Maintaining internal E-mail systems has long been the bane of the university information-technology director. Servers are unwieldy and unreliable, and in the past several years, the number of student complaints has grown exponentially as forward-moving providers like YahooMail, Hotmail, and Gmail have increased expectations of what E-mail should offer. The solution for a number of colleges has been to wave the white flag and outsource E-mail hosting to the experts.
Microsoft, which owns Hotmail, and Google (Gmail) are the biggest players in the educational E-mail hosting market. Along with the neat-o peripheral gizmos like messaging, calendars, and collaboration tools, the outsourced systems are more stable, have better spam filters, and provide much more storage space than the typical university's in-house system. At the University of Pennsylvania, its old E-mail service gave students 60 megabytes of storage, just 3 percent of the 2 gigabytes Windows Live now provides. In return, Google and Microsoft get almost nothing, at least monetarily and in the short term. Microsoft's Windows Live @ edu and the Google Apps Education Edition are free of charge for schools. Eliminating another source of revenue, the two tech giants stripped their respective services of advertising in an effort to accommodate educators' concerns. Microsoft breaks even on the venture (it does run ads on non-E-mail services like instant messaging), while Google, which makes almost all its money through advertising, runs at a loss.
But what money they don't make at the moment will—the companies hope—pay great dividends in the form of lifelong users in the future, says Google's Jeff Kelter. As quickly as they shuffle out of commencement, graduates see their E-mail transition to the traditional ad-based formats of Gmail and Hotmail. And unlike before, when universities couldn't afford to host thousands of alumni, Google and Microsoft can maintain every account indefinitely, retaining customers as long as customers still want them.
Not all schools are ready to outsource their tech dirty work, with privacy and security topping the list of concerns. Critics worry that by handing over the responsibility of E-mail hosting, colleges also relinquish the freedom to keep the information safe in the best way they see fit. Even in the corporate world, there is great skepticism of consumer technologies like Google Apps. Yet most university IT managers agree that outsiders would do a better job protecting individual E-mail from viruses and spam than their own small operations, and strong word-of-mouth praise has done wonders to supplement the almost nonexistent marketing budgets for these Microsoft and Google projects.
The price tag—or lack of one—isn't a bad sales pitch either. Ramin Sedehi, the vice dean for finance and administration at Penn, says 30 percent of Penn's students already forward their messages to outside clients, and he predicts universities will eventually be out of the E-mail hosting business altogether. Ball State University and the Indiana University Alumni Association are now on Windows Live, and Arizona State University switched to Google Apps in October 2006, already converting at least 40,000 of its 65,000 students to the new system. Penn State University and California Polytechnic State University, to name two, have been in talks, while other schools are watching and waiting.
1. The number of student complaints has grown exponentially because_____
[A] the school servers are unwieldy and unreliable.
[B] the information-technology director is not the expert in providing IT-related assistance.
[C] the internal E-mail systems are much more backward than those commercially successful email systems.
[D] there are no collaboration tools in the internal E-mail systems.
2. Microsoft and Google do not run ads on the E-mail systems for schools because_____
[A] they want to cater to the requirements of their clients.
[B] they are sponsored by schools and do not need the revenue from ads.
[C] they want to build up a unique community with life-long loyalty.
[D] they want to maintain the stability of the systems at the present.
3. Compared with the universities, the advantage of Goole and Microsoft in hosting accounts of alumni is _____
[A] that they can reserve every account with minimum charge.
[B] that they can retain every account at customers’ wish.
[C] that they can maintain every account as long as the customers want.
[D] that they can keep every account fro free in a long term.
4. The two giants persist in providing the E-mail services though they run at a loss because_____
[A] they believe they will have good returns from the would-be lifelong users in the future.
[B] it is part of their social commitment to return the society through contributing to education.
[C] their strategy is to make profit through advertisement to university alumni.
[D] they want the students to propagandize for their projects.
5. The word “relinquish” (Line 3, Paragraph 4)most probably means_____
[A] lose.
[B] abandon.
