↑ 收起筛选 ↑
试题详情

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

高三英语阅读理解中等难度题

少年,再来一题如何?
试题答案
试题解析
相关试题