[9급 국가직 영어] 05년 1회차 기출문제 정답·해설 페이지

밑줄 친 단어와 의미가 같은 것은?
The purpose of environmental water retention areas is to slow down the permeation of water into the soil in order to reduce harmful chemicals reaching the ground water and waterways.

resuscitation

injection

infiltration

evaporation

밑줄 친 "permeation"은 '스며듦, 침투'라는 뜻으로 "infiltration"(침투, 스며듦)과 의미가 같다.
지문은 물이 "into the soil"(토양 속으로) 스며드는 속도를 늦춰 유해 화학물질이 지하수에 이르는 것을 줄인다는 내용이다.
"resuscitation" — '소생, 부활'이라는 뜻이다.
"injection" — '주입, 주사'라는 뜻이다.
"evaporation" — '증발'이라는 뜻이다.

밑줄 친 곳에 가장 적절한 것은?
The normally ________ Mr. Robert has said little.

taciturn

loquacious

uncommunicative

reticent

빈칸에는 '말이 많은, 수다스러운'이라는 뜻의 "loquacious"가 알맞다.
"normally"(평소에는)와 "has said little"(이번에는 말을 거의 하지 않았다)가 대조를 이루므로, 평소에는 말이 많은 사람이어야 한다.
"taciturn" — '말수가 적은'으로, 대조가 성립하지 않는다.
"uncommunicative" — '말을 잘 하지 않는'으로 역시 대조가 되지 않는다.
"reticent" — '과묵한'으로, 평소와 다름을 나타내지 못한다.

밑줄 친 곳에 공통으로 들어갈 단어는?
I am ________ friendly terms with her.
You should reflect ________ how to solve that problem.

on

to

under

from

두 빈칸에 공통으로 들어갈 말은 "on"이다.
"be on friendly terms with"는 '~와 친한 사이다', "reflect on"은 '~에 대해 곰곰이 생각하다'라는 뜻의 관용 표현이다.
"to" — "reflect to"나 "to friendly terms"는 쓰이지 않는다.
"under" — 두 표현 어느 쪽과도 결합하지 않는다.
"from" — "reflect from"은 '~에서 반사하다'의 뜻이 되어 문맥과 맞지 않는다.

밑줄 친 단어의 쓰임이 적절하지 않은 것은?

The new law will be put into effect next month.

The incident effected a profound change in her.

Their opinion will not affect my decision.

Alcohol has a very bad affect on drivers.

쓰임이 적절하지 않은 것은 "Alcohol has a very bad affect on drivers."이다. 관사 a와 형용사 bad 뒤에는 명사가 와야 하므로 동사 "affect"가 아니라 명사 "effect"(영향)를 써야 한다(have an effect on).
"affect"는 주로 '영향을 미치다'라는 동사로, "effect"는 '영향, 효과'라는 명사 또는 '(변화를) 초래하다'라는 동사로 쓰인다.
"put into effect" — '시행하다'라는 관용 표현으로 명사 effect가 옳다.
"effected a profound change" — 동사 effect(초래하다)로 옳다.
"will not affect my decision" — 동사 affect(영향을 미치다)로 옳다.

밑줄 친 부분의 표현이 적절하지 않은 것은?

In the case of rain, the athletic meeting will be postponed.

He gave me a check instead of cash.

In spite of all his exertions, he failed the test.

Because of an advance in the cost of living, salary raise is needed.

표현이 적절하지 않은 것은 "In the case of rain,"이다. '비가 올 경우에는'이라는 조건은 "In case of rain"으로 써야 한다.
"in case of"는 '~의 경우에(대비해)'라는 조건 표현이고, "in the case of"는 '~에 관해서는'이라는 뜻으로 쓰여 조건의 의미가 약하다.
"instead of cash" — '현금 대신에'로 옳다.
"In spite of all his exertions" — '온갖 노력에도 불구하고'로 옳다.
"in the cost of living" — "an advance in"(~의 상승) 뒤에 '생활비'가 와 옳다.

우리말을 영어로 옮긴 것 중 옳지 않은 것은?