[C] exchange.
[D]waste.
文章剖析：
这篇文章介绍了大学将自己的电邮系统外包给微软、谷歌等公司。第一段讲述大学自己经营电邮系统的缺陷；第二段讲述外包电邮系统的优点；第三段讲述外包商的策略；第四段讲述外包存在的一些问题；第五段讲述目前大学电邮系统外包的情况。
词汇注释:
bane n. 祸害；害人精 unwieldy adj. 难操纵的, 难控制的
exponentially adv. 指数地，幂数地 gizmo n. 小玩意儿，小发明
spam n. 兜售信息[邮件，广告，新闻，文章]
dividend n. 红利 shuffle out of v. 笨拙地脱下
alumni n. 毕业生, 校友 relinquish v.放弃
难句突破：
(1) Servers are unwieldy and unreliable, and in the past several years, the number of student complaints has grown exponentially as forward-moving providers like YahooMail, Hotmail, and Gmail have increased expectations of what E-mail should offer.
[主体句式] Severs are…, and the number has grown…
[结构分析] 这是一个并列句，后面分句结构比较复杂；该分句是带有as引导的原因状语从句的复杂句，前面in the past several years是状语。
[句子译文]在过去的几年中，学生抱怨的数量呈指数增长，而不断进步的供应商如雅虎邮件、Hotmail、Gmail更多考虑电子邮件能提供什么服务。
(2) Yet most university IT managers agree that outsiders would do a better job protecting individual E-mail from viruses and spam than their own small operations, and strong word-of-mouth praise has done wonders to supplement the almost nonexistent marketing budgets for these Microsoft and Google projects.
[主体句式] Most university IT managers agree that… and praise has done …
[结构分析] 这是一个并列句。前面的分句以that引导的宾语从句中，protecting …是现在分词结构作前面job的定语；后面的分句to引导的是目的状语。
[句子分析] 但是大多大学IT负责人认为比起他们自己的小型程序，外包可以更好地保护个人邮件免受病毒和广告的侵扰，而学生们对这些系统的口头赞扬已经为微软和谷歌的项目补充了那些几乎不存在的市场预算。
题目分析:
[答案]C
[难度分析] ☆☆☆
[分析] 推理题。文章第一段提到随着不断进步的供应商如雅虎邮件、Hotmail、Gmail不断更新电邮的服务项目，学生的抱怨越来越多，可以看出，学生抱怨数量的增多是因为相对于学校之外那些商业上非常成功的电邮系统，内部电邮系统跟不上进步。因此，选项C最为符合题意。A选项也有一定道理，但是不如C选项概括精确。B和D选项很显然不是主要的原因。
[答案] A
[难度分析] ☆☆☆☆
[分析] 细节题。文章在第二段提到这两大巨头将各自的广告项目都从该系统移除了，这是为了照顾教育家们的担忧，那么可以推断，是因为教育家担忧学校系统有广告会影响教育，因此两个公司才有这样的举措，所以他们主要是为了迎合客户的需求。因此选项中A最为符合题意。C选项有一定道理，而且在文章第三段中也有提到终生用户，但是这只是一个长远的想法，并不是本问题的直接原因。
[答案] C
[难度分析] ☆☆☆
[分析] 细节题。文章第三段提到在以前大学自己的网络上，不能保存那么多学生的纪录，而这两大巨头却可以无限期地保存这些记录，只要客户需要就能以这种方式将客户保留住。可以，其优势是可以无限期地保存每一份记录。选项C中as long as the customers want就是文章中indefinitely这个词语的意思，因此为正确答案。至于是否收费还是免费、以及是否会考虑客户的需求，这在文章中都没有提及。
[答案] A
[难度分析] ☆☆☆
