单选题 {{B}}第二篇{{/B}}
A profound change seems to have taken place in the economic relationship between Americans and their animals. In 1993, the pet business was a $16 billion field dominated by mom and pop outfits and independent veterinarians. Today, it is a $ 23 billion empire.
Nearly 60 percent of Americans live with one or more animals. More than 30 million have dogs, and 27 million have cats. While the overall number of owners has remained relatively stable since the 1980s, they are spending ever greater amounts on their animals. Signs of the boom are everywhere. On the retail side, superstore chains are covering the country.
Americans consider cats and dogs a "part of the family" rather than property, which, legally, at least, they remain. (Being property themselves, for instance, animals cannot legally inherit property in wills, though growing numbers of them are being provided for in estates, and some law firms have developed a specialty in the area. )
The reasons for this metamorphosis from property to person are mysterious. No one seems to know exactly why Americans have changed their views. A decline in warmth among homo sapiens may explain part of the phenomenon, says attorney Lane Gabeler. She says it actually helps the practice by giving her people a softer edge. "People hate lawyers, and we look more human with a dog," Gabeler insists.
On the other hand, there are more reasons now to own pets than there were a generation ago. Adults in their 20s and 30s marry and have kids later, leaving more room in their lives to adopt a beast. Medical research has determined that contact with pets can lower blood pressure and fend off heart attacks, so more and more of the elderly have embraced the animal kingdom.
The pet industry is confident that the future remains bright. On the health insurance side alone, for example, the market has hardly been scratched. In the United Kingdom, 13 percent of the country's 15 million owners have policies, and in Sweden, 57 percent of 7 million have been insured. But in the United States, with a total of 114 million pets, fewer than 1 percent of pets are covered if they choke on a chicken bone or try to bite the UPS truck driver. So if the bond between people and their creatures truly exists, and if that bond keeps deepening economically as well as emotionally, the next wave of American moguls may well be pet insurance agents rather than Internet pioneers.
单选题 The profound change in the economic relationship between Americans and their pets has been caused by the fact that ______.
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】该题要求理解美国人和他们的宠物之间的经济关系发生深刻变化的原因。根据第二段,虽然饲养宠物的人数没有什么增加,但花在宠物身上的费用增加了。因此,造成美国人和他们的宠物之间的经济关系发生深刻变化的原因,是美国人在宠物的身上花了更多的钱。
单选题 Paragraphs 4 and 5 mainly answer which of the following questions?
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】该题要求理解第四、五段的主要内容。在第,四段,作者指出饲养宠物可以使人们更有人情味;根据第五段,年轻人有更多的时间来饲养宠物,以及饲养宠物可以降低血压和防止心脏病。所以这两段的内容主要回答了选项B提出的问题。
单选题 The word "metamorphosis" (para. 4) could best be replaced by ______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】该题要求从上下文猜测词义。根据第二段,美国人不再把宠物看作是一种财产,而是把它们看作和人一样,并试图在遗产中对它们作出安排。第三段则解释了造成这种转变的原因。
单选题 The passage supports which of the following statements?
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】该题要求理解文章中部分句子的意思。选项A错。第三段括号中的一句话是说,虽然宠物在法律上不能继承财产,但越来越多的宠物在遗产中得到了安排;选项B错。作者在第四段中引用了Lane Gabeler律师作为一个例子,说明宠物使一些令人讨厌的工作更富有人情味,但并不说明大多数律师都拥有宠物;选项C错。第五段第二句的意思是说,年轻人由于推迟生儿育女,从而有时间来饲养宠物,不是因为饲养宠物而推迟生儿育女;选项D对。根据第六段第四句,美国的11,400万只宠物只有不到1%有健康保险。
单选题 What does the author mean by "the market has hardly been scratched" (para. 6)?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】该题要求理解第六段的主要内容。该段主要说的是,美国只有1%的宠物有健康保险,而英国和瑞典分别为13%和57%。从这个意义上来说,美国宠物保险市场还未启动,其前途大有可为。