Oil pleasant surprise

It seems that oil-price shocks are less shocking than they used to be.

1.COULD the bad old days of stagflation be about to return? Since OPEC agreed to supply-cuts in March, the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel, up from less than $10 last December and its highest since the Gulf war in 1991. This near-tripling of oil prices evokes scary memories of the 1973 oil shock, when prices quadrupled, and 1979-80, when they also almost tripled. Both previous shocks resulted in double-digit inflation and global recession. So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?
Their absence is even more striking given that, at the start of the year, many commentators (including, rather prominently, this newspaper) expected prices to fall, not rise. OPEC's agreement to cut output has so far proved more durable than many predicted.

2. The oil price was given another nudge up(命题时改为push up )this week when Iraq suspended oil exports in a showdown with the UN over sanctions. Strengthening economic growth, at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere, could push the price higher still in the short term.

3 . Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s. The sharp rise in oil prices follows an equally sharp collapse over the previous two years, when prices fell by more than half to their lowest level in real terms since before the 1973 shock. Even now, prices are not much higher than in early 1997.
Moreover, in most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s. In Europe, taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price, so even quite big changes in the price of crude have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.

4 .Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were, and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price. Energy conservation, a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption. Software, consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production. For each dollar of GDP (in constant prices) rich economies now use nearly 50% less oil than in 1973. The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that, if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year, compared with $13 in 1998, this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.5% of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980. On the other hand, oil-importing emerging economies-to which heavy industry has shifted-have become more energy-intensive, and so could be more seriously squeezed.
The impact on the output of oil-importing countries also depends on whether oil producers save or spend their windfalls. In 1973 and 1979 many OPEC countries already had current-account surpluses, and most of their extra oil revenues were saved. Today, many have large current-account deficits (Saudi Arabia hit 10% of GDP last year). Cash-strapped producers are more likely to spend their windfalls on imports from rich countries.

5.One more reason not to lose sleep over the surge in oil prices is that, unlike the rises in the 1970s, it has not occurred against the backdrop (命题时改为background )of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand. A sizeable chunk(命题时改为portion) of the world is only just emerging from recession(命题时改为economic decline ). The Economist?s commodity price index is broadlyunchanged from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%, and in 1979 by almost 30%.

　　这是1999年11月27日刊登在某经济报刊上的一篇经济类评论文章。作者在文中主要论述了油价上涨以全球经济的影响，指出这次上涨不会像以前造成经济的衰退并分析列举了其原因。
　　从文章的题材上讲，商业经济类的文章始终是考研阅读的四大题材之一（另外三类是文化教育、社会生活和科学技术），而且这篇文章谈论的是石油价格的涨落这个全球性的热门话题，自然是非常适合考研时出题的。再从体裁上看，这是一篇典型的说明性议论文，也属于考研阅读的最常见体裁。问题是这篇文章共有8段，611词，如果用来设计阅读理解Part B选择搭配型考题很合适，但若设计为Part A单项选择题型，则段落和字数都有些偏多，因为该部分的文章通常要求将字数控制在400词左右；多至8段的文章偶尔也有（如2002年第四篇），但多数文章保留4-5段，便于设题（一段一题）。
这篇文章被选用于2002年的考研题中，距离发表时间，相隔整整三年，被编为第三篇，试题顺序为51-55。文中划线的部分是试题中被节选的内容，其余的部分全部被删除。改编后的文章共5段，427词。