당신이 갈등을 해결할 때, 그것을 어떻게 말하느냐가 무엇을 말하느냐 만큼 중요하다. 
 = In resolving conflict, what you say it is as important as how you say.

차이점이 아니라 우리가 공통으로 가지고 있는 것에 집중하라. 
 = Focus on what we have in common, not on our differences.

당신이 하겠다고 결단하는 것보다 당신의 인생을 만들어 가는 것은 없다. 
 = Nothing shapes your life more than the moments you choose to make.

사랑하지 않고 줄 수는 있으나, 주지 않고 사랑할 수는 없다. 
 = You can give without loving, but you can't love without giving.

옳지 않은 영작은 "what you say it is as important as how you say."이다. 우리말은 '어떻게 말하느냐가 무엇을 말하느냐만큼 중요하다'인데, 영문은 주어와 비교 대상이 뒤바뀌었고 주어 뒤에 불필요한 대명사 it이 들어갔다.
올바른 문장은 "how you say it is as important as what you say"이다.
"Focus on what we have in common, not on our differences." — '공통점에 집중하라'로 바르게 옮겼다.
"Nothing shapes your life more than the moments you choose to make." — '~보다 더 인생을 만드는 것은 없다'로 옮겼다.
"You can give without loving, but you can't love without giving." — 우리말 그대로다.

다음 문장 중 어법상 옳지 않은 것은?

I never see her without being reminded of my mother.

I just hate the thought of doing just one thing through the day.

It's needless to say that diligence wins in the end.

They were on the verge to leave the summer resort.

어법상 옳지 않은 것은 "They were on the verge to leave the summer resort."이다. '막 ~하려는 참이다'는 "on the verge of + 동명사"로 쓰므로 "on the verge of leaving"으로 고쳐야 한다.
나머지는 관용 구문을 바르게 썼다.
"never see her without being reminded of" — 'never A without B'(A할 때마다 B하다) 구문으로 옳다.
"the thought of doing just one thing" — 전치사 of 뒤 동명사로 옳다.
"It's needless to say that" — '~은 말할 필요도 없다'로 옳다.

밑줄 친 부분 중 어법상 옳지 않은 것은?
One of my patients was self-made man ① used to getting his way. A cynic, he never trusted his workers to do their jobs. He always double-checked them, and this often led to conflict and angry outbursts. But he believed his temper had contributed to his success. One autumn afternoon a motorist ② cut him off as he rushed from one job site to another. Ordinarily he would have leaned on the horn. But suddenly he felt as though a red-hot poker ③ were being thrust into his chest. He barely managed to drive to the nearest hospital, ④ which he was admitted to the coronary-care unit.

used to getting

cut him off

were being

which

어법상 옳지 않은 것은 "which"이다. 뒤의 "he was admitted to the coronary-care unit"이 빠진 성분 없는 완전한 절이므로 관계대명사가 아니라 장소의 관계부사 "where"(또는 in which)를 써야 한다.
나머지 밑줄은 어법상 옳다.
"used to getting" — 'be used to + 동명사'(~에 익숙한)가 man을 후치 수식하는 형태로 옳다.
"cut him off" — '(차가) 앞을 가로막다'라는 구동사로, 대명사 목적어가 가운데 와서 옳다.
"were being" — "as though" 뒤 가정법으로 진행 수동(were being thrust)을 써서 옳다.

밑줄 친 곳에 들어갈 가장 적절한 것을 고르시오.
There are many places people visit to get services, such as banks, public offices, etc. Depending upon how many servers are available, they stand in many lines. When they are supposed to stand in line, they are always faced with a problem of making a decision. ________. It's because a shorter line does not always lead to quicker service. Some people who come later get served earlier simply because they happen to stand in the 'lucky' line. That's why some early comers wait longer than they expected to. This is not fair for all the parties concerned both servers and customers.

A fair waiting system makes it possible for us to serve and be served on a first-come-served basis.

That is, in which line will I be able to get my job done most quickly?

The solution to this problem seems to be easy.

