A.P = a premise marker

B.C = a conclusion marker

C.A = an assuring term

D.G = a guarding term

E.D = a discounting term

F.E+ = a positive evaluative term

G.E- = a negative evaluative term

H.N = none of the above

正确答案：D = a discounting term

12、Please indicate the main function of the word that is in boldface in the following passage.More than one letter might be acceptable， but you must choose only one option as the best.；From Steven Jay Gould— "；The Panda’s Thumb"；：...The message is paradoxical but profound.Orchids manufacture their intricate devices from the common components of ordinary flowers， parts usually fitted for very different functions.If God had designed a beautiful machine to reflect his wisdom and power， surely he would not have used a collection of parts generally fashioned for other purposes.Orchids were not made by an ideal engineer； they are jury-rigged from a limited set of available components.Thus， they must have evolved from ordinary flowers.Thus the paradox and the common theme of this trilogy of essays：Our textbooks like to illustrate evolution with examples of optimal design—nearly perfect mimicry of a dead leaf by a butterfly or of a poisonous species by a palatable relative.However， ideal design is a lousy argument for evolution， for it mimics the postulated action of an omnipotent creator.Odd arrangements and funny solutions are the proof of evolution—paths that a sensible God would never tread but that a natural process， constrained by history， follows perforce.

A.P = a premise marker

B.C = a conclusion marker

C.A = an assuring term

D.G = a guarding term

E.D = a discounting term

F.E+ = a positive evaluative term

G.E- = a negative evaluative term

H.N = none of the above

正确答案：G = a guarding term

13、Please indicate the main function of the word that is in boldface in the following passage.More than one letter might be acceptable， but you must choose only one option as the best.；From Steven Jay Gould—"；The Panda’s Thumb"；：；...The message is paradoxical but profound.Orchids manufacture their intricate devices from the common components of ordinary flowers， parts usually fitted for very different functions.If God had designed a beautiful machine to reflect his wisdom and power， surely he would not have used a collection of parts generally fashioned for other purposes.Orchids were not made by an ideal engineer； they are jury-rigged from a limited set of available components.Thus， they must have evolved from ordinary flowers.Thus the paradox and the common theme of this trilogy of essays：Our textbooks like to illustrate evolution with examples of optimal design—nearly perfect mimicry of a dead leaf by a butterfly or of a poisonous species by a palatable relative.However， ideal design is a lousy argument for evolution， for it mimics the postulated action of an omnipotent creator.Odd arrangements and funny solutions are the proof of evolution—paths that a sensible God would never tread but that a natural process， constrained by history， follows perforce.