[福建]2023厦门银行社会招聘笔试参考题库答案详解.docx

[福建]2023厦门银行社会招聘笔试参考题库答案详解（图片大小可自由调整）第1卷一.单项选择题(共50题)1.大众传媒应该成为真正公共讨论的______，让纷纭繁复的表象在充分讨论中______出真实的逻辑，让各种观念在交锋和沟通中______出共识填入画横线部分最恰当的一项是（　　）A.平台　浮现　碰撞B.空间　呈现　撞击C.课题　展现　达成D.界面　涌现　获得答案：A 本题解析：首先，第一空中，大众传媒成为“课题”或“界面”，搭配不当，而且由“交锋”和“沟通”可推断出，第三空填“碰撞”最合适，第二空填“浮现”也合适2.一次足球赛，有A、B、C、D四队参加，每两队都赛一场，按规则，胜一场得2分，平一场得1分，负一场得0分比赛结果，C队得5分，A队得3分，D队得l分所有场次共进了9个球，C队进球最多，进了4个球，A队共失了3个球，B队一个球也没进，D队与A队比分是2：3，则D队与C队的比分是多少?A.0：0B.0：1C.0：3D.3：2答案：C 本题解析：四队共赛C2=6场，每一场两队得分之和都是2分，则B队得分为6×2—5—3—1=3分，由于B队一个球没进．必是与其他三队打平。

C队得5分，必是胜2场、平1场；D队得l分，必是平1场、负2场；D队与A队比分是2：3，A队必是胜l场、平l场、负1场D队与A队比赛时，A队进了3个球，D队进了2个球，这一场共进了5个球，C队进球数是4，合起来共3+2+4=9个球，因而A、D两队只在A、D两队比赛中进了球，而在其他场比赛中没进球C队与8队比分是O：o，C队进的4个球必是与A队或D队比赛时进的，因为A队失3个球，在与D队比赛时失了2个球，因此与C队比赛时失1个球，这样A队与C队比分是0：1，于是在C队与D队比赛中，C队进了3个球D队没有进球，所以D队与C队的比分是0：3，应选择C3.某市2005年就该市城镇居民和农民参加体育锻炼及其影响因素，开展了一项调查调查结束后按城乡、性别分别进行了统计，统计结果如下两张表所示无法从表1、表2获得支持的判断是（ ）A.农民对体育锻炼的不恰当看法和认识更普遍一些B.与城镇居民相比，农民参加体育锻炼的项目比较单调C.在全民健身方面，培养农民参加体育锻炼的兴趣可能比城镇居民更迫切D.男性因工作压力放弃体育锻炼的更多一些，而女性因家务压力放弃体育锻炼更多一些答案：D 本题解析：B、C选项均容易判断，A选项并不好判断，但是D选项的后半句明显错误，因为女性因家务压力放弃体育锻炼的百分比比男性低，直接选出这个选项即可。

4. 中外学者一致认为 , 划分货币层次的重要依据是金融资产的 ( ) A.稳定性B.还原性C.兑换性D.流动性答案：D 本题解析：暂无解析5.下列外国作家、作品、作者国籍对应错误的一项是（ ）A.海明威——《老人与海》——美国B.但丁——《神曲》——意大利C.狄更斯——《双城记》——德国D.司汤达——《红与黑》——法国答案：C 本题解析：《双城记》的作者是著名的英国小说家查尔斯?狄更斯，他生活在英国由 半封建社会向工业资本主义社会的过渡时期其作品广泛而深刻地描写这时期社会生活的各 个方面，鲜明而生动地刻画了各阶层的代表人物形象《双城记》这部小说深刻地揭露了法国 大革命煎深深激化了的社会矛盾，强烈地抨击贵族阶级的荒淫残暴，并深切地同情下层人民的苦难创作动机在于借古讽今，以法囯大革命的历史经验为借鉴，给英国统治阶级敲响警钟 C项作者国籍错误；A、B、D三项对应均准确无误故本题答案为C6.Russian really is hard for lcarners, and a casual comparison might serve the conclusion that big, prestigious languages like Russian are complex. Just look, after all, at their rich, technical vocabularies, and the complex industrial societies that they serve.But linguists who have compared languages systematically are struck by the opposite conclusion.This is largely because linguists, unlike laypeople, focus on grammar, not vocabulary,Consider Berik, spoken in a few villages in eastern Papua. It may not have a word for“supernova”, but it drips with complex rules: a mandatory verb ending tells what time of day the action occurred, and another indicates the size of the direet object. Ofcourse these things can be said in English, but Berik requires them. Remote socictics may be materially simplc;“primitive”", their languages are not.Systematically so: a study in 2010 of thousands of tongucs found that smaller languages have more Berik-style grammatical bits and pieces attached to words. By contrast, bigger ones tend to be like English or Mandarin, in which words change their form lttle ifat all. No one knows why, but a likely culprit is the very scale and ubiquity of such widely travelled languages.As a language spreads, more foreigners come to learn it as adults (thanks to conquest and trade, for example). Since languages are more complex than they need to be, many of those adult learners will- Stalin-style- ignore some of the niceties where they can. If those newcomers have children, the children will often learn a slightly simpler version of the language from their parents.But a new study, conducted at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics at Nijmegen in the Netherlands, has found that it is not entirely foreigners and their sloppy ways that are to blame for languages becoming simpler. Merely being bigger was enough. The researchers, Limor Raviv, Antje Meyer and Shiri Lev-Ari, asked 12 groups of four strangers and 12 groups of eight to invent languages to describe a group of moving shapes on the screen. They were told that the goal was to rack up points for communicating successfully over 16 rounds. (They“talked" by keyboard and were forbidden to use their native language, Dutch.)Over time both big and small groups got better at making themselves understood,but the bigger ones did so by crcating more systematic languages as they interacted,with fewer idiosyncrasies. The rescarchers suppose that this is because the members of the larger groups had fewer interactions with each other member, this put pressureon them to come up with clear patterns. Smaller groups could afford quirkierlanguages, because their members got to“know”cach other better.Ncither the more systematic nor the more idiosyncratic languages were“better",given group size: the small and large groups communicated equally well. But the work provides evidence that an idiosyncratic language is best suited to a small group with rich shared history, As the language spreads, it nceds to become morepredictablc.Taken with previous studies, the new research offers a two-part answer to why grammar rules are built- and lost. As groups grow, the need for 。