Specialization can be seen as a response to the problem of an increasing accumulation of scientific knowledge. By splitting up the subject matter into smaller units, one man could continue to handle the information and use it as the basis for further research. But specialization was only one of a series of related developments in science affecting the process of communication. Another was the growing professionalization of scientific activity.
No clear-cut distinction can be drawn between professionals and amateurs in science: exceptions can be found to any rule. Nevertheless, the word "amateur" does carry a connotation that the person concerned is not fully integrated into the scientific community and, in particular, may not fully share its values. The growth of specialization in the nineteenth century, with its consequent requirement of a longer, more complex training, implied greater problems for amateur participation in science. The trend was naturally most obvious in those areas of science based especially on a mathematical or laboratory training, and can be illustrated in terms of the development of geology in the United Kingdom.
A comparison of British geological publications over the last century and a half reveals not simply an increasing emphasis on the primacy of research, but also a changing definition of what constitutes an acceptable research paper. Thus, in the nineteenth century, local geological studies represented worthwhile research in their own right; but, in the twentieth century, local studies have increasingly become acceptable to professionals only if they incorporate, and reflect on, the wider geological picture. Amateurs, on the other hand, have continued to pursue local studies in the old way. The overall result has been to make entrance to professional geological journals harder for amateurs, a result that has been reinforced by the widespread introduction of refereeing, first by national journals in the nineteenth century and then by several local geological journals in the twentieth century. As a logical consequence of this development, separate journals have now appeared aimed mainly towards either professional or amateur readership. A rather similar process of differentiation has led to professional geologists coming together nationally within one or two specific societies, whereas the amateurs have tended either to remain in local societies or to come together nationally in a different way.
Although the process of professionalization and specialization was already well under way in British geology during the nineteenth century, its full consequences were thus delayed until the twentieth century. In science generally, however, the nineteenth century must be reckoned as the crucial period for this change in the structure of science.
1.The growth of specialization in the 19th century might be more clearly seen in sciences such as _____.
A.sociology and chemistry B.physics and psychology
C.sociology and psychology D.physics and chemistry
2.We can infer from the passage that______.
A.there is little distinction between specialization and professionalization
B.amateurs can compete with professionals in some areas of science
C.professionals tend to welcome amateurs into the scientific community
D.amateurs have national academic societies but no local ones
3.The author writes of the development of geology to demonstrate ______.
A.the process of specialization and professionalization
B.the hardship of amateurs in scientific study
C.the change of policies in scientific publications
D.the discrimination of professionals against amateurs
4.The direct reason for specialization is ______.
A.the development in communication B.the growth of professionalization
