TOEFL 托福 听力原创模拟题 10

NARRATOR: Listen to a conversation between a student and a professor. STUDENT: Hello, Professor Ingrid. Thank you for meeting with me during your office hours. PROFESSOR: Hello, Tomas. Come on in. You wanted to talk about your proposal for the environmental science paper, right? STUDENT: Yes. I submitted my initial topic draft online, but I got your email saying it was a bit too, uh, broad. I wanted to see how I can fix it. PROFESSOR: Right. Your proposal was on 'the global benefits of urban green spaces.' That is a wonderful topic for a whole textbook, but our assignment is a short research paper. Remember, the limit is strictly five pages. STUDENT: Ah, yes, five pages. I guess I got a little too excited about all the different examples. I wrote about parks in Europe, Asia, and South America. PROFESSOR: It is easy to do that! But for a five-page paper, you need a narrow focus. I suggest choosing just one local project. That way, you can analyze it in detail. STUDENT: Oh, that makes sense. Actually, I read that our university library just built a new rooftop garden. Could I write about that? PROFESSOR: Absolutely! That is a perfect case study. You can talk about the types of plants they used and how it helps insulate the building. It is local, and you can even go take photos yourself. STUDENT: That sounds much easier to manage. I can definitely write five pages on that. PROFESSOR: Excellent. Just make sure to submit the revised one-page proposal on our course website. The deadline for the revision is next Friday at five p.m. STUDENT: Next Friday at five. Got it. I will start working on the new proposal today. Thank you so much for your help! PROFESSOR: You are very welcome, Tomas. I look forward to reading it. [Q1] Why does the student go to see the professor?

中文翻译

旁白：听一段学生和教授之间的对话。 学生：您好，英格丽德教授。感谢您在答疑时间抽空见我。 教授：你好，托马斯。快请进。你想谈谈你的环境科学论文提案，对吧？ 学生：是的。我在网上提交了最初的主题草稿，但我收到您的邮件，说这个主题有点太……呃，宽泛了。我想来看看该怎么修改。 教授：没错。你的提案主题是“城市绿地的全球益处”。对于一整本教科书来说，这确实是个极好的主题，但我们的作业只是一篇短篇研究论文。记住，篇幅严格限制在五页以内。 学生：啊，是的，五页。我想我当时对那么多不同的案例太兴奋了。我写了欧洲、亚洲和南美洲的公园。 教授：这很容易理解！但对于一篇五页的论文，你需要缩小研究范围。我建议只选择一个本地的项目。这样，你就可以进行详细的分析。 学生：噢，这很有道理。其实我读到报道说，我们大学图书馆刚刚建了一个新的屋顶花园。我可以写那个吗？ 教授：当然可以！那是一个非常完美的案例研究。你可以探讨他们使用的植物类型，以及它如何帮助建筑物隔热。这是本地的项目，你甚至可以自己去拍照片。 学生：那听起来好驾驭多了。写五页这个内容绝对没问题。 教授：太好了。只需确保在我们的课程网站上提交修改后的一页提案即可。修改稿的截止日期是下周五下午五点。 学生：下周五五点。记住了。我今天就动手写新的提案。非常感谢您的帮助！ 教授：不客气，托马斯。我很期待阅读你的提案。 [Q1] 学生为什么去找教授？

(Shared with Q1.) [Q2] According to the professor, what was the problem with the student's initial proposal?

中文翻译

（与第1题共用。）[Q2] 根据教授的说法，该学生最初的研究计划有什么问题？

(Shared with Q1.) [Q3] What does the professor suggest the student do to improve his paper?

中文翻译

（与第1题共用音频。）[Q3] 教授建议学生怎么做来改进他的论文？

(Shared with Q1.) [Q4] What can be inferred about the student's new research paper?

