, to 3.52 million barrels a day. Privately, Shell execs say the company’s decision to cut spending for exploration when oil prices bottomed out in the late 1990s is partly to blame for the anemic numbers now. Shell CEO Jeroen vander Veer insists that projects like those on Sakhalin Island off Siberia and in Nigeria and the Gulf of Mexico will enable the company to start catching up with peers in the years ahead. It won’t be easy. If you’re not adding to reserves, you have a problem, says Sanford Bernstein analyst Oswald Clint. Shell will have to run twice as hard just to stay in place.To which of the following statements would Matthew Simmons most likely agree（）A．Shell still has huge assets.B．Shell' daily production is reduced.C．Shell should replace their reserve.D．Shell is exhausting its asset.7.Text 4 Judging by the $ 23 billion it earned last year, these should be the best of times for Shell, the Anglo-Dutch energy giant that ranks third among the top five Western oil companies. But Wall Street isn’t celebrating. Instead, analysts are worried that buried beneath the record profit figures are worrying signs of a business in decline. That’s because Shell hasn’t been able to find nearly as much oil and gas as it’s now pumping out of the ground. In fact, it hasn’t even come close--replacing only 60% to 70% of what it produced in 2005 and only 19% in 2004. Shell has had reserve problems for years--a controversy over improperly booked assets forced it to reduce estimated reserves by roughly 30% and led to the resiguation of its CEO, Phil Watts, in 2004. But what’s troubling now is that Shell is falling way behind rivals like Exxon and BP despite spending billions more each year on exploring and drilling new wells. Last year Exxon replaced 112% of production; BP came up with 95%. I have never seen anything like this, says Fadel Gheit, a veteran energy analyst with Oppenheimer Co. Shell used to represent the gold standard in this industry, but lately they can’t get their act together. To be sure, Shell still has huge assets--nearly 12 billion barrels. But in the oil and gas industry, reserve replacement is the best guide to whether a company will be able to maintain-or grow-production in the future. So not replacing what you pump, says longtime industry observer Matthew Simmons, is like eating your seed corn. If you’re not finding new oil, you’re just liquidating what you’ve got. Indeed, Shell’s daily production figures have been weak lately, falling 6. 7 % in 2005, to 3.52 million barrels a day. Privately, Shell execs say the company’s decision to cut spending for exploration when oil prices bottomed out in the late 1990s is partly to blame for the anemic numbers now. Shell CEO Jeroen vander Veer insists that projects like those on Sakhalin Island off Siberia and in Nigeria and the Gulf of Mexico will enable the company to start catching up with peers in the years ahead. It won’t be easy. If you’re not adding to reserves, you have a problem, says Sanford Bernstein analyst Oswald Clint. Shell will have to run twice as hard just to stay in place.According to Oswald Clint, Shell's chance of catching up is（）A．strenuous.B．scarce.C．sparse.D．simple.8.Text 4 Judging by the $ 23 billion it earned last year, these should be the best of times for Shell, the Anglo-Dutch energy giant that ranks third among the top five Western oil companies. But Wall Street isn’t celebrating. Instead, analysts are worried that buried beneath the record profit figures are worrying signs of a business in decline. That’s because Shell hasn’t been able to find nearly as much oil and gas as it’s now pumping out of the ground. In fact, it hasn’t even come close--replacing only 60% to 70% of what it produced in 2005 and only 19% in 2004. Shell has had reserve problems for years--a controversy over improperly booked assets forced it to reduce estimated reserves by roughly 30% and led to the resiguation of its CEO, Phil Watts, in 2004. But what’s troubling now is that Shell is falling way behind rivals like Exxon and BP despite spending billions more each year on exploring and drilling new wells. Last year Exxon replaced 112% of production; BP came up with 95%. I have never seen anything like this, says Fadel Gheit, a veteran energy analyst with Oppenheimer Co. Shell used to represent the gold standard in this industry, but lately they can’t get their act together. To be sure, Shell still has huge assets--nearly 12 billion barrels. But in the oil and gas industry, reserve replacement is the best guide to whether a company will be able to maintain-or grow-production in the future. So not replacing what you pump, says longtime industry observer Matthew Simmons, is like eating your seed corn. If you’re not finding new oil, you’re just liquidating what you’ve got. Indeed, Shell’s daily production figures have been weak lately, falling 6. 7 % in 2005, to 3.52 million barrels a day. Privately, Shell execs say the company’s decision to cut spending for 。