命题人如何改动原文
命题人主要在以下方面对原文进行了改动:
一、文章的标题和引言被删除。文章标题的作用在于概括全文的主题，如果给出，则文章大意就会一目了然。从测试的角度讲，理解文章的主旨大意是阅读理解能力考查的首要任务。即使不出专门的主旨大意题，对文章主旨大意的理解也会对事实细节以及作者的观点态度的理解产生很大的影响。因此，考研阅读的文章标题都要被删掉，使文章主题"藏而不漏"，要求考生从文章的具体内容中去理解和把握。本文除标题Oil pleasant surprise显露了文章的谈论话题和作者的观点态度（pleasant表明作者的态度是积极的）外，引言"It seems that oil-price shocks are less shocking than they used to be."也暴露了文章的主题和观点态度，所以被删除。
二、表达不明确的部分被删除。考研题目对语言的规范性要求较高，凡表达不够清晰，含义模糊的地方要进行修改或删除。文章第一段中的and its highest since the Gulf war in 1991指的是现在的价格还是去年十二月份的价格，很不清楚，所以被删去。
三、为压缩字数，不影响文章总体结构的细节内容要被删除。原文第二、四、七段被删去的部分均属于此。
四、为使文章结构更加严谨，段落组织要作适当调整。如原文中的第四和第五段改编后被合为一段。
五、适当替换了一些超纲词，详见第2、第5段。
节选、改编后的文章不但没有破坏原文的结构和内容，反倒使文章变得更加短小精悍，结构严谨，层次清晰。第一段和第二段指出最近石油价格上涨的情况，指出这次会不会向前两次一样造成经济衰退的问题。第三段至第五段：列举这次油价上涨的影响不会像以前那样严重的几点原因。
现在我们再来看看命题人是怎样设计试题的：
51. The main reason for the latest rise of oil price is
[A] global inflation.
[B] reduction in supply.
[C] fast growth in economy.
[D] Iraq?s suspension of exports.
【分析】这是一道事实细节题，难度适中，难度系数为0.555（即有55.5%的考生答对此题）。命题针对的是文章第二句；题干中的the main reason是关键词，说明要求给出的是rise of oil price的原因。原因状语从句"Since OPEC agreed to supply-cuts in March"解释了近来石油价格上涨的原因，所以答案是[B]。 其中的reduction in supply是原文中supply cuts的同义替述。
52. It can be inferred from the text that the retail price of petrol will go up dramatically if
[A] price of crude rises.
[B] commodity prices rise.
[C] consumption rises.
[D] oil taxes rise.
【分析】从It can be inferred from the text that这个典型题干可以看出，这是一道推理判断题。此题难度不大，难度系数为0.609。命题针对的是文章第三段第二、三两句。第二句中的"?crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol"指出原油价格只是石油价格中的一小部分。第三句则以欧洲的例子说明"taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price（税收高达石油零售价的五分之四）"。由此可以推断出[A] "原油价格上升"是错误的，而[D]项"石油税上升"是正确的选项。文章中没有阐述商品价格及消费上涨与石油价格的关系，故[B]、[C]不是正确选项。
53. The estimates in Economic Outlook show that in rich countries
[A] heavy industry becomes more energy-intensive.
[B] income loss mainly results from fluctuating crude oil
prices.
[C] manufacturing industry has been seriously squeezed.
[D] oil price changes have no significantimpact on GDP.
【分析】推理判断题，标志词是题干中的show。命题针对文章第四段第五句，其中提到：经济合作与发展组织（欧洲）在最新一期《经济望》中估计，与1998年每桶13美元的油价相比，如果平均油价每桶22美元持续一年，"this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.5% of GDP"，即富裕的国家和地区的石油进口的增长只能达到国内生产总值的0.25%到0.5%；文中用了only一词强调增长数字之小，显而易见，石油价格的变化不会对GDP产生重要影响，故正确答案为[D]。这道题比较容易，难度系数为0.793。
54. We can draw a conclusion from the text that
[A] oil-price shocks are less shocking now.
[B] inflation seems irrelevant to oil-price shocks.
[C] energy conservation can keep down the oil prices.
[D] the price rise of crude leads to the shrinking of heavy
industry.
【分析】从题干中的draw a conclusion from the text that可以看出，这也是一道推理判断题，难度适中，难度系数为0.533。此题属于综合推断题，需要通观全文进行分析。文章前两段讨论最近石油价格上涨的情况，接着第三段首句"Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s."笔锋一转指出"然而我们有足够的理由预期此次油价对经济的冲击不会像七十年代那样严重"，其原因就是富裕国家对石油的依赖的降低；最后一段"One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that, unlike the rises in the 1970s, it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand."指出"另一个石油价格上涨不必过分担忧的原因是，这次油价上涨与1973年不同，并不是在物价全面上涨、全球需求过剩的背景下发生的"。由此可以得出结论为[A] "石油价格的冲击不再那么令人震惊了"。
55. From the text we can see that the writer seems
[A] optimistic.
[B] sensitive.
[C] gloomy.
[D] scared.
【分析】这是一道观点态度题；难度为0.765。文章最后一段是最明显的线索。其中"not to lose sleep"，"is broadly unchanging"等词都说明这次石油上涨后果并不是很严重。另外第三段第一句也指出?但也有很好的理由盼望现在的经济后果会比二十世纪七十年代的情况乐观?，第四段第一句也表明了对石油涨价后果持乐观态度的原因，因为Rich economies are also less dependent on ill than they were, and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price，显然，作者对此次油价波动的后果持较为乐观的态度[A]，而不是[B]"敏感"、[C]"沮丧"或[D]"恐惧"。
　　本文是《大学生》杂志与王长喜老师特约的"考研必胜客"专栏文章，发表于2004年12月刊。王长喜老师通过追寻历年考研真题选材与设题的轨迹，深入细致地剖析了考研阅读的选材规律与命题特征。研究分析结果表明，考研阅读的文章主要选自11家英文报刊与网站，其中75%的文章选自五大英美报刊。王长喜老师在此项研究的基础上，精选了出自这五种报刊的180篇文章，经过设计、整理、详解，现呈现给广大考研学生。希望考生能从中汲取营养，在来年的考试大获全胜！