中文翻译

（与第1题共用音频。）[第4题] 关于该学生的新研究论文，可以推断出什么？

(Shared with Q1.) [Replay: "Ah, yes, five pages. I guess I got a little too excited about all the different examples."] [Q5] Why does the student say this:

中文翻译

“啊，对，五页。我想我可能对那些各种各样的例子有点兴奋过头了。”

NARRATOR: Listen to part of a lecture in a biology class. PROFESSOR: Today we're going to talk about a fascinating aspect of plant ecology: plant-to-plant communication. Now, for a long time, people thought of plants as passive organisms, just sitting there getting eaten by insects. But we now know they have sophisticated defense systems. Specifically, we'll look at how plants use what we call volatile organic compounds, or VOCs. VOCs are airborne chemical signals that plants release into the atmosphere when they are damaged by herbivores—you know, plant-eating pests. PROFESSOR: When a caterpillar, say, starts chewing on a leaf, the plant doesn't just suffer in silence. It synthesizes and emits these VOCs. This triggers what biologists call an indirect defense. Instead of poisoning the herbivore directly, which would be a direct defense, the plant releases a specific chemical blend that acts like a distress signal. This signal attracts the natural enemies of that herbivore. For instance, when lima bean plants are attacked by spider mites, they release VOCs that specifically attract predatory mites, which then prey upon the spider mites. It's an elegant way of recruiting a bodyguard. STUDENT: So, the plant is basically calling for help? But does this signal also affect other plants nearby, or is it just meant for the predatory insects? PROFESSOR: That is the central question, Tomas. And the answer is yes, neighboring plants can 'eavesdrop' on these chemical signals. This leads to a phenomenon called priming. Priming is a physiological state in which a neighboring, undamaged plant detects the VOCs from a damaged neighbor and prepares its own defense systems, but without fully activating them right away. It's a way to get ready for an imminent attack without wasting precious energy on producing defensive toxins prematurely. PROFESSOR: Think of it like a home security system being set to 'high alert.' The alarm hasn't gone off, but the sensors are active. If a herbivore then attacks this primed plant, the plant can mount a defense much faster and much more strongly than an unprimed plant would. Now, why don't plants just keep these defenses turned on all the time? Well, synthesizing defensive chemicals requires a massive amount of metabolic energy—resources that would otherwise go toward growth, leaf development, or producing seeds. So priming is an elegant compromise: it saves energy while keeping the plant ready. PROFESSOR: To demonstrate this, researchers did a study with wild tobacco plants. They placed a damaged plant and a healthy plant in a controlled environment. The healthy neighbor exposed to the damaged plant's VOCs didn't immediately start producing nicotine—which is wild tobacco's primary defense toxin. Producing nicotine is incredibly energy-intensive. Instead, the neighbor simply primed its defense genes. But when researchers later introduced caterpillars to that primed neighbor, its nicotine production shot up... well, actually, it doubled within hours, much faster than in plants that hadn't been exposed to the VOCs. This confirmed that priming allows plants to conserve resources. PROFESSOR: Of course, this airborne communication isn't perfect. It can be heavily influenced by environmental factors. For example, strong winds can disperse VOCs too quickly, diluting the chemicals before neighboring plants can detect them. But under calm conditions, this chemical network can effectively protect entire plant communities. [Q6] What is the lecture mainly about?

