阅读理解
For a century, urban commotion has been treated as a moral failing of individuals. Fixing it will require systemic changes to environmental noise. What are your ears hearing right now? Maybe the bustling sounds of a busy office, or your partner cooking dinner in the next room. Whatever the texture of the sonic landscape of your life may be, beneath it all is the same omnipresent din: the sound of cars. That might seem benign, or perhaps even endearing—the sound of the bustle of the big city. But the din of vehicles, along with transit and industrial activity, is making people sick. People forget that noise pollution is still pollution. And noise pollution is everywhere. Unlike many other injuries, hearing damage is irreparable. It also functions differently. People tend to assume that hearing loss is akin to turning down the volume in one's head—that everything just sounds quieter. But it's more complex than that. Sound at certain frequencies just vanishes—birdsong, intelligible human speech, the gentle rustling of leaves, the crispy highs of brushes on jazz cymbals. People can avoid using earbuds excessively or attending loud concerts. But people do not necessarily have the ability to avoid high levels of environmental noise—it's in their neighborhoods, near their schools, at their workplaces. That makes noise pollution a matter of bodily autonomy. Solving the environmental-noise problem has been difficult, partly because for more than a century anti-noise advocates have fought for the right to silence rather than the right to hear. Concerns about hearing loss largely focus on excessive noise exposure. But environmental noise is just as unsafe. People living in cities are regularly exposed (against their will) to noise above 85 decibels from sources like traffic, subways, industrial activity, and airports. That's enough to cause significant hearing loss over time. If you have an hour-long commute at such sound levels, your hearing has probably already been affected. Urban life also sustains average background noise levels of 60 decibels, which is loud enough to raise one's blood pressure and heart rate, and cause stress, loss of concentration, and loss of sleep. Sirens are a particularly extreme example of the kind of noise inflicted on people every day: They ring at a sound-pressure level of 120 decibels—a level that corresponds with the human pain threshold, according to the World Health Organization. But since the turn of the 20th century, protecting human hearing has taken a back seat to securing quiet for those with means, and punishing those without. Noise-abatement laws transformed an objective concern about environmental and health conditions into a subjective fight over aesthetic moralism.