[分析] 细节题。文章第二段提到两大巨头在亏本为高校提供电邮系统服务，第三段开头就指出它们希望，现在没有赚到的钱会在将来以终身用户的形式来给与它们回报。可见，他们这样做的目的是为了培养终生客户。因此，答案A最为符合题意。B选项在文章中并没有提及任何社会责任，属于无中生有。关于C选项，虽然文章中提到了他们的长远目标是留住大学校友客户，但是并没有提到通过向他们打广告盈利。D选项显然也是错误的，两家公司并没有计划让学生们帮忙宣传。
[答案]B
[难度分析] ☆
[分析]根据上下文，并不是所有的学校都打算外包服务，批评家也担心如果将电邮转让出去，大学可能就要放弃保证信息安全的自由。从also这个词可以看出来，relinquish和hand over应该类似，是主动的，那么答案中B最为贴切。A有被动失去的意思。
参考译文:
长期以来，维护内部电子邮件系统一直是大学信息技术主任最头疼的问题。服务器难以控制、稳定性差，在过去的几年中，学生抱怨的数量呈指数增长，而不断进步的供应商如雅虎邮件、Hotmail、Gmail更多考虑电子邮件能提供什么服务。许多学校的解决办法就是举起白旗，将电邮交给外面的专家打理。
拥有Hotmail的微软，谷歌（Gmail）是教育电邮市场最大的玩家。外包系统除了有灵巧的辅助小工具（如收发消息、日历和协作工具），该系统更加稳定，有更好的广告过滤器, 并提供比大学传统的内部系统更大的存储空间。在宾西法尼亚大学，老电邮服务为学生提供60m的存储，是Windows Live现在提供的2G空间的3%。但是谷歌和微软都不收费，起码从金钱上或是短期来说是这样的。微软的Windows Live @ edu以及谷歌的教育应用版对于学校是免费的。这两个科技巨头还除去了另外一项收入来源，即将各自的广告服务去除，以免去教育家的担忧。微软甚至中断了这项业务（其在即时消息那样的非电邮服务上运营广告），而几乎完全靠广告获得收入的谷歌公司现在正亏损运行。
但是虽然他们现在没有赚到的钱，这些公司希望在未来通过终身用户的形式获得巨大的红利，谷歌的Jeff Kelter这样说。一旦毕业典礼结束，学生们就会看到自己的电邮转为传统的基于广告的Gmail和 Hotmail了。和以前不同的是，如果大学应付不了成千上万的校友，谷歌和微软可以无限期地保留每个人的纪录，他们有需求就可以一直保留用户身份。
但是并不是所有的学校都打算将自己的技术工作外包，隐私和安全问题是他们最为关心的。批评者认为如果将电邮的职责交出去的话，学校也就放弃了以他们认为合适的方法保证信息安全的自由。即使在业界，对于诸如谷歌Apps这样的用户技术也存在很大的怀疑。但是大多大学IT负责人认为比起他们自己的小型程序，外包可以更好地保护个人邮件免受病毒和广告的侵扰，而学生们对这些系统的口头赞扬已经为微软和谷歌的项目补充了那些几乎不存在的市场预算。
价格标签——或者没有——也不是一个坏的销售方式。宾西法尼亚大学财务和管理副主任Ramin Sedehi称30%的学生已经将他们的信息转给外部委托人，他预计大学最终将完全脱离自主电邮行业。鲍尔州立大学和印第安纳大学校友会使用Windows Live，而亚利桑那州州立大学2006年10月开始使用谷歌Apps，目前已经将至少65000名学生中的40000名转移到了新系统上。宾西法尼亚州州立大学和加利福尼亚工艺州立大学已经在商谈中，而其他学校都在观望和等待。
China makes computers, but imports most of its chips. India makes drugs, but copies almost all of the compounds; it writes software, but rarely owns the result. The bolder claims made for all three industries thus have a similar, hollow ring. They have flourished, but mostly on the back of other countries' technology. “We are not at the stage of Intel Inside,” admits Arvind Atignal of Clinigene, a clinical-research firm, drawing his own analogy between desktops and drugs. “We are the keyboard, screens and peripherals.”
