1. 电脑系统：剑桥通用五级考试网上报名要求您使用联接互联网的电脑并装有浏览器(推荐使用Microsoft IE 9、10、11和火狐最新版本)。推荐显示分辨率设为 1366*768。电脑须安装简体中文输入法以输入考生中文姓名和地址。在汉字输入状态下，须采取半角方式输入数字。
2. 网上支付考费：剑桥通用五级考试费的支付方式仅限于网上支付。考生可任选报名网站所连接的网上银行支付系统交纳考费。
*大陆考生参加考试必须携带的唯一身份证件是有效的“中华人民共和国居民身份证”原件。根据《中华人民共和国身份证法》，任何*公民无论是何年龄，均可向户籍所在派出所申领身份证。特别提醒未申领身份证的青少年考生提前办理，以免影响考试。
香港、澳门地区考生必须使用有效香港、澳门身份证原件;台湾地区考生必须使用有效台湾居民往来大陆通行证原件。
外国籍考生必须使用有效护照。
In the past, evolutionary biologists contemplating the absence of wheels in nature agreed that the explanation was not undesirability: wheels would be good for animals, just as they are for us. Animals were prevented from evolving wheels, the biologists reasoned, by the following dilemma: living cells in an animal's body are connected to the heart by blood vessels, and to the brain by nerves. Because a rotating joint is essential to a wheel, a wheel made of living cells would twist its artery vein and nerve connections at the first revolution, making living impracticable. However, there is a flaw in the argument that the evolution of wheeled animals was thwarted by the insoluble joint problem. The theory fails to explain why animals have not evolved wheels of dead tissue with no need for arteries and nerves. Countless animals, including us, bear external structures without blood sup* or nerves - for example, our hair and fingernails, or the scales, claws, and ho rns of other animals. Why have rats not evolved bony wheels, similar to roller skates?Paws might be more useful than wheels in some situations, but cats' claws are retractable: why not retractable wheels?We thus arrive at the serious biological paradox flippantly termed the RRR dilemma: nature's failure to produce rats with retractable roller skates.
从前，研究自然界没有轮子的进化论生物学家都同意不能用无此需要来解释这种现象：轮子对于动物会像对于我们人类一样有好处。生物学家们推论，动物没有进化出轮子是由下述困难所致：动物身上的活细胞通过血管与心脏相连，通过神经与大脑相连。因为一个旋转的接头对轮子来说是至关重要的，由活的细胞构成的轮子在第一次转动时便会扭伤其上的动脉和神经的连结，因而不现实。
不过，动物未能进化出轮子是受阻于无法解决接头问题的说法有一个缺陷。这种理论无法解释为何动物没有进化出由死组织构成的而无需动脉和神经的`轮子。包括人在内的无数动物都有一些没有血液供应和神经的体外构造，例如，我们的头发和指甲，或者鳞片、爪子和其它一些动物的角。为什么老鼠没有进化出类似于滑轮溜冰鞋的骨质的轮子呢?在某些情况下，爪子可能比轮子更有用，但猫的爪子是可以伸缩的：为什么不能有可以伸缩的轮 子呢?这样，我们便得出了一个被戏称为 RRR 的严肃的生物学悖论：大自然未能产生出有可伸缩的滑轮溜冰鞋的老鼠。
Archaeology is a source of history, not just a humble auxiliary discipline. Archaeological data are historical documents in their own right, not mere illustrations to written texts. Just as much as any other historian, an archaeologist studies and tries to reconstitute the process that has created the human world in which we live —— and us ourselves in so far as we are each creatures of our age and social environment. Archaeological data are all changes in the material world resulting from human action or, more succinctly, the fossilized results of human behavior. The sum total of these constitutes what may be called the archaeological record. This record exhibits certain peculiarities and deficiencies the consequences of which produce a rather superficial contrast between archaeological history and the more familiar kind based upon written records.