单选题
According to the first paragraph, urban commotion is not related to ______.
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】具体信息题。 题源揭示：本文源于2018年2月的The Atlantic(《大西洋月刊》)。题目是City Noise Might Be Making You Sick(《城市的噪声可能正在使你生病》)。 文章大意：本文讨论了城市噪声对人体健康有害的问题。城市噪声多种多样，带来了各种不同的影响，尤其给人类健康带来了巨大危害，如使血压和心率升高，使人感到紧张、注意力丧失和睡眠不足。以往解决环境噪声的方式集中于争取安静的权利，而不是听的权利。20世纪初治理噪声的条例出台使得系统改变环境噪声从一个被迫关注的问题上升到了主动的斗争。 篇章结构： 题目是关于第一段中城市喧嚣的表述。题目问根据第一段内容，城市喧嚣与一无关。原文指出：一个世纪以来，城市喧嚣一直被视为是个人道德缺失的表现。解决这个问题需要使环境噪声发生系统性的改变。由此可以判断城市喧嚣与人们的道德缺失、环境噪声等有关，这些因素都可以导致城市喧嚣。只有选项B．individual emotional state“个人的情绪状态”在文中没有提到，是正确答案。 选项A“个人道德缺失”，选项C“城镇的噪声污染”，选项D“一个人所处的吵闹的环境”，都是与城市喧嚣有关的因素，都排除。 [参考译文] 一个世纪以来，城市喧嚣一直被视为是个人道德缺失的表现。要解决这个问题就需要使环境噪声发生系统性的改变。 现在你的耳朵能听到什么声音?或许是忙碌的办公室里熙熙攘攘的声音，或是你的伴侣在隔壁房间做饭的声音。无论你处在什么样的生活环境中，在它的背后都是同样无处不在的喧闹声：汽车的声音。 大城市喧闹的声音似乎是无害的，甚至可能是惹人喜爱的。但是车辆的噪声以及运输和工业活动，正在使人们生病。人们忘记了噪声污染仍然是污染。噪声污染无处不在。 与其他许多损伤不同，听力损伤是无法修复的。它的机理也不同。人们往往认为听力损失就像降低一个人头脑中的音量——一切听起来只是更安静了。但实际情况却比那更复杂。特定频率的声音几乎消失了——鸟鸣、明白易懂的人类语言、树叶轻柔的沙沙声、击打爵士鼓吊镲发出的清脆的尖音。人们可以避免过度使用耳塞或参加吵闹的音乐会。但是，人们并不一定有能力避免高水平的环境噪声——它存在于人们所在的社区、学校附近和工作场所。这使得噪声污染成为一种关乎身体是否有自主性的问题。 解决环境噪声问题一直是困难的，部分原因在于，一个多世纪以来，反噪声倡导者们一直在争取安静的权利，而不是听的权利。 对听力损失的关注主要集中在过度接触噪声上。但环境噪声也同样不安全。生活在城市的人们经常(被迫)暴露在超过85分贝的噪声中，这些噪声来自交通、地铁、工业活动和机场。随着时间的推移，这足以导致严重的听力损失。如果在这种声音水平下通勤一个小时，你的听力可能已经受到影响了。城市生活还持续不断地提供着平均60分贝的背景噪声，这种噪声足以使人血压和心率升高，并导致压力、注意力丧失和睡眠不足。世界卫生组织的数据显示，警笛声是人们每天都要承受的噪声中的一个特别极端的例子：它们的声压级达到120分贝——相当于人类的疼痛阈值水平。 但自二十世纪以来，保护人类听力已被置于次要地位，对那些有办法的人来说确保安静才是更重要的，而没有办法的人只能承受噪声的折磨了。噪声消减条例把对环境和健康状况被迫的关注转变成了一场关于审美道德主义的主动的斗争。
单选题
The word 'din' (Line 3, Paragraph 2 and Line 2, Paragraph 3) is closest in meaning to ______.
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】词义理解题。 题目问第二段第三行和第三段第二行的din是什么意思。该词所在句子为beneath it all is the same omnipresent din: the sound of cars(在这一切的背后都是同样无处不在的______：汽车的声音)以及But the din of vehicles, along with transit and industrial activity, is making people sick...noise pollution is everywhere(但是汽车的______，以及运输和工业活动，正在使人们生病……噪声污染无处不在)。我们可以推断出这个词与声音、噪声是同义词或近义词，而最接近这个意思的是选项C“一种持续一段时间的、非常响亮而令人不快的声音”。 选项A“一天中在晚上或中午提供的正餐”是对dinner的解释，选项B“一个舒适而隐蔽的房间”是对den的解释，选项D“在海上用作标记的小浮标”是对dan的解释，因此这三个选项均可排除。
单选题
Which of the following is true of the hearing damage? ______
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】具体信息题。 题目问关于听力损伤哪个选项是正确的，本题涉及多处细节与原文的一致性。文章第六段第一句话提到Concerns about hearing loss largely focus on excessive noise exposure，大意是，对听力损失的关注主要集中在过度接触噪音上。选项D“它是由过度接触噪声引起的”与此信息一致，是正确选项。 选项A“它可以被修复或改善”，与原文第四段第一句话“与其他许多损伤不同，听力损伤是无法修复的”内容相反；选项B“它的机理相同”，与原文第四段第二句话“它的机理也不同”内容相反，因此这两项排除；选项C“它让一切听起来更安静”，是对原文第四段第三、四、五句话“人们往往认为听力损失就像降低一个人头脑中的音量——一切听起来只是更安静了。但实际情况却比那更复杂。特定频率的声音几乎消失了……”的曲解，听力损失并不是声音听起来变小了，而是听不到特定频率的声音了，因此也可排除。
单选题
We may infer from the sixth paragraph that ______.