中文翻译

旁白：听一段生物课讲座的片段。 教授：今天我们要讨论植物生态学中一个非常迷人的方面：植物之间的交流。长期以来，人们一直认为植物是处于被动状态的生物，只能呆在原地等着被昆虫吃掉。但我们现在知道，它们拥有复杂的防御系统。具体来说，我们将探讨植物如何利用我们所说的“挥发性有机化合物”（简称VOCs）。VOCs是植物在受到草食性动物（也就是食草害虫）伤害时，释放到空气中的化学信号。 教授：比方说，当一条毛毛虫开始咀嚼叶子时，植物并不会默默地承受痛苦。它会合成并释放这些VOCs。这会触发生物学家所说的“间接防御”。植物阻击草食性动物的方式并不是直接毒死它们（那是直接防御），而是释放一种特殊的混合化学物质，像求救信号一样。这种信号会吸引该草食性动物的天敌。例如，当利马豆植株受到叶螨袭击时，它们会释放专门吸引捕食性螨类的VOCs，然后这些捕食性螨类就会捕食叶螨。这是一种招募“保镖”的绝妙方式。 学生：所以，植物基本上是在呼救？但这种信号也会影响附近的其它植物吗，还是说它只是发给捕食性昆虫的？ 教授：这正是核心问题，托马斯。答案是肯定的，邻近的植物可以“窃听”这些化学信号。这会引发一种被称为“预警（priming）”的现象。预警是指邻近未受损的植物检测到受损邻居释放的VOCs，并开始准备自己的防御系统，但不会立即完全激活它的一种生理状态。这是一种为即将到来的攻击做好准备的方法，同时又不会因为过早产生防御性毒素而浪费宝贵的能量。 教授：把它想象成家用安防系统被设置为“高度戒备”状态。警报还没有拉响，但传感器已经激活。如果此后草食性动物攻击这株处于预警状态的植物，它就能比未处于预警状态的植物更快、更强烈地发起防御。那么，为什么植物不一直开启这些防御呢？因为合成防御性化学物质需要消耗大量的代谢能量——这些资源原本可以用于生长、叶片发育或产生种子。因此，预警是一种绝妙的折中方案：它既能节省能量，又能让植物保持戒备。 教授：为了证明这一点，研究人员对野生烟草植物进行了一项研究。他们将一株受损的植物和一株健康的植物放在受控环境中。暴露在受损植物VOCs中的健康邻近植物并没有立即开始产生尼古丁——这是野生烟草的主要防御毒素。产生尼古丁需要消耗极大的能量。相反，这株邻近植物只是启动了其防御基因。但当研究人员随后将毛毛虫引入那株处于预警状态的邻近植物时，它的尼古丁产量急剧上升……实际上，在几个小时内就翻了一番，比未暴露于VOCs的植物要快得多。这证实了预警能让植物保存资源。 教授：当然，这种空气传播的交流并不完美。它会受到环境因素的极大影响。例如，强风会过快地吹散VOCs，在邻近植物检测到它们之前就将其稀释了。但在无风的环境下，这种化学网络可以有效地保护整个植物群落。

(Shared with Q6.) [Q7] According to the professor, what is an indirect defense?

中文翻译

（与第6题共用听力材料。）[第7题] 根据教授的说法，什么是间接防御？

(Shared with Q6.) [Q8] According to the professor, what happens during the process of priming? Choose 2 answers.

中文翻译

（与第6题共享音频。）[第8题] 根据教授的说法，在“启动”（priming）过程中会发生什么？请选择两个答案。

(Shared with Q6.) [Q9] Why does the professor mention a home security system?

中文翻译

（与第6题共享）[第9题] 教授为什么提到家庭安全系统？

(Shared with Q6.) [Q10] According to the professor, what did the study on wild tobacco plants demonstrate?

中文翻译

（与第6题共享。）[第10题] 根据教授的说法，关于野生烟草植物的研究表明了什么？

(Shared with Q6.) [Replay: "shot up... well, actually, it doubled within hours"] [Q11] Why does the professor say this:

中文翻译

（与第6题相同。）[重放：“猛增……额，实际上，它在几个小时内就翻了一倍”] [第11题] 教授为什么说这句话：

NARRATOR: Listen to a conversation between a student and a registrar's office administrator. STAFF: Hi there. How can I help you today? STUDENT: Hi. Um, I'm hoping to graduate at the end of next semester, in the spring. But when I checked my online degree audit this morning, it says I'm still three credits short in my major electives. The thing is, I took a course last summer at another university—Global Environmental Policy— and I was under the impression that those credits had already transferred over. STAFF: Okay, let's take a look at your record... Sofia, right? Yes, I see your file here. I do see a note about the summer course, but the credits haven't been officially applied to your degree audit. Did you submit the Transfer Credit Pre-Approval Form before you took the class? STUDENT: Oh, uh, actually, no. I didn't know I needed to do that beforehand. I thought I could just send over the official transcript once the course was completed. Which I did, about a month... wait, actually, it was early August, so almost two months ago. STAFF: Ah, I see. That explains it. Ordinarily, students must file that pre-approval form so the academic department can verify that the external course matches our curriculum. Since you didn't do that, the system flagged it. But don't worry, it's not an uncommon mistake, and we can still resolve it. STUDENT: Oh, thank goodness. I was really worried I'd have to pay for another class next term or, worse, delay my graduation. What do I need to do to get it approved now? STAFF: You'll need to file a Retroactive Credit Petition. Basically, you'll fill out a form and attach the syllabus from the summer course you took. Then, you'll need to get a signature from the chair of your department—in your case, the Environmental Studies department—to confirm they accept the course content. Once they sign off, you bring the form back to us. STUDENT: Okay, that sounds manageable. I still have the syllabus saved on my computer. Is there a deadline for submitting this petition? STAFF: Yes, for spring graduation candidates, all transfer credit adjustments must be finalized by the end of October. Since we're already in mid-September, I'd suggest getting on this right away. Also, because this is a retroactive petition—meaning it's being filed after the course was completed without prior approval—there is a thirty-dollar administrative fee. STUDENT: A thirty-dollar fee? I guess that's fair, considering it was my oversight. Where do I pay that? Can I do it online? STAFF: You can pay it online through your student portal, or right downstairs at the bursar's window. If you do it online, just print out the receipt and attach it to your petition form when you submit it. Remember, we can't process the petition without that receipt. STUDENT: Got it. I'll download the petition form right now, email my department chair with the syllabus, and get this sorted out. Thanks so much for your help! STAFF: You're very welcome. Good luck with your final semesters! [Q12] Why does the student go to see the registrar's office administrator?

中文翻译

旁白：听一段学生和教务处工作人员之间的对话。 老师：嗨，你好。今天有什么可以帮你的？ 学生：你好。嗯，我希望在下学期末，也就是明年春天毕业。但今天早上我查看在线毕业学分审核时，上面显示我的专业选修课还差三个学分。问题是，我去年夏天在另一所大学修了一门课——《全球环境政策》，我一直以为这些学分已经转过来了。 老师：好的，让我们看看你的记录……索菲亚，对吧？是的，我看到你的档案了。我确实看到了关于这门暑期课程的记录，但这些学分还没有正式计入你的毕业学分审核中。你在修这门课之前提交过《转学分预审批表》吗？ 学生：噢，呃，实际上没有。我不知道需要提前做这个。我以为修完课之后直接把官方成绩单寄过来就行了。我也确实寄了，大概一个月……不对，其实是八月初寄的，所以差不多是两个月前。 老师：啊，我明白了。这就说得通了。通常情况下，学生必须提交预审批表，以便学术部门核实校外课程是否与我们的课程大纲相匹配。因为你没有这样做，所以系统拦截了它。不过别担心，这种错误挺常见的，我们还是可以解决的。 学生：噢，谢天谢地。我真的很担心下学期还得再掏钱多上一门课，或者更糟的是延迟毕业。我现在需要做什么才能让它通过审批？ 老师：你需要提交一份《追溯学分申请表》。简单来说，你需要填写一张表格，并附上你修读的暑期课程的大纲。然后，你需要让你所在学部的负责人——也就是环境研究学部的主任签字，以确认他们认可该课程内容。一旦他们签字同意，你再把表格交回给我们。 学生：好的，听起来还可以搞定。我的电脑里还保存着课程大纲。提交这份申请有截止日期吗？ 老师：有的，对于春季毕业的候选人，所有转学分调整必须在10月底前最终确定。现在已经是9月中旬了，我建议你立即着手办理。另外，因为这是追溯申请——也就是说是在课程结束后且未经事先批准的情况下提交的——所以需要缴纳30美元的手续费。 学生：30美元的手续费？我想这也合理，毕竟是我的疏忽。我在哪里缴费？可以网上支付吗？ 老师： You可以通过学生门户网站在线支付，或者直接到楼下的财务窗口支付。如果你在线支付，只需打印出收据，并在提交申请表时附在上面。记住，没有收据我们是无法受理申请的。 学生：明白了。我现在就去下载申请表，给学部主任发邮件附上课程大纲，把这事解决掉。非常感谢您的帮助！ 老师：不客气。祝你最后一个学期顺利！

(Shared with Q12.) [Q13] According to the administrator, why were the student's summer credits not automatically applied to her degree audit?