Not all human behavior fossilizes. The words I utter and you hear as vibrations in the air are certainly human changes in the material world and may be of great historical significance. Yet they leave no sort of trace in the archaeological records unless they are captured by a dictaphone or written down by a clerk. The movement of troops on the battlefield may "change the course of history," but this is equally ephemeral from the archaeologist's standpoint. What is perhaps worse, most organic materials are perishable. Everything made of wood, hide, wool, linen, grass, hair, and similar materials will decay and vanish in dust in a few years or centuries, save under very exceptional conditions. In a relatively brief period the archaeological record is reduced to mere scraps of stone, bone, glass, metal, and earthenware. Still modern archaeology, by ap*ing appropriate techniques and comparative methods, aided by a few lucky finds from peat-bogs, deserts, and frozen soils, is able to fill up a good deal of the gap.
In the past, evolutionary biologists contemplating the absence of wheels in nature agreed that the explanation was not undesirability: wheels would be good for animals, just as they are for us. Animals were prevented from evolving wheels, the biologists reasoned, by the following dilemma: living cells in an animal's body are connected to the heart by blood vessels, and to the brain by nerves. Because a rotating joint is essential to a wheel, a wheel made of living cells would twist its artery vein and nerve connections at the first revolution, making living impracticable. However, there is a flaw in the argument that the evolution of wheeled animals was thwarted by the insoluble joint problem. The theory fails to explain why animals have not evolved wheels of dead tissue with no need for arteries and nerves. Countless animals, including us, bear external structures without blood sup* or nerves - for example, our hair and fingernails, or the scales, claws, and ho rns of other animals. Why have rats not evolved bony wheels, similar to roller skates?Paws might be more useful than wheels in some situations, but cats' claws are retractable: why not retractable wheels?We thus arrive at the serious biological paradox flippantly termed the RRR dilemma: nature's failure to produce rats with retractable roller skates.
从前，研究自然界没有轮子的进化论生物学家都同意不能用无此需要来解释这种现象：轮子对于动物会像对于我们人类一样有好处。生物学家们推论，动物没有进化出轮子是由下述困难所致：动物身上的活细胞通过血管与心脏相连，通过神经与大脑相连。因为一个旋转的接头对轮子来说是至关重要的，由活的细胞构成的轮子在第一次转动时便会扭伤其上的动脉和神经的连结，因而不现实。
不过，动物未能进化出轮子是受阻于无法解决接头问题的说法有一个缺陷。这种理论无法解释为何动物没有进化出由死组织构成的而无需动脉和神经的`轮子。包括人在内的无数动物都有一些没有血液供应和神经的体外构造，例如，我们的头发和指甲，或者鳞片、爪子和其它一些动物的角。为什么老鼠没有进化出类似于滑轮溜冰鞋的骨质的轮子呢?在某些情况下，爪子可能比轮子更有用，但猫的爪子是可以伸缩的：为什么不能有可以伸缩的轮 子呢?这样，我们便得出了一个被戏称为 RRR 的严肃的生物学悖论：大自然未能产生出有可伸缩的滑轮溜冰鞋的老鼠。
Archaeology is a source of history, not just a humble auxiliary discipline. Archaeological data are historical documents in their own right, not mere illustrations to written texts. Just as much as any other historian, an archaeologist studies and tries to reconstitute the process that has created the human world in which we live —— and us ourselves in so far as we are each creatures of our age and social environment. Archaeological data are all changes in the material world resulting from human action or, more succinctly, the fossilized results of human behavior. The sum total of these constitutes what may be called the archaeological record. This record exhibits certain peculiarities and deficiencies the consequences of which produce a rather superficial contrast between archaeological history and the more familiar kind based upon written records.
Not all human behavior fossilizes. The words I utter and you hear as vibrations in the air are certainly human changes in the material world and may be of great historical significance. Yet they leave no sort of trace in the archaeological records unless they are captured by a dictaphone or written down by a clerk. The movement of troops on the battlefield may "change the course of history," but this is equally ephemeral from the archaeologist's standpoint. What is perhaps worse, most organic materials are perishable. Everything made of wood, hide, wool, linen, grass, hair, and similar materials will decay and vanish in dust in a few years or centuries, save under very exceptional conditions. In a relatively brief period the archaeological record is reduced to mere scraps of stone, bone, glass, metal, and earthenware. Still modern archaeology, by ap*ing appropriate techniques and comparative methods, aided by a few lucky finds from peat-bogs, deserts, and frozen soils, is able to fill up a good deal of the gap.