How much does this matter? Joseph Xie of SMIC, the Chinese chipmaker, spent seven years working inside Intel. Its strategy, he says, was simple: “get there first; make most of the money; let the second guy get the change.” That is certainly one way to run a technology firm. But competing in that race is expensive and exhausting. Few of Intel's rivals still try to keep up with it, nanometre by nanometre.
Countries of China's and India's heft and ambition cherish the idea of pushing back the limits of technology. But that push is risky, costly, frustrating work. A country shouldn't do it unless it has to. Although China and India could devote their considerable intellectual resources to solving the problems faced by economies on the technological frontier, why cross that bridge until you reach it? Seen in this light, India's generic drugmakers are models not laggards. They invest in just enough know-how to exploit the rest of the world's discoveries. Thanks to them, Indians enjoy some of the world's cheapest medicines.
Under the WTO's Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights agreement (TRIPS), India has ceded the right to free-ride foreign advances. It now grants 20 years of patent protection to inventions hatched after 1995. In return, it hopes tighter laws will inspire Indians to new exploits in innovation, and reassure foreigners wary of inventing or making original products in the country.
The tougher laws may yet succeed. A recent study by Bruce Abramson of the World Bank expresses high hopes. A “patent chic” is already detectable in the country, he reports. He has even heard of Indian farmers calling lawyers in the hope of patenting their prize vegetables.
But, as yet, the new regime has not proved its worth. Over 17,000 patent applications were filed in India in 2004-05, almost 40% more than the year before. But only 3,500 were by Indians. Of the 49 most prolific filers in the past decade, 44 are either foreign companies or subsidiaries. Of the five Indian firms, all are either government-sponsored institutes or generic-drug companies, which did fine before TRIPS.
The new regime will be costly to run, if India takes it seriously. But the larger cost lies in the opportunities for unabashed imitation that India has now forgone. These lost opportunities might be quite big. Had Indian firms been prevented from copying fluoroquinolones, for example, the Indian public would have been worse off by the equivalent of $255m a year, reckons a study of the antibiotics market by Shubham Chaudhuri of the World Bank, Pinelopi Goldberg of Yale and Panle Jia of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
1. Arvind Atignal draws an analogy between desktops and drugs because_____
[A] both of them have a similar prospect in China and India.
[B] both industries in India are still lacking core technology.
[C] drug-making in India is like making peripherals for desktops.
[D] the two industries have a similar operation in India.
2. The idea maintained by countries like China and India is _____
[A] to do the best they could.
[B] to solve the technological problems to the best of their ability.
[C] to go beyond the limits of technology.
[D] to do what they have to.
3. India has ceded the right to free-ride foreign advances because_____
[A] it wants to push back the limits of technology.
[B] it is in accordance with TRIPS.
[C] it wants to inspire Indians to making innovation.
[D] it wants to protect the inventions by the foreigners.
4. From the data of the sixth paragraph, it can be inferred that_____
[A] the tougher laws are not successful since it failed to raise Indians’ enthusiasm for patents.
[B] Indians are not so inventive as the foreign counterparts measured by patent application.
[C] Indians’ inventions are negligible because most firms are funded by the government and thus lack incentive.
[D] Indians are still left behind in inventions even under the system that encourage patenting.
5. Towards the future of the new regime, the author’s attitude can be said to be_____
[A] pessimistic.
[B] optimistic.
[C] dubious.
[D] objective.
文章剖析：
这篇文章介绍印度在技术发明创造方面的情况。第一、二段讲述印度在科技核心发明方面的特点；第三段讲述印度在该方面实施策略的逻辑；第四段讲述印度为改变发明专利方面现状采取的一些措施；第五段讲述严格的法律并没有明显效果；第六段讲述印度在发明专利方面还很落后；第七段讲述采取这样措施的弊端。
词汇注释：
nanometre n. 毫微米 heft n. 影响
laggard n. 落后者 cede v. 放弃
free-ride n. 不付出正常努力就能得到的东西
难句突破：
(1) Although China and India could devote their considerable intellectual resources to solving the problems faced by economies on the technological frontier, why cross that bridge until you reach it?