中文翻译

（与第12题共用音频。）[第13题] 根据教务老师的说法，为什么该学生的暑期学分没有自动计入她的学位审核中？

(Shared with Q12.) [Q14] What can be inferred about the student's attitude regarding the thirty-dollar administrative fee?

中文翻译

（与第12题共用音频。）[第14题] 关于这笔30美元的行政费用，可以推断出该学生持有什么态度？

(Shared with Q12.) [Q15] Why does the administrator mention the end of October?

中文翻译

（与第12题共用音频。）[第15题] 管理员为什么要提到十月底？

(Shared with Q12.) [Replay: "Ah, I see. That explains it. Ordinarily, students must file that pre-approval form so the academic department can verify that the external course matches our curriculum."] [Q16] Why does the speaker say this:

中文翻译

（与第12题共用。）[重放：“啊，我明白了。原来是这样。通常情况下，学生必须提交预审表，以便院系核实校外课程是否与我们的课程设置相匹配。”]

NARRATOR: Listen to part of a lecture in an environmental science class. PROFESSOR: Welcome back, everyone. Today, we're going to dive into a phenomenon that occurs right above our heads but is often completely invisible to the naked eye: atmospheric gravity waves. Now, before we proceed, let's make a critical distinction. Do not confuse atmospheric gravity waves with gravitational waves. The latter are ripples in spacetime from massive cosmic events like colliding black holes—that's astrophysics. Atmospheric gravity waves, on the other hand, are physical oscillations in our atmosphere. They are generated when a parcel of air is forced upward—say, by a mountain range—and gravity, or rather buoyancy, acts as a restoring force, pulling it back down, causing it to oscillate. PROFESSOR: For these waves to exist, we need stable stratification. This is an atmospheric condition where warmer, less dense air sits on top of colder, denser air. If a wind pushes cold air up into the warm layer, it's denser than its surroundings, so gravity pulls it back down. As it sinks, it overshoots, gets too warm, and buoyancy pushes it back up. This back-and-forth motion propagates horizontally as a wave. STUDENT: So, is it like throwing a pebble into a pond, but in the air? PROFESSOR: Exactly, Yuki. The mountain acts as the pebble, and the air acts as the water surface. In meteorology, we call these mountain-induced disturbances 'orographic gravity waves.' Now, these waves are not just local curiosities. They play a massive role in global climate systems. When these waves propagate upward into the mesosphere—that's about fifty to eighty-five kilometers up—they eventually 'break,' much like ocean waves crashing on a beach. When they break, they transfer momentum to the background flow. This momentum deposition acts as a drag, slowing down the powerful jet streams or even driving the global atmospheric circulation from the equator to the poles. PROFESSOR: Here's the catch: because these waves are relatively small, often just a few kilometers in horizontal scale, they are what we call 'sub-grid scale.' This means they are too small to be directly resolved by our global climate models, which divide the Earth into a grid of squares that are typically tens of kilometers wide. So, if a climate model can't 'see' these waves, it will miscalculate wind speeds and temperature distributions globally. To fix this, meteorologists must use 'parameterization'—which is a method of representing the simplified, average effects of these small-scale processes based on larger, resolvable variables. PROFESSOR: Let's look at a specific consequence when we fail to parameterize them correctly. In the winter, the polar vortex—the cold ring of winds around the poles—is highly sensitive to wave drag. Without proper parameterization of gravity waves generated by the Rocky Mountains or the Himalayas, models would predict an unrealistically strong polar vortex, leading to completely inaccurate winter weather forecasts for mid-latitudes. PROFESSOR: Another fascinating aspect is 'wave ducting.' This happens when a gravity wave gets trapped in a stable layer of the atmosphere, sandwiched between the ground and a higher layer of unstable air. Instead of propagating upward and dispersing its energy into the upper atmosphere, the wave is channeled horizontally, travel—uh, travelling thousands of kilometers without losing much intensity. This can lead to unexpected, severe windstorms far away from the mountains that originally generated the wave. We've seen this happen in the lee of the Rocky Mountains, where ducted waves suddenly surface as destructive wind gusts in the plains. [Q17] What is the lecture mainly about?