It would be possible for us to think of a social invention.

빈칸에는 "That is, in which line will I be able to get my job done most quickly?"(즉, 어느 줄에서 가장 빨리 일을 볼 수 있을까?)가 알맞다.
앞 문장의 "a problem of making a decision"(결정을 내려야 하는 문제)을 구체적으로 풀어 주는 문장이 필요하고, 뒤에서 "a shorter line does not always lead to quicker service"(짧은 줄이 항상 빠른 것은 아니다)라고 그 이유를 설명한다.
"A fair waiting system makes it possible ..." — 공정한 대기 시스템이라는 해결책으로, 문제 제기 단계에 맞지 않는다.
"The solution to this problem seems to be easy." — 뒤의 '불공정하다'는 흐름과 맞지 않는다.
"It would be possible for us to think of a social invention." — 결정의 문제를 구체화하지 못한다.

밑줄 친 곳에 들어갈 가장 적절한 것을 고르시오. (순서대로 ㉠, ㉡)
The smoke signals from Asia's ailing cities are increasingly obvious, but many leaders and ordinary citizens are slow to act. For a relatively quick fix, governments can beef up enforcement of existing regulations on ___㉠___ levels-and later bring them in line with more stringent international standards. They can also require assessments of the environmental cost of schemes that increase commercial and private traffic. A long-term regimen includes investing in more efficient and extensive mass transport systems and in alternative sources of clean energy; and committing to far-sighted urban planning that would help create jobs and housing ___㉡___ congested city centers.

education, next to

expectation, except for

emission, outside of

preservation, just under

㉠에는 "emission"(배출), ㉡에는 "outside of"(~ 밖에)가 들어간다.
㉠은 아시아 도시의 "smoke signals"(매연 신호)에 대한 처방으로 기존 규제를 강화하는 대상이므로 배출 수준이 맞다. ㉡은 "congested city centers"(혼잡한 도심) 밖에 일자리와 주택을 만들어 혼잡을 분산하는 장기 도시계획이다.
"education"·"next to" — 교육 수준은 매연 규제와 무관하고, 도심 '옆'으로는 혼잡이 해소되지 않는다.
"expectation"·"except for" — 기대 수준 규제는 의미가 통하지 않는다.
"preservation"·"just under" — 보존 수준 규제도, 도심 '바로 아래'도 문맥에 맞지 않는다.

밑줄 친 곳에 들어갈 가장 적절한 것을 고르시오. (순서대로 ㉠, ㉡)
Another principle, that of conservation of energy, is the most recent of all. Energy can exist in a vast variety of forms, of which the simplest is pure energy of motion-the motion of a billiard ball over a table. Newton had shown that this purely mechanical energy is 'conserved'. ___㉠___, when two billiard balls collide, the energy of each is changed, but the total energy of the two remains unaltered; one gives energy to the other, but no energy is lost or gained in the transaction. ___㉡___, this is only true if the balls are 'perfectly elastic', an ideal condition in which the balls spring back from one another with the same speed with which they approached.

Besides, In short

For instance, However

However, As a result

On the other hand, On the contrary

㉠에는 "For instance", ㉡에는 "However"가 들어간다.
㉠ 뒤의 당구공 충돌은 앞 문장 "this purely mechanical energy is 'conserved'"의 구체적 예시다. ㉡ 뒤의 "this is only true if the balls are 'perfectly elastic'"(공이 완전 탄성일 때만 참이다)는 앞 내용에 제한을 거는 역접이다.
"Besides"·"In short" — 첨가와 요약으로, 예시와 단서의 관계를 나타내지 못한다.
"However"·"As a result" — ㉠은 역접이 아니고, ㉡도 결과가 아니다.
"On the other hand"·"On the contrary" — 대조 표현으로, ㉠의 예시 관계와 맞지 않는다.