[主体句式] Although China and India could…why cross …
[结构分析]这是一个带有条件状语从句的复合句，条件状语从句中，devote…to…是一个固定结构，to后跟的是动名词；主句是一个反疑疑问句。
[句子译文] 尽管中国和印度能够投入他们可观的智力资源来解决经济在技术前沿遇到的经济问题，那为什么不在碰到问题时再跨越这座桥呢？
(2) Had Indian firms been prevented from copying fluoroquinolones, for example, the Indian public would have been worse off by the equivalent of $255m a year, reckons a study of the antibiotics market by Shubham Chaudhuri of the World Bank, Pinelopi Goldberg of Yale and Panle Jia of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[主体句式] …, reckons a study
[结构分析] 这是一个复合句，Had…$255m a year 这是reckons的宾语从句，该宾语从句是虚拟语气；a study 是句子的主语。
[句子译文] 比如根据世界银行的Shubham Chaudhuri、耶鲁大学的Pinelopi Goldberg以及麻省理工大学的Panle Jia做的一项关于抗生素市场的研究，如果禁止印度公司效仿氟硅酮，那么印度公众可能一年就要损失掉2亿550万美元。
题目分析：
[答案] C
[难度分析] ☆☆☆
[分析] 这是一个推理题。Arvind Atignal供职于临床研究公司，他做这样的类比应该是说明医药方面的情况，键盘、显示器只是外围的设备，核心是因特尔芯片。结合上文所说的印度制药业的情况，可以看出他做这样的类比是为了说明印度的制药业核心还不在自己手上，做的一些东西都是边缘化的。因此，选项C最为符合题意。至于B选项提到的核心技术，相应的段落没有具体集体，因此B是干扰选项。
[答案]D
[难度分析] ☆☆☆
[分析]推理题。文章第三段主要就是描述此类国家在技术创新方面的观点。他们认为，等到了确实需要的时候再进行研究，目前需要什么就研究什么，不要过于超前追求技术的创新。选项中，A、B选项正好和这个观点相反，C选项也和限制技术极限的观点相反，D选项符合这个观点，是正确答案。
[答案]B
[难度分析] ☆☆☆
[分析] 推理题。文章第四段讲述印度目前采取了一些措施想要改变技术创造的现状。首先提到，依据世贸组织相关知识产权协议，放弃了借鉴外国先进技术的权利。可以看出，是这项协定作用的结果，因此，答案为B选项，而其他三个选项的内容在第四段中都没有提到。
[答案] D
[难度分析] ☆☆☆☆
[分析]推理题。文章第六段中给出的数据可以明显看出，印度人在发明创造专利申请方面比起外国人来少之又少，而结合前面谈到的情况，可以得出印度在发明创造方面还远远不如外国人。因此，答案中D最为符合。A选项不正确是因为这些数据可能是在该法律实施前的数据；C只是表面的现象，深层次来讲还是印度发明创造落后这一原因。
[答案]A
[难度分析] ☆
[分析]态度题。这篇文章介绍了目前印度为改变技术创新方面的现状作了一些努力，但从后面的描述中可以看出这些举措还未成功，而且最后谈到这样的话印度损失很大。由此可以看出，作者对此的态度并不乐观，选项A最为符合。
参考译文：
中国制造电脑，但大部分芯片都是进口的。印度制药，但所有的配方都是抄来的；印度还编软件，但最后的成果却很少归他们所有。关于这三个行业的大胆设想都有相似的、空洞的性质。这些行业都很兴盛，但是却要依仗其他国家的技术。“我们还没到因特尔内核那个层面，”临床研究公司Clinigene的Arvind Atignal说道，他将电脑和医药进行了类比。“我们只不过是键盘、显示器和一些外围设备罢了。”
那么这有什么关系呢？中国芯片制造商SMIC的Joseph Xie 在因特尔公司工作了七年。他说，因特尔的策略很简单：“先到一个地方；赚一大部分钱；让第二个人得点零头。”这当然是运营科技公司的一种方法，但是这种竞争是昂贵的，也是耗人体力的。因特尔仅有的几个对手仍在追赶它，尽管是以毫微米的速度。
在影响、抱负方面与中国、印度不相上下的国家都希望能把科技的极限推回去，但是这种作法有一定风险、耗费财力且容易落空。一个国家如果不是迫不得已就不应该这样做。尽管中国和印度能够投入他们可观的智力资源来解决经济在技术前沿遇到的经济问题，那为什么不在碰到问题时再跨越这座桥呢？要这样看的话，印度生物制药商就是典范而不是落后者了。他们只用足够的专门技术去开发世界各地的发现。正是因为他们，印度人才能够享受世界上最便宜的药物。
根据世界贸易组织的相关知识产权协议，印度已经放弃了借鉴国外先进的权利。现在印度赋予1995年后孵化的发明20年的专利保护。希望从紧的法律可以激励印度人探索新发明，也让那些一直对在这个国家的发明创造充满戒心的外国人安心。
更为从紧的法律还未成功。不过世界银行的Bruce Abramson最近的一项研究表达了较高的期望。他报道说，在这个国家已经发现了“专利chic”。他曾听说印度农民打电话给律师，希望可以为他们得奖的蔬菜申请专利。
但是，这个新兴的国家还没有证实自己的价值。2004年至2005年，印度的专利使用权申请有17000多宗，比前一年多了几乎40%。但是其中只有3500宗是印度人申请的。在过去的十年里，49个最多产的专利申请机构中有44个或是外国公司、或是外国公司子公司。而这五家印度公司要不是政府资助的研究所，要不是生物制药公司，它们在TRIPS前做得很出色。
如果印度真的要这样做的话，这个国度运作起来就太耗费钱财了。但是更大的消耗在于印度目前放弃的模仿机会。这样丢失掉的机会可能很多。比如根据世界银行的Shubham Chaudhuri、耶鲁大学的Pinelopi Goldberg以及麻省理工大学的Panle Jia做的一项关于抗生素市场的研究，如果禁止印度公司效仿氟硅酮，那么印度公众可能一年就要损失掉2亿550万美元。