C.the expansion of scientific knowledge D.the splitting up of academic societies
5.Which statement about the amateur is correct?
A.Professionals and amateurs are very different from each other in science.
B.The growth of specialization improves the amateur participation in science.
C.In the twentieth century, due to the increasing developments of science, the difference between the professional and amateur become larger than before.
D.A similar process of differentiation occurred in the specific societies of geometry.
長難例句分析
［長難例句］A rather similar process of differentiation has led to professional geologists coming together nationally within one or two specific societies, whereas the amateurs have tended either to remain in local societies or to come together nationally in a different way.
［結構分析］本句是一個主從復合句。主句中的主語是process，謂語是has led to，分詞分句“professional geologists coming together nationally within one or two specific societies”作賓語。whereas引導了一個比較從句，從句中的主語是the amateurs，謂語是have tended, 而either to remain or to come together作賓語。
［參考譯文］另一相近的分化過程是，全國專業(yè)地質(zhì)學者會聚一堂，組成一兩個專業(yè)小組，與之相反，業(yè)余人員要么傾向于占據(jù)地方學會，要么就以另外的不同于前者的方式在全國范圍內(nèi)聯(lián)合。
全文參考譯文
專業(yè)分工可以看成是對科學知識不斷增加的問題的應對之策。通過把科學知識按課題不同劃分成更小的單元，人們能繼續(xù)掌握這些知識并把它用作進一步研究的基礎。然而，專業(yè)分工僅是科學上影響交流進程的一系列相關科學發(fā)展的一個方面。另一方面則是科學活動的不斷專業(yè)化。
專業(yè)人員和業(yè)余人員之間在科學上無法作出明確的劃分：因為任何規(guī)則都有例外。不過“業(yè)余人員”一詞確實含有如此的意義：他并沒有徹底融入科學界，尤其是，可能不能完全分享其價值。19世紀專業(yè)分工的發(fā)展加上時間更長、內(nèi)容更復雜的培訓，暗示了業(yè)余人員參加科學活動將會碰到更多的問題。這一趨勢在以數(shù)學或?qū)嶒炇遗嘤枮榛A的科學領域里自然表現(xiàn)得尤為突出。英國地質(zhì)學的發(fā)展可以闡明這一趨勢。
比較一下英國過去一個半世紀的地質(zhì)學方面的刊物，人們發(fā)現(xiàn)，不僅研究的重要性愈來愈受到強調(diào)，學術論文的出版標準亦在不斷改變。因而，即使19世紀區(qū)域地質(zhì)學研究本身代表了有價值的科研活動；但是，在20世紀，區(qū)域研究唯有包容、思考更廣泛的問題，才會逐漸被專業(yè)人員所接受。另外，業(yè)余人員仍然用從前的方式進行區(qū)域研究。其結果導致了業(yè)余人員在專業(yè)地質(zhì)刊物上發(fā)表論文更加困難。19世紀的國家級雜志和20世紀的幾家地方地質(zhì)雜志先后廣泛引進評審制度，促使該問題表現(xiàn)得更為明顯。這一發(fā)展的必然結果是，導致分別出現(xiàn)了以專業(yè)讀者或業(yè)余讀者為主要對象的刊物。另一相近的分化進程是，全國專業(yè)地質(zhì)學者會聚一堂，組成一兩個專業(yè)小組，與之相反，業(yè)余人員要么傾向于占據(jù)地方學會，要么就以另外的不同于前者的方式在全國范圍內(nèi)聯(lián)合。
盡管在19世紀，專業(yè)化和專業(yè)分工進程在英國地質(zhì)學領域里就早已開始形成，可其成果被推遲到20世紀才充分顯現(xiàn)。無論如何，從整個科學領域的范圍來說，19世紀必定被看成這種科學結構轉變的至關重要的時期。
題目答案與解析
1.19世紀專業(yè)化的發(fā)展可能在一些科學領域表現(xiàn)得更為突出，例如______。
A.社會學與化學 B.物理學與心理學 C.社會學與心理學 D.物理學與化學
【答案】D
【解析】本題可參照文章的第二段。從文章第二段倒數(shù)兩句話可知，19世紀專業(yè)化的發(fā)展以及隨后時間更長、內(nèi)容更復雜的訓練要求暗示——業(yè)余人員參與科學研究所面臨的問題會更大；當然，在那些尤其以數(shù)學或?qū)嶒炇矣柧殲榛A的科學領域，這種趨勢表現(xiàn)得最明顯，英國地質(zhì)學的發(fā)展可以闡明這種趨勢。據(jù)此可知，19世紀專業(yè)化的發(fā)展在那些以數(shù)學或?qū)嶒炇矣柧殲榛A的科學領域可能表現(xiàn)得更為突出。D項與文章的意思相符，因此為正確答案。
2.我們可以從本文推知，______。
A.專業(yè)化和職業(yè)化之間幾乎沒有區(qū)別
B.業(yè)余人員能夠在科學的某些領域同專業(yè)人員競爭
C.專業(yè)人員往往歡迎業(yè)余研究人員加入科學團體
D.業(yè)余人員擁有全國性學術機構，但沒有地方性學術機構
【答案】B
【解析】從文章第三段的內(nèi)容可知，在19世紀，區(qū)域地質(zhì)學研究代表的是一些獨立完成的、有價值的科學研究；但是，到20世紀時，區(qū)域地質(zhì)學研究唯有包容、思考更廣泛的地質(zhì)學問題，才會逐漸被專業(yè)人員接受；另外，業(yè)余人員仍然以從前的方式進行區(qū)域地質(zhì)學研究。據(jù)此可知，業(yè)余人員可以在某些研究領域同專業(yè)人員競爭。B項與文章的意思相符，因此為正確答案。
3.作者寫了地質(zhì)學的發(fā)展，用以論證______。
A.專業(yè)化與職業(yè)化的發(fā)展過程 B.業(yè)余人員在科學研究中的艱辛
C.科學出版政策上的變化 D.專業(yè)人員對業(yè)余人員的歧視
【答案】A
【解析】從文章第二段的最后一句話可知，尤其在那些以數(shù)學或?qū)嶒炇遗嘤枮榛A的科學領域，這種業(yè)余人員參與科學研究的趨勢表現(xiàn)得最明顯，英國地質(zhì)學的發(fā)展可以闡明這種趨勢；第三段則詳細說明了英國地質(zhì)學的發(fā)展是如何論證了這種趨勢。據(jù)此可知，作者利用地質(zhì)學發(fā)展的例子是為了說明業(yè)余人員與專業(yè)學者之間的分化過程。A項與文章的意思相符，因此為正確答案。
4.專業(yè)化的直接原因是_________。
A.交流的發(fā)展 B.職業(yè)化的發(fā)展 C.科學知識的擴展 D.學術團體的分化
【答案】C
【解析】本題可參照文章的第一段。從中可知，專業(yè)化可以被看成是對科學知識不斷增加的問題的應對之策；通過把科學知識按課題不同劃分成更小的單位，人們能夠繼續(xù)掌握這些知識，并把它作為進一步研究的基礎。據(jù)此可知，專業(yè)化的直接原因是科學知識的不斷增加。C項與文中的意思相符，因此為正確答案。
5.關于“業(yè)余人員”，哪個說法是正確的？
A.在科學領域，專業(yè)人員和業(yè)余人員彼此大不相同。
B.專業(yè)化的發(fā)展提高了業(yè)余人員的科學參與機會。
C.在20世紀，因為科學的加速發(fā)展，專業(yè)人員和業(yè)余人員之間的差距比原來加大了。
D.相類似的差異化發(fā)生在地理學的專業(yè)團體中。
【答案】C
【解析】本科考查對語義的理解。第一個選項跟第二段的第一句話矛盾。第二個選項跟第二段的第三句話相沖突。第四個選項在數(shù)量上跟文中描述的within one or two不符。