밑줄 친 곳에 들어갈 가장 적절한 것을 고르시오.
Most musicians agree that the world's best violins were made in Cremona, Italy, about 300 years ago. These violins sound better than any others. They even sound better than violins made today. Violin makers and scientists now try to make instruments like the Italian violins, but they are not the same. Musicians still prefer the old ones. Why are these old Italian violins so special? ________. Some people think it is the age of the violins. Other people say that the kind of wood is not so important and that it is more important to cut the wood a special way.

Only some old violins have a special sound.

They secret may be lost forever.

The smallest difference will change the sound of the violin.

No one really knows, but many people think they have an answer.

빈칸에는 "No one really knows, but many people think they have an answer."(정말로 아는 사람은 없지만 많은 사람이 답을 안다고 생각한다)가 알맞다.
빈칸 뒤에 "Some people think ... Other people say ..."로 바이올린이 특별한 이유에 대한 여러 사람의 견해가 이어지므로, 이를 이끄는 문장이 필요하다.
"Only some old violins have a special sound." — 질문에 대한 답이 되지 않고 뒤의 견해 나열과 이어지지 않는다.
"They secret may be lost forever." — 비밀이 사라졌다는 결론은 뒤에 견해가 이어지는 흐름과 맞지 않는다.
"The smallest difference will change the sound of the violin." — 여러 견해를 소개하는 연결 문장이 되지 못한다.

밑줄 친 곳에 들어갈 가장 적절한 것을 고르시오.
________. Scientists think the zebra evolved from a horselike animal with no stripes. They have different ideas about what the zebra's stripeless ancestor looked like, but many argue that it was mostly dark-colored or black. (So, to answer an old question, a zebra is probably a black animal with white stripes, rather than the other way around.) The way stripes might have evolved is this: By accidental variation, some of the dark horse foals were born with lighter-colored stripes. Since stripes were protective coloring, they were an advantage. And so striped animals often survived to have striped foals-another example of natural selection. More and more striped animals appeared as the generations passed. Eventually, there were several distinct species of an animal we call the zebra.

What good are zebra's stripes?

How did the zebra evolve from horses?

Where did the stripes of the zebra come from?

What is the origin of the zebra?

빈칸에는 "Where did the stripes of the zebra come from?"(얼룩말의 줄무늬는 어디에서 왔을까?)가 알맞다.
글은 줄무늬 없는 조상에서 출발해 "The way stripes might have evolved is this"(줄무늬가 진화한 방식은 이렇다)라며 줄무늬의 기원을 자연선택으로 설명한다.
"What good are zebra's stripes?" — 줄무늬의 이점(보호색)은 기원 설명의 한 근거일 뿐 글 전체의 질문이 아니다.
"How did the zebra evolve from horses?" — 말에서 진화했다는 내용이 아니라 "a horselike animal"(말과 비슷한 동물)이며, 초점도 줄무늬다.
"What is the origin of the zebra?" — 얼룩말 자체의 기원이 아니라 줄무늬의 기원이 중심이다.

밑줄 친 곳에 들어갈 가장 적절한 것을 고르시오.
Some anthropologists want to ________ the word 'race' as a classification for human groups. Their first reason is the obvious fact that human history has always involved migration and mobility, which results in interbreeding between different human groups. Therefore, there are no 'pure' races in the human species. Perhaps less well known is the fact that there exist several racial stocks, such as the African Bushman and the Polynesians of the South Pacific, that do not fit any one racial classification but have characteristics of several races. Finally, although the average person may not be aware of it, and may even prefer to think otherwise, the greatest differences among human groups are not those of biology or race, but of culture.

drop

use

regard

specify

빈칸에는 '버리다, 그만 쓰다'라는 뜻의 "drop"이 알맞다.
이어지는 근거가 모두 인종 분류의 무용성을 말한다. "there are no 'pure' races"(순수 인종은 없다), 어느 인종 분류에도 "do not fit"(맞지 않는) 집단이 있다, 가장 큰 차이는 인종이 아니라 "of culture"(문화)의 차이라는 것이다.
"use" — 인종 분류를 쓰자는 뜻이 되어 근거와 반대다.
"regard" — '~로 여기다'로, 뒤의 반대 근거와 이어지지 않는다.
"specify" — '명시하다'로, 분류를 없애자는 흐름과 맞지 않는다.

