问答题What is Componential Analysis? Use this theory to explain why the following sentences do not make sense;(a)John is a man but not a male.(b)Peter killed Bob but Bob did not die.

问答题Directions : For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write a composition of no less than 150 words. Your composition should be based on the following two questions after you have read the story given in Chinese. 1. What do you think about the story? 2. What do you learn from it? 乒乓女将 众所周知，邓亚萍从小就酷爱打乒乓球，她梦想着有朝一日能够在世界赛场上大显身手。但身高仅1.55米的邓亚萍似乎不是打乒乓球的料，因为身材矮小，手腿粗短，根本不符合体校的要求，体校的大门没能向她敞开。于是，年幼的邓亚萍跟父亲学起了乒乓球，父亲规定她每天在练完体能课后，必须还要做100个发球接球的动作。邓亚萍虽然只有七八岁，但为了能使自己的球技更加熟练，基本功更加扎实，便在自己的腿上绑上了沙袋，而且把木拍换成了铁拍。这不但使身体备受煎熬，心理方面也要承受巨大的压力。 多年的训练，终于使得邓亚萍站上了世界冠军的领奖台。在她的运动生涯中，她总共夺得了18枚世界冠军奖牌。邓亚萍的出色成就，不仅为她自己带来了巨大的荣耀，也改变了世界乒坛只在高个子中选拔运动员的传统观念。

问答题EUNICE; What"s the matter, honey? Are you lost?BLANCHE: They told me to take a street-car named Desire. And then transfer to one called Cemeteries and ride six blocks and get off at—Elysian Fields!EUNICE: That" s where you are now. Questions:

问答题美国驻华大使

问答题Read the following passage carefully and then write a summary of it in English in about 150 words. A simple idea underpins science; "trust, but verify". Results should always be subject to challenge from experiment. That simple but powerful idea has generated a vast body of knowledge. Since its birth in the 17th century, modern science has changed the world beyond recognition, and overwhelmingly for the better. But success can breed complacency. Modern scientists are doing too much trusting and not enough verifying—to the detriment of the whole of science, and of humanity. Too many of the findings that fill the academic ether are the result of shoddy experiments or poor analysis(see article). A rule of thumb among biotechnology venture-capitalists is that half of published research cannot be replicated. Even that may be optimistic. Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could reproduce just six of 53 "landmark" studies in cancer research. Earlier, a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67 similarly important papers. A leading computer scientist frets that three-quarters of papers in his subfield are bunk. In 2000—2010 roughly 80, 000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later retracted because of mistakes or improprieties. Even when flawed research does not put people's lives at risk—and much of it is too far from the market to do so—it squanders money and the efforts of some of the world's best minds. The opportunity costs of stymied progress are hard to quantify, but they are likely to be vast. And they could be rising. One reason is the competitiveness of science. In the 1950s, when modern academic research took shape after its successes in the Second World War, it was still a rarefied pastime. The entire club of scientists numbered a few hundred thousand. As their ranks have swelled, to 6m—7m active researchers on the latest reckoning, scientists have lost their taste for self-policing and quality control. The obligation to "publish or perish" has come to rule over academic life. Competition for jobs is cutthroat. Full professors in America earned on average $ 135, 000 in 2012—more than judges did. Every year six freshly minted PhDs vie for every academic post. Nowadays verification(the replication of other people's results)does little to advance a researcher's career. And without verification, dubious findings live on to mislead. Careerism also encourages exaggeration and the cherry-picking of results. In order to safeguard their exclusivity, the leading journals impose high rejection rates: in excess of 90% of submitted manuscripts. The most striking findings have the greatest chance of making it onto the page. Little wonder that one in three researchers knows of a colleague who has pepped up a paper by, say, excluding inconvenient data from results "based on a gut feeling". And as more research teams around the world work on a problem, the odds shorten that at least one will fall prey to an honest confusion between the sweet signal of a genuine discovery and a freak of the statistical noise. Such spurious correlations are often recorded in journals eager for startling papers. If they touch on drinking wine, going senile or letting children play video games, they may well command the front pages of newspapers, too. Conversely, failures to prove a hypothesis are rarely even offered for publication, let alone accepted. "Negative results" now account for only 14% of published papers, down from 30% in 1990. Yet knowing what is false is as important to science as knowing what is true. The failure to report failures means that researchers waste money and effort exploring blind alleys already investigated by other scientists. The hallowed process of peer review is not all it is cracked up to be, either. When a prominent medical journal ran research past other experts in the field, it found that most of the reviewers failed to spot mistakes it had deliberately inserted into papers, even after being told they were being tested. All this makes a shaky foundation for an enterprise dedicated to discovering the truth about the world. What might be done to shore it up? One priority should be for all disciplines to follow the example of those that have done most to tighten standards. A start would be getting to grips with statistics, especially in the growing number of fields that sift through untold oodles of data looking for patterns. Geneticists have done this, and turned an early torrent of specious results from genome sequencing into a trickle of truly significant ones. Ideally, research protocols should be registered in advance and monitored in virtual notebooks. This would curb the temptation to fiddle with the experiment's design midstream so as to make the results look more substantial than they are.(It is already meant to happen in clinical trials of drugs, but compliance is patchy.)Where possible, trial data also should be open for other researchers to inspect and test. The most enlightened journals are already becoming less averse to humdrum papers. Some government funding agencies, including America's National Institutes of Health, which dish out $30 billion on research each year, are working out how best to encourage replication. And growing numbers of scientists, especially young ones, understand statistics. But these trends need to go much further. Journals should allocate space for "uninteresting" work, and grant-givers should set aside money to pay for it. Peer review should be tightened—or perhaps dispensed with altogether, in favour of post-publication evaluation in the form of appended comments. That system has worked well in recent years in physics and mathematics. Lastly, policymakers should ensure that institutions using public money also respect the rules. Science still commands enormous—if sometimes bemused—respect. But its privileged status is founded on the capacity to be right most of the time and to correct its mistakes when it gets things wrong. And it is not as if the universe is short of genuine mysteries to keep generations of scientists hard at work. The false trails laid down by shoddy research are an unforgivable barrier to understanding.