中文翻译

旁白：听一段环境科学课上的讲座片段。 教授：大家欢迎回来。今天，我们将深入探讨一个发生在我们头顶上方、但肉眼通常完全看不见的现象：大气重力波。在继续之前，我们先做一个关键的区别。不要把“大气重力波”与“引力波”混淆。后者是黑洞碰撞等巨大宇宙事件引起的时空涟漪——那是天体物理学的范畴。而大气重力波则是我们大气层中的物理振荡。当一团空气被强行推高（比如受到山脉的阻挡）时，就会产生这种波。此时重力（更准确地说是浮力）作为恢复力将其拉回，从而引发振荡。 教授：要产生这些波动，我们需要“稳定分层”。这是一种大气状态，即温度较高、密度较小的空气位于温度较低、密度较大的空气之上。如果风将冷空气推入暖空气层，由于它比周围空气密度大，重力会把它拉回来。在下落过程中，它会因为惯性而超过原位置，变得过热，随后浮力又把它往上推。这种来回往复的运动就会作为波动水平传播开来。 学生：所以，这就像往池塘里扔石子，只不过是发生在空气中？ 教授：完全正确，由纪。山脉就像是那颗石子，而空气就像是水面。在气象学中，我们把这种由山脉引起的扰动称为“地形重力波”。这些波动可不仅仅是局部地区的奇特现象，它们在全球气候系统中发挥着巨大的作用。当这些波动向上传播到中间层（大约50到85公里高空）时，它们最终会“破碎”，就像海浪拍打沙滩一样。当它们破碎时，会向背景气流传递动量。这种动量沉降起到了阻力的作用，减缓了强劲的急流，甚至推动了从赤道到两极的全球大气环流。 教授：但问题在于：因为这些波动的规模相对较小，水平尺度通常只有几公里，所以它们属于我们所说的“次网格尺度”。这意味着它们太小了，无法被我们的全球气候模型直接解析，因为这些模型将地球划分为通常有几十公里宽的网格。因此，如果气候模型“看不到”这些波动，它就会错误地计算全球的风速和温度分布。为了解决这个问题，气象学家必须使用“参数化”方法——这是一种根据可解析的大尺度变量，来表示这些小尺度过程简化后的平均效应的方法。 教授：让我们来看看如果未能正确进行参数化会带来什么具体后果。在冬季，极地涡旋（环绕极地的寒冷风环）对波阻力高度敏感。如果不对落基山脉或喜马拉雅山脉产生的重力波进行合理的参数化，模型预测出的极地涡旋就会异常强劲，从而导致对中纬度地区冬季天气预报的彻底失真。 教授：另一个迷人的现象是“波导”。当重力波被困在大气的稳定层中，夹在地面 and 更高层的物理不稳定空气之间时，就会发生这种情况。这种波不会向上传播并将其能量分散到高层大气中，而是被水平导向传输，可以——呃，传播数千公里而不会损失太多强度。这可能会在远离最初产生波动的山脉的地方，引发意想不到的严重暴风雨。我们已经在落基山脉的背风坡看到了这种情况，在那里，导向波会突然在平原地区露头，形成具有破坏性的阵风。

(Shared with Q17.) [Q18] According to the professor, what is required for atmospheric gravity waves to form?

中文翻译

（与第17题共用听力文本。）[第18题] 根据教授的说法，大气重力波的形成需要什么条件？

(Shared with Q17.) [Q19] Why does the professor mention the polar vortex?

中文翻译

（与第17题共用听力文本。）[Q19] 教授为什么要提到极地涡旋？

(Shared with Q17.) [Q20] Based on the discussion of wave ducting, what is a primary danger associated with this phenomenon?

中文翻译

（与第17题共享。）[第20题] 根据对波导现象的讨论，与该现象相关的主要危害是什么？

(Shared with Q17.) [Q21] What can be inferred about global climate models that do not use parameterization for gravity waves?

