第4题：
问答题
Practice 5 Listen to the following passage. Write in English a short summary of around 150-200 words of what you have heard. You will hear the passage only once and then you will have 25 minutes to finish your summary. This part of the test carries 20 points. You may need to scribble a few notes to write your summary. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
正确答案：
【文章梗概】
本文的主题是测谎仪。文章认为目前测谎仪已有渗透到日常生活中的趋势,但目前仍没有研究表明测谎仪真的有效。几个世纪以来世界各国人们都在孜孜不倦地寻求通过物理手段检测谎言的仪器。随着科技的发展,声音分析器开始流行,这种仪器工作原理并不复杂,而且使用简单、携带方便。现在仍有先进产品上市,前景良好。美国政府对测谎仪的使用制定了双重标准,一方面政府加大使用测谎仪的力度,一方面命令法庭禁用经测谎仪得到的结果。
【参考答案】
综述内容应包括5个主要点信息和9个次要点信息中的5个。下划线部分为主要点, 斜体部分为次要点。
Lie detectors, those controversial assessors of truth, are making their way into everyday life. Insurance companies use them to help catch people filing fraudulent claims. Suspicious spouses use hand-hand versions to judge whether their significant others are cheating. Interrogators for the U.S. government use them to double-check analyses of who might be terrorists.
Polygraphs, which have been used for decades, have been joined by new systems that purportedly analyze a person's voice, blush, pupil size and even brain waves for signs of deception. The devices range from costly experimental devices that use strings of electrodes or thermal imaging to $19.95 palm-sized versions.
No studies haVe ever proven that lie detectors work. Many show that they assess truth as accurately as a coin flip; in other words, not at all. Still, some people have come to depend on them. The recent proliferation of lie detectors has reignited a decades-old debate over the ethics and politics of when and how they should be used and whether such important questions as guilt or innocence should be left to machines.
Mankind has looked for centuries for a physical indicator that would expose a liar. The Romans studies the entrails of suspected liars. In China, rice was shoved into the mouths of interviewees to measure how dry they were—the drier the mouth, the more likely the person was lying, it was thought. Other cultures tried various chemical concoctions, but they worked no better than chance.
Especially since September 11, law enforcement agencies consider lie detection systems critical to their investigations. The CIA, FBI and Defense Department have spent millions of dollars on them. In an unusual plea made soon after the terrorist auacks, the government asked for the public’s help in building counterterrorism technologies, among them a portable polygraph.
In the United States, there is a double standafd when it comes to the use of polygraphs. Although the so-called lie detector is considered an important law enforcement tool, polygraph data are inadmissible as evidence in a court of law. The U.S. Supreme Court forbade private companies from using them to screen job applicants, but allowed the government to use them for the same purpose.
As debate about polygraphs rages, the devices are being phased out in favor of voice analyzers, which are more portable and easier to use. A voice analyzer device typically consists of a telephone and microphone attached to a computer that packs neatly in a briefcase, or attached to any PC with the proper software installed. Most of the analyzers can be used in person or over the phone. Conversations can be tested in real time or recorded for later analysis.
First, the questioner asks an interviewee about something he or she would have no reason to lie about, such as “When’s your birthday?” Then he asks what he really wants to ask. The device makes an assessment about whether the subjects is telling the truth based on the differences between the inaudible microtremors in the voice during the first round of questioning and those in the second.
The federal government officially says it does not use these voice lie detectors. Still, the voice technology has its true believers, among them more than 1.200 police departments nationwide and tens of thousands of consumers.
The slightly more sophisticated Truster software program that runs on a desktop computer gives text rating of truthfulness. The companies that market these technologies say they are more than 80 percent accurate.
Though skeptical, Rick Garloff, a 35-year-old American, still said even if the systems are not great lie detectors, they are wonderful lie deterrents. He once used the Truster on his 9-year-old son, to see if he had forgotten to close a door, accidentally letting the dog in. His son claimed no. But the lie detection system said yes. When confronted, his son confessed.
【解 析】
一、主干内容表达部分:
这部分内容为文章的主干内容,是综述的主要点信息。
1. Lie detectors, those controversial assessors of truth, are making their way into everyday life.
[分析]本句开宗明义,点明文章的主题,是全文的框架性内容。
2. No studies have ever proven that lie detectors work.
[分析]本句位于段落首,是全段中心句,而且本段所讨论的内容也是全文主要论点之一,因此该句是全文的框架性内容。
3. Mankind has looked for centuries for a physical indicator that would expose a liar.
[分析]本句位于段落首,是全段中心句,而且本段所讨论的内容即测谎仪的历史追溯也是全文主要内容,为文章论点的提出奠定基础,因此该句是全文的框架性内容。
4. In the United States, there is a double standard when it comes to the use of polygraphs.
[分析]本句位于段落首,是全段中心句。人类对测谎仪的使用态度是全文讨论的重点内容,因此该句为全文的框架性内容。
5. As debate about polygraphs rages, the devices ale being phased out in favor of voice analyzers, which are more portable and easier to use.
[分析]本句位于段落首,是全段中心句。测谎仪发展的主流和趋势是全文讨论的重点内容,因此该句为全文的框架性内容。
二、支持性细节表达部分
这部分内容为主要点的重要支持性细节,是综述的次要点信息。
1. Polygraphs, which have been used for decades, have been joined by new systems that purportedly analyze a person’s voice, blush, pupil size and even brain waves for signs of deception.
