$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$$\quad$Text 3

$\quad$$\quad$The US＄3 million Fundamental Physics is indeed an interesting experiment, as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March. And it is far from the only one of its type. As a New Feature article in Nature discusses, a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years. Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs. These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.

$\quad$$\quad$耗资300万美元的基础物理学确实是一个有趣的实验，这是Alexander Polyakov在三月他接受今年奖项时说的。而且它也远不是同类产品中唯一的一款。正如《自然》杂志的一篇新文章所讨论的一样，近年来一连串的给研究人员的丰厚奖金加入了诺贝尔奖。许多种，就像基础物理学奖一样，资金来自互联网企业家们就像电话号码一样长的银行存款。这些捐助者在他们自己的领域很成功，而且他们想用他们的财富去吸引这些在科学上成功的人。

$\quad$$\quad$What’s not to like? Quite a lot, according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature. You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels. The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them, say scientists. They could distort the achievement-based system of preview-led research. They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research. They do not fund peer-reviewed research. They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.

$\quad$$\quad$有什么不同的意见吗？很少有，根据一系列的在新特征杂志上的科学提问你不能购买到风度，就像以前的谚语说的一样，而且这些暴发户无法为自己的奖项买到诺贝尔奖的声望。这些新的奖项对科学家们来说是幕后推手的一种新的自我推销的活动。他们会曲解这些基于成就系统的引领时代的研究。它们可以巩固同行评议研究的现状。他们不资助同行评议的研究。它们使孤独天才的神话永垂不朽。

$\quad$$\quad$The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism. Some want to shock, others to draw people into science, or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.

$\quad$$\quad$颁奖者的目标似乎和批评一样分散。有些人想让人震惊，有些人想吸引人们投身科学，或者更好地奖励那些以研究为职业的人。

$\quad$$\quad$As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes—both new and old—are distributed. The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life science include. But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson. The Nobels were, of course, themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money. Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.

$\quad$$\quad$正如《自然》杂志(Nature)之前指出的那样，对于科学奖项——无论是新奖项还是旧奖项——如何分配，存在一些合理的担忧。今年推出的生命科学突破奖对生命科学的内容采取了一种不具代表性的观点。但是，诺贝尔基金会规定的每位获奖者必须在世的上限，早已被现代研究的合作性所超越——在承认希格斯玻色子的发现时，谁被忽略这一问题上不可避免的争吵也将证明这一点。当然，诺贝尔奖本身是由一个非常富有的人设立的，他决定了如何使用自己的钱。赋予他们合法性的是时间，而不是意图。

$\quad$$\quad$As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards, two things seem clear. First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere. It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism—that is the culture of research, after all-but it is the prize- givers’ money to do with as they please. It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.

$\quad$$\quad$尽管一些科学家可能会抱怨这些新的奖项，但有两件事似乎是清楚的。首先，如果能得到这样的奖励，大多数研究人员都会接受。第二，资金和注意力投向科学而不是其他地方，这无疑是一件好事。批评和质疑这一机制(毕竟这是研究的文化)是公平的，但这是获奖者的钱，他们可以随意支配。带着感激和优雅接受这些礼物是明智的。

31 The Fundamental Physics Prize is seen as

[A] a symbol of the entrepreneurs’ wealth.

企业家财富的象征。

[B] a handsome reward for researchers.

一份对研究者来说丰厚的回报      对

[C] a possible replacement of the Nobel Prizes.

可能会替代诺贝尔奖的地位

[D] an example of bankers’ investments.

一个银行家投资的例子

答案定位：{ Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs. These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.}

32 The critics think that the new awards will most benefit

[A] the profit-oriented scientists.

[B] the achievement-based system.

[C] the founders of the new awards   正确

[D] peer-review-led research.

33 The discovery of the Higgs boson is a typical case which involves

[A] legitimate concerns over the new prizes.

[B] controversies over the recipients’ status.

[C] the joint effort of modern researchers.

[D] the demonstration of research findings.

34 According to Paragraph 4, which of the following is true of the Nobels?

[A] History has never cast doubt on them.

[B] their endurance has done justice to them.

[C] They are the most representative honor.

[D] Their legitimacy has long been in dispute.

35 The author believes that the new awards are

[A] unworthy of public attention.

[B] subject to undesirable changes.

[C] harmful to the culture of research.

[D] acceptable despite the criticism