2009 年度英語読解力及び聴解力考査＊ ICU に入学を希望する受験生の学習のために公開している資料です。
ICU 公式の試験問題用紙ではありません。
(This is NOT the official Exam.)No.000001

受験番号

英語

係りの指示があるまでは絶対に中を開けないこと
英語の試験は初めにリスニング、次に読解の順序で行います。読解の指示は、リスニングが終わった後で行います。
リス二ングの指示
0.

(今年度から問題冊子の科目名が「英語」になっています。)

1.

リスニングには、PART I，Ⅱ，Ⅲの 3 つがあります。

2.

各 PART が始まる前に、日本語で説明をします。注意して聞いてください｡

3.

問題冊子には、問いと、4 つの答えが選択肢として与えられています。その中から最も適当と思われる答えを 1 つ選んで、解答カードの相当欄を鉛筆で塗ってください。

4.

各 PART が終わったら、音声による指示があるまで、次のページを開けないで待っていてください。

5.

PART I では 10 の短い会話を聞きます。それぞれの会話についての闘いに答えてください。

6.

PART II では PART I より長めの会話を 2 つ聞きます。それぞれの会話についての問いに答えてください。

7. PARTⅢでは長めの講義を 3 つ聞きます。講義の内容について、それぞれ 5 つの問に答えてください。

「受験番号」を解答用カードの定められたところに忘れずに書きいれること

2009

ENG
Edited by BUCHO.NETENG
1− 136 −ENG
2− 137 −ENG
3− 138 −ENG
4− 139 −ENG
5− 140 −ENG
6− 141 −ENG
7− 142 −ENG
8− 143 −ENG
9− 144 −ENG
10− 145 −PART 1
Text 1
1.

To understand why nutrition science has been so spectacularly wrong about dietary fatand health, itʹs important to realize that doing nutrition science isnʹt easy. In fact, itʹs a lotharder than most nutrition scientists realize or at least are willing to admit. For one thing,
the scientific tools available are in many ways poorly suited to the task of understanding
systems as complex as food and diet. The assumptions of nutritionism—such as the ideathat a food is not a system but rather the sum of its nutrient parts—cause further difficulties.
We like to think that scientists are free from biased assumptions, but of course they are asbiased as the rest of us.

2.

The confusion begins with isolating the nutrient. Most nutritional science involves
studying one nutrient at a time, a seemingly unavoidable approach that even nutritionists
will tell you is deeply flawed. ʺThe problem with nutrient‐by‐nutrient analysis,ʺ points out
one researcher, ʺis that it takes the nutrient out of the context of the food, the food out of thecontext of the diet, and the diet out of the context of the lifestyle.ʺ

3.

If nutrition scientists know this, why do they still do it? Because bias is part of how
science is done. All scientists study variables they can isolate; if they canʹt isolate the parts,
they wonʹt be able to tell whether a certain variableʹs presence or absence is meaningful. Yet
even the simplest food, a carrot, for example, is a hopelessly complicated thing to analyze; it
has a wide variety of chemical compounds, many of which exist in intricate and dynamic
relation to one another, constantly changing from one state to another. So if youʹre anutrition scientist you do the only thing you can do with the available tools: Break the fooddown into its separate parts and study those one by one, even if such study ignores subtle
interactions and contexts, and the fact that the whole carrot may be more than, or merely
different from, the sum of its parts.

4.

Such scientific reductionism is an undeniably powerful concept, but it can mislead us too,
especially when applied to something as complex as food, on the one hand, and the humaneater, on the other.

5.

Itʹs wise to remind ourselves that what nutrition science manages to perceive well enoughto isolate and study is undergoing almost continual change, and that we have a tendency toassume that what we can see is the important element to look at. The vast attention paid tocholesterol since the 1950s, for example, is largely the result of the fact that for a long timecholesterol was the only factor linked to heart disease that we had the scientific tools tomeasure. This is sometimes called parking‐lot science, after the legendary fellow who loses
his keys in a parking lot and goes looking for them under the streetlight—not because thatʹswhere he lost them, but because thatʹs where it is easiest to see.

6.

The good news, however, is that we donʹt need to understand the complexity of a carrot
in order to benefit from it.
* From In Defense of Food by Michael Pollan, Penguin Books Ltd.

ENG
11bucho.net

31.

The main purpose of this text is toa. demonstrate that health warnings are often wrong.
b. illustrate a particular weakness of nutrition science.
c. suggest we are too skeptical of scientific research.
d. encourage people to improve their diets.

32. The word ʺspectacularlyʺ underlined in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to which of thefollowing?
a. consistently
b. unexpectedly
c. remarkably
d. unnoticeably
33. What does paragraph 1 imply about scientists?
a. They may be less objective than they believe.
b. They make the subject of their study too complex.
c. They may have a financial motive for their research.
d. They do not work as hard as they think they do.
34. The phrase ʺdeeply flawedʺ underlined in paragraph 2 is closest in meaning to which of thefollowing?
a. widely practiced
b. very mistakenc. highly complex
d. rather unique
35. Which of the following can be inferred from the quotation of the researcher in paragraph 2?
a. Nutrition research is overly simple.
b. Lifestyle inevitably determines diet.
c. Food ought to be more nutritious.
d. Health depends upon food, diet, and lifestyle.
36. The weakness in nutrition research described in paragraph 3 could best be compared toa. mixing too many chemicals in one experiment.
b. studying a plant independently from its eco‐system.
c. cutting down trees when attempting to examine a forest.
d. using kitchen tools to try to build a house.
37. From the discussion in the text, the term ʺscientific reductionismʺ underlined in paragraph 4
can be understood to meana. eliminating variables.
b. developing hypotheses.
c. predicting outcomes.
d. generalizing results.

ENG
12

38. According to paragraph 5, cholesterol has been so extensively researched because
a. it is the only factor that is linked to heart disease.
b. it can be easily eliminated from a personʹs diet.
c. it was possible to identify and measure it.
d. it shed light on a crucial health risk.
39. The expression ʺparking‐lot scienceʺ underlined in paragraph 5 suggests thata. solutions can be found outside the laboratory.
b. like all of us, scientists sometimes lose their way.
c. scientists need key insights to guide their research.
d. scientists sometimes err in focusing on the most obvious factor.
40. What is the function of paragraph 6?
a. To contradict the writerʹs main point
b. To summarize the writerʹs argumentc. To emphasize the shortcomings of nutrition scienced. To soften the writerʹs criticism of nutrition scienceENG
13bucho.net

ENG
14− 147 −ENG
15− 148 −ENG
16− 149 −ENG
17− 150 −ENG
18− 151 −