单选题 Americans no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter-culture as responsible for the decline of formal English. Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in education. Mr. McWhorter' s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the gradual disappearance of "whom", for example, to be natural and no more regrettable than the loss of the case-endings of Old English. But the cult of the authentic and the personal, "doing our own thing", has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly educated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English, talking is triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft. Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like, care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non-standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive—there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas. He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper. Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old-fashioned to most English-speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical education reforms—he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English "on paper plates instead of china". A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one.
单选题 According to McWhorter, the decline of formal English______.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:细节题。根据第二段第二句可知,麦荷特先生擅长语言史以及语言演变.他认为类似“whom”这一类的正式英语词汇的消失没什么大惊小怪的,就像古英语中一些繁琐的词格消失一样。由此可知.麦荷特认为正式英语的退化只是语言发展中的自然现象.故选B项。
单选题 The word "talking"(Para. 3)denotes______.
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】解析:词义题。根据第三段第一句可知,“走自己的路”这一对事物真实性和个人性的崇高信条,已经使正式演讲、写作、诗歌及音乐消亡了,即正式英语已经在退化了。最后一句指出,无论是在书面还是在口语英语中,talking要胜过speaking,spontaneity(即兴发挥)也要胜过craft(精心准备)。由此可知,talking之于speaking就类似于spontaneity和craft的对比,“即兴发挥”就是使用非正式的语言.“精心准备”代表使用正式的语言。因此talking与speaking的对比也就是非正式和正式英语语言应用的对比,talking代表的就是非正式英语,故选D项。
单选题 To which of the following statements would McWhorter most likely agree?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】解析:细节题。根据第四段最后一句可知,麦荷特先生认为我们尽管说话不规范,但这不一定就会让我们的思考变得不准确,也就是.他认为逻辑思维和说话方式不是有必然联系的。所以选A项。
单选题 The description of Russians' love of memorizing poetry shows the author's _____.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:推断题。根据第五段的内容,作者首先描述了俄罗斯人爱好背诵诗歌以及意大利的政客们倾向于精心准备演讲。作者用这些例子来说明以下观点,即“麦荷特为那些虽不实用却很美好的事物的消逝而哀叹”。经过分析得知。在作者的眼里,“俄罗斯人爱好背诵诗歌”和“意大利的政客精心准备演讲”都属于这些“虽不实用却很美好的事物”。由此可以推知.作者对俄罗斯人的做法是抱着欣赏态度的,表达的是对美好事物消逝的哀叹,故选B项。
单选题 According to the last paragraph, "paper plates" is to "china" as ______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】解析:推断题。根据第五段第二、三句可知,麦荷特先生并不觉得正式英语是不可或缺的,也并没提出彻底的教育改革——他只是为那些“虽不实用却很美好的事物”的消逝而哀叹,如今我们过多地用非正式英语去替代正式英语。这虽然令人惭愧.但已经无法避免。由此可知,作者用“纸盘子”和“瓷盘子”来比喻正式英语的退化,联系上文可以推知.“纸盘子”指的是那些“实用却不美好”的事物,即非正式英语;“瓷盘子”则是指那些“不实用却美好”的事物,即正式英语,故选C项。