Thousands of writers in Los Angeles and New York went on strike this week, risking their incomes and careers. They want more money for their work when it is used online than Hollywood studios are willing to pay. Because the strike is over matters of principle, not just dollars and cents, it could last for months. The immediate effect was to shut down late-night talk shows, including “Late Show with David Letterman” and “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno”. If the last writers' strike, in 1988, is any guide, the talk shows will stay silent for a couple of months before going back on air without scripts. Soaps will be next to go, in a week or two; then prime-time dramas, a few weeks later. Some say the film business is safe, because studios have stockpiled scripts. But scripts often need tweaking by writers at the last minute.
Media companies argue that the market has become increasingly competitive and uncertain for many reasons, including internet piracy and tumbling box-office receipts. They want to cut writers' income from “residuals”, which are payments made when a TV show is re-used. The writers are determined not to repeat the mistake they made in 1985, when they listened to the studios' plea that home video was an unproven new market and agreed to a residual payment of 0.3%, which translates into about four cents for each sale of a DVD—or one-tenth of what DVD-box manufacturers get. The writers now want a residual payment of 2.5% for re-use of material online and on mobile phones.
The studios say that internet delivery is the same as home video, so the old rate still applies. And they refuse to pay anything to writers when content is streamed over the internet free to viewers, supported by ads, because this is merely “promotion”. Both sides made last-minute concessions on traditional-media payments. But because new-media rights are so critical to the future earnings of writers and studios, neither was willing to compromise.
Who will suffer the most? “The strike won't affect most studios unless the writers stay out three to five months,” says a senior executive at a media conglomerate. Because writers on reality and animation programmes are not unionised, the networks will be able to switch to other forms of programming; sport will fill the gaps, too. But Moody's, a credit-rating agency, reckons that a strike lasting into late 2008 would have a serious financial impact. Broadcast networks and premium-cable channels would be hurt most, because they rely most on first-run scripted shows.