[分析]本句简单介绍普遍认为的测谎仪工作原理,丰满了全文框架性内容,是重要的支持性细节。
2. The recent proliferation of lie detectors has reignited a decades-old debate over the ethics and politics of when and how they should be used and whether such important questions as guilt or innocent should be left to machines.
[分析]本句是对全文主要观点的进一步阐释,引发全文讨论的重点,是重要的支持性细节。
3. Especially since September 11, law enforcement agencies consider lie detection systems critical to their investigations.
[分析]本句位于段首,是全段中心句,以典型人物的具体事例强调了文章主要观点,有力地支持了文章的扩展,是重要的支持性细节。
4. The government asked for the public’s help in building counterterrorism technologies,among them a portable polygraph.
[分析]本句位于段尾,是全段总结句,进一步证明了该段中心句内容,为全文主要观点提供了有力的证据,是重要的支持性细节。
5. Although the so-called lie detector is considered an important law enforcement tool, polygraph data ale inadmissible as evidence in a court of law.
[分析]本句是对全文主要观点的进一步解释和说明,是主要观点的具体化,因此是重要的支持性细节。
6. Most of the analyzers can be used in person or over the phone. Conversations can be tested in real time or recorded for later analysis.
[分析]本句是对全文主要内容,即测谎仪发展的主流和趋势的进一步解释和说明,因此是重要的支持性细节。
7. The device makes an assessment about whether the subjects is telling the truth based on the differences between the inaudible microtremors in the voice during the first round of questioning and those in the second.
[分析]本句是对主流测谎产品工作原理的介绍,丰满了全文主要内容,因此是重要的支持性细节。
8. The federal government officially says it does not use these voice lie detectors. Still, the voice technology has its true believers.
[分析]本句是对全文主要内容的扩展和延伸,从市场角度证明了测谎仪的流行,丰富了全文主要内容,因此是重要的支持性细节。
9. The slightly more sophisticated Truster software program that runs on a desktop computer gives text rating of truthfulness.
[分析]本句介绍了测谎仪的流行产品及市场情况,暗示了测谎仪的前景。使对主题的讨论充满意义,丰满了全文主要内容,因此是重要的支持性细节。
【录音原文】
Lie detectors, those controversial assessors of truth, are making their way into everyday life. Insurance companies use them to help catch people filing fraudulent claims. Suspicious spouses use hand-hand versions to judge whether their significant others are cheating. Interrogators for the US government use them to double check analysis of who might be terrorists.
Polygraphs, which have been used for decades, have been joined by new systems that purportedly analyze a person’s voice, blush, pupil size and even brain waves for signs of deception. The devices range from costly experimental devices that use strings of electrodes or thermal imaging to $19.95 palm-sized versions.
No studies have ever proven that lie detectors work. Many show that they assess truth as accurately as a coin flip; in other words, not at all. Still, some people have come to depend on them. The recent proliferation of lie detectors has reignited a decades-old debate over the ethics and politics of when and how they should be used and whether such important questions as guilt or innocence should be left to machines.
Mankind has looked for centuries for a physical indicator that would expose a liar. The Romans studied the entrails of suspected liars. In China, rice was shoved into the mouths of interviewees to measure how dry they were—the drier the mouth, the more likely the person was lying, it was thought. Other cultures tried various chemical concoctions, but they worked no better than chance.
Especially since September 11, law enforcement agencies consider lie detection systems critical to their investigations. The CIA, FBI and Defense Department have spent millions of dollars on them. In an unusual plea made soon after the terrorist attacks, the government asked for the public’s help in building counterterrorism technologies, among them a portable polygraph.
In the United States, there is a double standard when it comes to the use of polygraphs. Although the so-called lie detector is considered an important law enforcement tool, polygraph data are inadmissible as evidence in a court of law. The US Supreme Court forbade private companies from using them to screen job applicants, but allowed the government to use them for the same purpose.
As debate about polygraphs rages, the devices are being phased out in favor of voice analyzers, which are more portable and easier to use. A voice analyzer device typically consists of a telephone and microphone attached to a computer that packs neatly in a briefcase, or attached to any PC with the proper software installed. Most of the analyzers can be used in person or over the phone. Conversations can be tested in real time or recorded for later analysis.
First, the questioner asks an interviewee about something he or she would have no reason to lie about, such as “When’s your birthday?” Then he asks what he really wants to ask. The device makes an assessment about whether the subject is telling the truth based on the differences between the inaudible microtremors in the voice during the first round of questioning and those in the second.
The federal government officially says it does not use these voice lie detectors. Still, the voice technology has its true believers, among them more than 1,200 police departments nationwide and tens of thousands of consumers.
The slightly more sophisticated Truster software program that runs on a desktop computer gives text rating of truthfulness. The companies that market these technologies say they are more than 80 percent accurate.
Though skeptical, Rick Garloff, a 35-year-old American, still said even if the systems are not great lie detectors, they are wonderful lie deterrents. He once used the Truster on his 9-year-old son, to see if he had forgotten to close a door, accidentally letting the dog in. His son claimed no. But the lie detection system said yes. When confronted, his son confessed.
解析：
暂无解析