밑줄 친 곳에 들어갈 가장 적절한 것을 고르시오.
The value of philosophy is, in fact, to be sought largely in its very ________. The man who has no tincture of philosophy goes through life imprisoned in the prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age or his nation, and from convictions which have grown up in his mind without the cooperation or consent of his deliberate reason. To such a man the world tends to become definite, finite, obvious; common objects rouse no questions, and unfamiliar possibilities are contemptuously rejected. As soon as we begin to philosophize, on the contrary, we find, as we saw in our opening chapters, that even the most everyday things lead to problems to which only very incomplete answers can be given.

uncertainty

consensus

perspective

atmosphere

빈칸에는 "uncertainty"(불확실성)가 알맞다.
철학이 없는 사람에게 세상은 "definite, finite, obvious"(확정적이고 유한하며 뻔한) 것이지만, 철학을 하기 시작하면 일상적인 것조차 "only very incomplete answers"(매우 불완전한 답)밖에 없는 문제로 이어진다. 즉 철학의 가치는 확실성이 아니라 불확실성에 있다.
"consensus" — '합의'로, 불완전한 답만 있다는 내용과 맞지 않는다.
"perspective" — '관점'으로, 확정성과 대비되는 핵심을 짚지 못한다.
"atmosphere" — '분위기'로 문맥과 무관하다.

다음 글을 읽고 일치하는 것을 고르시오.
Although many people think of reptiles as slimy, snakes and other reptiles are covered with scales that are dry to the touch. Scale are outgrowths of the animal's skin. Although in some species they are nearly invisible, in most they form a tile-like covering. The turtle's shell is made up of hardened scales that are fused together. The crocodile has a tough but more flexible covering.

Every reptile has hard scales.

The scales of all reptiles are alike.

All reptiles have scales.

All reptiles are dangerous.

글과 일치하는 것은 "All reptiles have scales."(모든 파충류는 비늘이 있다)이다.
지문은 "snakes and other reptiles are covered with scales"(뱀과 다른 파충류는 비늘로 덮여 있다)라고 하며, 일부 종은 비늘이 거의 보이지 않을 뿐 비늘이 있다고 설명한다.
"Every reptile has hard scales." — 어떤 종은 "nearly invisible"(거의 보이지 않는) 비늘이고, 악어는 "more flexible covering"(더 유연한 덮개)이다.
"The scales of all reptiles are alike." — 거북의 융합된 단단한 비늘, 악어의 유연한 덮개처럼 서로 다르다.
"All reptiles are dangerous." — 위험성에 대한 언급은 없다.

다음 글의 주장을 가장 잘 나타낸 것은?
Until the nineteenth century, when steamships and transcontinental trains made long-distance travel possible for large numbers of people, only a few adventurers, mainly sailor and traders, ever traveled out of their own countries. 'Abroad' was a truly foreign place about which the vast majority of people knew very little indeed. Early map makers therefore had little fear of being accused of mistakes, even though they were wildly inaccurate. When they compiled maps, imagination was as important as geographic reality. Nowhere is this more evident than in old maps illustrated with mythical creatures and strange humans.

Despite their unusual illustration, maps made before the nineteenth century were remarkably accurate.

Old maps had to include pictures of imaginary animals.

Imaginative maps were often drawn before the nineteenth century because so few people had traveled abroad.

Before the nineteenth century, map makers drew strange humans in maps because they were scared of mythical animals.

글의 주장을 가장 잘 나타낸 것은 "Imaginative maps were often drawn before the nineteenth century because so few people had traveled abroad."이다.
19세기 전에는 "only a few adventurers"(소수의 모험가)만 해외에 나갔기 때문에 지도 제작자는 실수를 지적받을 걱정이 없었고, "imagination was as important as geographic reality"(상상이 지리적 사실만큼 중요했다).
"maps made before the nineteenth century were remarkably accurate" — 지문은 "wildly inaccurate"(매우 부정확했다)라고 한다.
"Old maps had to include pictures of imaginary animals." — 반드시 넣어야 했다는 의무는 언급되지 않았다.
"because they were scared of mythical animals" — 신화 속 동물을 두려워했다는 내용은 없다.