问答题从法律上讲，合同是一种对签约双方都具有约束力的协议。合同的要点如下：1．双方同意：2．一种合法的补偿，在大多数情况下不一定是金钱；3．签约双方均具有合法的签约能力；4．不具有欺诈和威胁性；5．签约主题不得不具有非法性或违反公共准则。一般来说，合同既可以是口头的，也可以是书面的。不过，为了便于执行起见，有些合同必须采用书面形式，并需签字。

问答题Despite the web, we watch more television than ever. In the chaos of today's media and technology brawl--iPod vs. Zune, Google vs. Yahoo, Windows vs. Linux, Intel vs. AMD--we can declare one unlikely winner. Standing tall in a field of new tech wonders, it's a geezer technology that are invented in the 1920s and commercialized in the 1940s, and it's still more powerful than any thing created since. 45. As you try to figure out where consumer infotech is going, and what it means for society, remember this big, central reality. People just want more television. If you doubt it, look at today's biggest news in tech. It continually centers on new ways to bring consumers the thing they crave above all else. 46. Sony flooded the recent Consumer Electronics Show with products that put Internet video on your TV set, as did almost every other consumer electronics company. At the simultaneous Macworld Expo, Apple chief Steve Jobs introduced Apple TV, which does the same thing. Verizon said it will soon offer live TV on cellphone screens. It will also sell full-length programs for viewing whenever you want. Put it all together, and we have achieved a nirvana that didn't exist even a year ago. unlimited television available 24/7 on every screen you own. It's no surprise, of course. 47. Ever since the basic facts of steadily multiplying processor power and bandwidth became apparent, seers have confidently predicted this day. They just as confidently predicted what it would mean. traditional television's demise. Once the World Wide Web appeared in the mid-1990s, the future looked very clear. Boring old TV, the scheduled programs that come to you through a coaxial cable or satellite dish or antenna, would fade away. 48. Which is exactly the opposite of what has happened. Despite many Net Age alternatives, we Americans today watch more boring old TV than ever, which is saying something. How can that be? My theory is the Two-Liter Coke Principle. The Coca-Cola company discovered long ago that if it could get people to bring home bigger bottles of Coke, those people would drink more than they used to. Just getting more Coke in front of them increased their consumption. It seems to be the same with TV. Put more of it in front of people--over 100 channels in many homes--and people will watch more. Seen from this perspective, the latest announcements of new TV-related technology look simply like additional ways to put more TV in front of American consumers. The supposed threat from the Internet was that we'd cut back on TV as we spent more time on MySpaee or in Second Life. We may well spend more time on such new Net attractions, but we're unlikely to take that time away from video viewing. We're more likely to cut back on things we consider less important, like sleep. 49. No one has evaluated TV better than the great New Yorker essayist E. B. White, who in 1938 wrote, "We shall stand or fall by television, of that I am sure. " We still don't know which it will be, but his assessment looks truer than ever.

问答题annotated

问答题我们不应当责备她，她已经尽了最大的努力。

问答题trade surplus

问答题The UGlobal Positioning System/U is a space-based global navigation satellite system that provides location and time information in all weather, anywhere on or near the Earth.

问答题智能电话

问答题Discuss the "moral Christian tradition" found in the character of Hamlet or some other acknowledged literary work.

问答题Directions: You are supposed to write for the English Club a notice to recruit volunteers for an international seminar on alternative energy. The notice should include the basic qualifications for applicants and other information which you think is relevant. You should write about 100 words on ANSWER SHEET 2. Do not sign your own name at the end of the letter. Use "English Club" instead.