中文翻译

（与第17题共享音频。）[第21题] 对于不使用重力波参数化的全球气候模型，可以推断出什么？

(Shared with Q17.) [Replay: "Now, before we proceed, let's make a critical distinction. Do not confuse atmospheric gravity waves with gravitational waves."] [Q22] Why does the professor say this:

中文翻译

（与第17题共用）[重放：“好，在继续往下讲之前，我们先做一个关键的区分。不要把‘大气重力波’和‘引力波’搞混了。”]

NARRATOR: Listen to part of a lecture in a linguistics class. PROFESSOR: Today, we’re going to challenge a long-held assumption in cognitive psychology and linguistics: the idea that human beings are, well, universally terrible at naming smells. For decades, researchers argued that our olfactory system has a weak connection to our language centers. If I ask you to describe the scent of, say, gasoline, you’ll probably say 'it smells like gasoline' or 'it's chemical-like'. This is what we call source-based naming—identifying an odor by referring directly to the object that produces it. Actually, wait, you might also say 'it's sharp,' which is a metaphor, but it's still not a dedicated smell word. In English, and indeed in most Western languages, we almost completely lack abstract odor terms. An abstract odor term, by definition, is a word that describes a smell itself, independent of any source object, in the same way 'blue' describes a color without referring to the sky or a blueberry. PROFESSOR: Now, is this limitation a biological truth of the human brain? Well, recent fieldwork suggests otherwise. Let's look at the Jahai people, a hunter-gatherer group living in the Malay Peninsula. Researchers tested Jahai speakers and English speakers on their ability to name both colors and smells. They measured what linguists call codability—that is, the ease and consistency with which speakers of a language can identify a stimulus. If ten people look at a red square, and they all immediately say 'red', that stimulus has high codability. PROFESSOR: For English speakers, color codability was extremely high, but odor codability was, well, quite poor—actually, abysmal is a more accurate term. They used long, hesitant descriptions, and rarely agreed on a label. But for the Jahai? Their agreement on odors was just as high and instantaneous as their agreement on colors. Why? Because the Jahai language has a rich set of about a dozen abstract, basic words for smells. For example, they have a word, ltpɨt, which refers to a pleasant, sweet smell associated with certain ripe fruits, flowers, and even some species of insects. It doesn't mean 'banana' or 'wasp'; it describes the quality of the scent itself. STUDENT: Excuse me, Professor. Could this linguistic difference just be because the Jahai live in a tropical rainforest with more, you know, rich botanical smells than a typical city? PROFESSOR: That's a very logical hypothesis, and indeed, environmental exposure does play a role. But it isn't the whole story. Even when English speakers are highly trained—like professional wine tasters or perfumers—they still rely heavily on source-based language, like 'notes of leather' or 'citrus'. They don't magically invent abstract, non-source-based terms. So, it's not just about expertise or the density of odors in the environment; it is a structural property of the language itself. This suggests that our cognitive architecture—the way our minds organize sensory data—is far more flexible than we once thought. It means our inability to name smells is a cultural and linguistic trait, not an evolutionary hardware limitation. PROFESSOR: This brings us to the broader implications for the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, or linguistic relativity. This hypothesis, as you might recall, suggests that the structure of a language influences its speakers' non-linguistic cognitive processes. In the case of the Jahai, having these dedicated smell words seems to make them much more adept at discriminating between subtle scent variations. They aren't just better at talking about smells; they actually process olfactory information differently, categorizing and remembering scents with a precision that English speakers struggle to match. [Q23] What is the lecture mainly about?