다음 글의 주제로 가장 적절한 것은?
If we don't protect Antarctica from tourism, there may be serious consequences for us all. The ice of Antarctica holds 70 percent of the world's fresh water. If this ice melts, ocean levels could rise 200 feet and flood the coastal cities of the Earth. Also, the continent's vast fields of ice provide natural air conditioning for our planet. They keep the Earth from getting too hot as they reflect sunlight back into space. Clearly, Antarctica should remain a place for careful and controlled scientific research. We cannot allow tourism to bring possible danger to the planet. The only way to protect this fragile and important part of the planet is to stop tourists from traveling to Antarctica.

If we stop tourism in Antarctica, there may be consequences for tour companies.

The writer wants Antarctica to bo banned from scientific research.

The ice of Antarctica attracts sunlight and heats the Earth.

Our excessive visits to Antarctica will harm it and then our planet.

글의 주제는 "Our excessive visits to Antarctica will harm it and then our planet."(남극에 대한 과도한 방문은 남극과 나아가 지구를 해칠 것이다)이다.
첫 문장 "If we don't protect Antarctica from tourism, there may be serious consequences for us all."이 주제문이고, 얼음이 녹으면 해수면이 상승하고 지구를 식히는 기능이 사라진다는 근거가 이어진다.
"there may be consequences for tour companies" — 관광회사가 입을 결과는 언급되지 않는다.
"Antarctica to bo banned from scientific research" — 오히려 "a place for careful and controlled scientific research"로 남아야 한다고 했다.
"The ice of Antarctica attracts sunlight and heats the Earth." — 얼음은 햇빛을 "reflect"(반사)해 지구가 뜨거워지지 않게 한다.

A, B대화의 연결이 자연스럽지 않은 것은?

A: Is it okay if I use your computer? 
 B: Not at the moment.

A: This is the doctor's office, isn't it? 
 B: I'm afraid not. The doctor's office is next door.

A: Oh, my God! Is that you, Barbara? 
 B: Yes, it is. Good to see you again, Danny.

A: What about some dessert? We have ice cream. 
 B: Sure, give me some more. I'm stuffed.

자연스럽지 않은 대화는 디저트를 권하자 "Sure, give me some more. I'm stuffed."라고 답한 것이다.
"I'm stuffed"는 '배가 꽉 찼다'는 뜻이므로 더 달라는 말과 모순된다. 자연스럽게 하려면 "No, thanks. I'm stuffed."처럼 사양해야 한다.
"Is it okay if I use your computer?" — "Not at the moment."(지금은 안 돼요)로 자연스럽다.
"This is the doctor's office, isn't it?" — "I'm afraid not." 뒤에 진료실 위치를 알려 주어 자연스럽다.
"Is that you, Barbara?" — "Yes, it is. Good to see you again"으로 자연스럽다.

A에 대한 B의 응답으로 가장 적절한 것은?
A: Even though going out for two years, she and I are still not talking the same language.
B: ________.

You're right. She doesn't have a liking for English.

So, do you intend to be through with her?

She must have gotten stuck in lost of work.

You never fail to please me.

B의 응답으로 가장 적절한 것은 "So, do you intend to be through with her?"(그래서 그녀와 헤어질 생각이니?)이다.
A는 2년을 사귀었는데도 "not talking the same language"(서로 생각이 통하지 않는다)라고 고민을 털어놓으므로, 관계를 끝낼 것인지 묻는 반응이 자연스럽다. "be through with"는 '~와 관계를 끝내다'라는 뜻이다.
"She doesn't have a liking for English." — "talking the same language"를 실제 언어로 오해한 반응이다.
"She must have gotten stuck in lost of work." — 일에 묶였다는 추측으로 고민과 무관하다.
"You never fail to please me." — '넌 늘 나를 기쁘게 해'로 대화 흐름과 맞지 않는다.