问答题His smile was so easy, so friendly, that Laura recovered. What nice eyes he had, small, but such a dark blue! And now she looked at the others, they were smiling too. " Cheer up, we won"t bite," their smile seemed to say. How very nice workmen were! And what a beautiful morning! She mustn"t mention the morning; she must be business-like. The marquee.

问答题{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} Read the following passage carefully and then translate each underlined part into Chinese. 71.{{U}}As a romantic teenager, I believed that my future life as a scientist would be justified if I could discover a single new fact and add a brick to the bright temple of human knowledge. The conviction was noble enough; the metaphor was simply silly. Yet that metaphor still governs the attitude of many scientists toward their subject.{{/U}} 72.{{U}}In the conventional model of scientific "progress ", we begin in superstitious ignorance and move toward final truth by the successive accumulation of facts. In this smug perspective, the history of science contains little more than anecdotal interest--for it can only chronicle past errors and credit the bricklayers for discerning glimpses of final truth. It is as transparent a.s an old-fashioned melodrama: truth (as we perceive it today) is the only arbiter and the world of past scientists is divided into good guys who were right and bad guys who were wrong.{{/U}} 73. {{U}}Historians of science have utterly discredited this model during the past decade. Science is not a heartless pursuit of objective information. It is a creative activity, its geniuses acting more as artists than as information processors. Changes in theory are not simply the derivative results of new discoveries but the work of creative imagination influenced by contemporary social and political forces. We should not judge the past through anachronistic spectacles of our own convictions--designating as heroes the scientists whom we judge to be right by criteria that had nothing to do with their own concerns.{{/U}} We are simply foolish if we call Anaximander (sixth century B. C.) an evolutionist because, in advocating a primary role for water among the four elements, he held that life first inhabited the sea; yet most textbooks so credit him.

问答题{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} Read the following text carefully and then translate the underlined segments into Chinese. Your translation should be written neatly on ANSWER SHEET 2. Internet is a vast network of computers that connects many of the world's businesses, institutions, and individuals. (46) {{U}}The Internet, which means interconnected network of networks, links tens of thousands of smaller computer networks. These networks transmit huge amounts of information in the form of words, images, and sounds.{{/U}} The Internet has information on every topic.(47){{U}}Network users can search through sources ranging from vast databases to small electronic" bulletin boards", where users form discussion groups around common interests. {{/U}}Much of the Internet's traffic consists of messages sent from one computer user to another. These messages are called electronic mail or e-mail. Internet users have electronic addresses that allow them to send and receive e-mail. Other uses of the network include obtaining news, joining electronic debates, and playing electronic games.(48){{U}}One feature of the Internet, known as the World Wide Web, provides graphics, audio, and video to enhance the information in its documents.{{/U}} These documents cover a vast number of topics. People usually access the Internet with a device called a modem. Modems connect computers to the network through telephone lines. Much of the Internet operates through worldwide telephone networks of fiber-optic cables(49) {{U}}These cables contain hair-thin strands of glass that carry data as pulses of light. They can transmit thousands of times more data than local phone lines, most of which consist of copper wires.{{/U}} In the future, the internet will probably grow more sophisticated as computer technology becomes more powerful. (50){{U}}Many experts believe the Internet may become part of a larger network called the information superhighway. This network, still under development, would link computers with telephone companies, cable television stations, and other communication systems. {{/U}}People could bank, shop, watch TV, and perform many other activities through the network.

问答题After the investigation, it was concluded that the old man was responsible for the accident.

问答题Translate the following English passage into Chinese. BANKS have endured a brutal nine months since credit markets froze in August. Losses and write-downs already total $335 billion; many of their best businesses have disappeared. In developed economies, almost all banks are facing economic and regulatory headwinds that will cut revenues and jobs. Yet the biggest danger facing Western finance is not a fall in its earning power but a loss of faith in how it works. Two criticisms assail the industry, one based on fairness and the other on efficiency. The first argues that finance is rigged to enrich bankers, rather than their customers, shareholders or the economy at large. Some worry about the way bonuses are calculated; others about moral hazard. Bankers will take wild bets because they know they will be bailed out by the taxpayer. Look at Bear Stearns or Northern Rock. The second, deeper question is whether a market-based approach to finance is efficient. Some Chinese officials claim the Western system has been shown up by the crisis. This week Germany's president demanded that the "monster" of financial markets "be put back in its place" : bankers had caused a "massive destruction of assets. " The critics do not lack ammunition. The lapses in credit-underwriting in the subprime-mortgage market hardly reflect a wise allocation of capital. The opacity of the shadow banking system and the mind-boggling complexity of those toxic asset-backed products have raised doubts about the discipline of the market.