中文翻译

旁白：请听一段语言学课上的讲座片段。 教授：今天，我们要挑战认知心理学和语言学中一个长期存在的假设：即人类普遍不擅长命名气味。几十年来，研究人员一直认为我们的嗅觉系统与语言中心的联系非常微弱。如果我让你描述比如汽油的气味，你可能会说“闻起来像汽油”或者“有股化学品味”。这就是我们所说的“基于源头的命名法”——即通过直接提及产生气味的物体来识别气味。实际上，等等，你可能还会说“它很刺鼻”，这是一个比喻，但它仍然不是一个专门描述气味的词。在英语中，事实上在大多数西方语言中，我们几乎完全缺乏抽象的气味词汇。根据定义，抽象气味词是指描述气味本身的词，它独立于任何源物体，就像“蓝色”描述一种颜色，而不需要指代天空或蓝莓一样。 教授：那么，这种局限性是人类大脑的生理事实吗？最近的实地考察表明事实并非如此。让我们来看看生活在马来半岛的狩猎采集群体——雅海族人。研究人员测试了雅海语母语者和英语母语者命名颜色和气味的能力。他们测量了语言学家所说的“可编码性”——即一种语言的说话者识别某种刺激的难易程度和一致性。如果十个人看着一个红色方块，并且都立即说出“红色”，那么这种刺激就具有很高的可编码性。 教授：对于英语母语者来说，颜色的可编码性极高，但气味的可编码性却相当差——实际上，用“糟糕透顶”来形容更准确。他们使用了冗长、犹豫不决的描述，而且很少在标签上达成一致。但是对于雅海人呢？他们对气味命名的一致性和迅速程度，与他们对颜色命名的一致性一样高。为什么？因为雅海语中有一套丰富的、大约十几个专门用于描述气味的抽象基本词汇。例如，他们有一个词叫 ltpɨt，指的是一种与某些成熟水果、花朵甚至某些昆虫相关的怡人甜香。它并不意味着“香蕉”或“黄蜂”，而是描述气味本身的特征。 学生：打扰一下，教授。这种语言上的差异，会不会仅仅是因为雅海人生活在热带雨林中，那里的植物气味比典型城市要丰富得多？ 教授：这是一个非常符合逻辑的假设，确实，环境暴露也起到了一定的作用。但这并不是全部的原因。即使是经过高度训练的英语母语者——比如专业的品酒师或调香师——他们仍然严重依赖基于源头的语言，比如“皮革的香调”或“柑橘味”。他们并不会神奇地发明出抽象的、非基于源头的词汇。所以，这不仅仅是专业知识或环境中气味浓度的问题，而是语言本身的一种结构属性。这表明我们的认知架构——即我们大脑组织感官数据的方式——比我们以前想象的要灵活得多。这意味着我们无法命名气味是一种文化和语言特征，而不是进化上的硬件限制。 教授：这就引出了对萨丕尔-沃尔夫假设（即语言相对论）更广泛的启示。大家可能还记得，这一假设认为语言的结构会影响说话者的非语言认知过程。就雅海人而言，拥有这些专门的气味词汇似乎使他们更擅长区分细微的气味变化。他们不仅更擅长谈论气味，而且实际上以不同的方式处理嗅觉信息，以英语母语者难以企及的精确度对气味进行分类和记忆。

(Shared with Q23.) [Q24] According to the professor, what distinguishes an abstract odor term from source-based naming?

中文翻译

（与第23题共享音频。）[第24题] 根据教授的说法，抽象气味词汇与基于来源的命名方式有什么区别？

(Shared with Q23.) [Q25] According to the lecture, what did researchers discover when comparing English speakers and Jahai speakers? Choose 2 answers.

中文翻译

（与第23题共用音频。）[Q25] 根据讲座内容，研究人员在对比英语使用者和雅哈伊语（Jahai）使用者时发现了什么？选择2个答案。

(Shared with Q23.) [Q26] Why does the professor mention professional wine tasters and perfumers?

中文翻译

（与第23题共用音频。）[Q26] 教授为什么提到专业品酒师和调香师？

(Shared with Q23.) [Q27] What does the professor imply about the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis?

中文翻译

（与第23题共用音频。）[Q27] 关于萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说，教授暗示了什么？

(Shared with Q23.) [Replay: "For English speakers, color codability was extremely high, but odor codability was, well, quite poor—actually, abysmal is a more accurate term."] [Q28] Why does the professor say this:

中文翻译

（与第23题共享。）[重放：“对于英语使用者而言，颜色的可编码性极高，但气味的可编码性，怎么说呢，相当低——事实上，用‘糟糕透顶’来形容更加准确。”]