Some writers, of course, are wealthy. “I'm walking the picket line with some guys who are worth millions,” says Lou DiMaggio, a reality- and game-show writer who won an Emmy award for “Win Ben Stein's Money”. But the vast majority of writers, he says, earn about $50,000-75,000 a year. Mr DiMaggio says he backed out of buying a house because of the strike; junior writers may have to go back to waiting tables. Luckily for Hollywood, however, most scribes are too devoted to their calling to be put off. Gary Goldman, a writer picketing outside Fox Studios who has worked on science-fiction thrillers such as “Minority Report”, says that many writers will spend their free time working on screenplays that they hope to sell to the studios on spec.
1. Which one of the following statements is TRUE of the strike?
[A] The mere aim of this strike is to increase writers’ income in general.
[B] The strike is mainly relevant the issue of scripts used on TV show and primary dramas.
[C] The strike will be effective only if it last for a long time.
[D] Whether the film industry will be affected by the strike or not is open to question.
2. The writers made a mistake in the strike of 1985 because_____
[A] the studio’s offer of payment increase was satisfactory.
[B] they readily believed the studios’ excuse out of a false judgment.
[C] the union failed to unite the majority of the writers.
[D] the market prospect of home video was not so competitive and uncertain.
3. In the end the writers and the studios made a compromise on_____
[A] the TV show payments.
[B] the payments of the online drama shows.
[C] the payments of the mobile phone shows.
[D] the payments of internet shows.
4. The word “unionised” (Line 3, Paragraph 4) most probably means_____
[A] united.
[B]organized.
[C] established.
[D] arranged.
5. The screenplays are written by the writers in their free time will be sold to the studios_____
[A] on a special offer.
[B] with no guarantee of profit.
[C] on special occasions.
[D] as a speculation.
文章剖析：
这篇文章介绍了目前美国编剧罢工的一些情况。第一段讲述罢工可能带来的后果；第二段讲述罢工的编剧们所提出的要求；第三段讲述目前达成的协议；第四段讲述制片商可能会受到的损失；第五段讲述编剧可能会受到的损失。
词汇注释：
script n. 剧本 tweak v. 调整
residual n. 电视片每次重映给演员[作者]的报酬
unionise v. 联合, 组合
难句突破：
(1) The writers are determined not to repeat the mistake they made in 1985, when they listened to the studios' plea that home video was an unproven new market and agreed to a residual payment of 0.3%, which translates into about four cents for each sale of a DVD—or one-tenth of what DVD-box manufacturers get.
[主体句式] The writers are determined not to repeat…
[结构分析] 这是一个复合句。宾语the mistake 后面跟着一个定语从句，该从句中的时间状语in 1985后跟着一个以when引导的定语从句，该定语从句为一个并列结构，在该从句中a residual payment of 0.3%，后面跟着以which引导的非限定性定语从句。
[句子译文] 而编剧们决心这次不再犯他们1985年犯过的错误了，当时他们听信了制片商的借口，说家庭录像还是一个未知的新市场，于是最终同意收取0.3%的重映费，这相当于每卖出一张DVD他们只能得4美分，这是DVD制造商所得的1/10。
(2) Gary Goldman, a writer picketing outside Fox Studios who has worked on science-fiction thrillers such as “Minority Report”, says that many writers will spend their free time working on screenplays that they hope to sell to the studios on spec.
[主体句式] Gary Goldman says that…
[结构分析] 这是一个复合句，主语带有一个同位语a writer…，该同位语中有一个以who引导的定语从句修饰a writer；在宾语从句中有一个以that引导的定语从句修饰screenplays。
[句子译文] Gary Goldman是在福克斯公司外工作的编剧，他曾经为科幻惊恐电影如“少数人报告”中工作过，他说许多编剧都会在业余时间里写电影剧本，他们希望可以碰碰运气看能否出售给制片商。
题目分析：
[答案]C
本文来源：https://www.2haoxitong.net/k/doc/07a39910bdd126fff705cc1755270722192e590f.html
文档为doc格式