单选题 Questions 11 to 14 are based on the following news report about Arafat's visit to China. You now have 20 seconds to rend Questions 11 to 14.

单选题{{I}}Questions 14 - 16 are based on the following conversation. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 14 - 16.{{/I}}

单选题 Questions 18—20 are based on the following talk.

单选题Until men invented ways of staying underwater for more than a few minutes, the wonders of the world below the surface of the sea were almost unknown. The main problem, of course, lies in air. How could air be supplied to swimmers below the surface of the sea? Pictures made about 2,900 years ago in Asia show men swimming under the surface with air bags tied to their bodies. A pipe from the bag carried air into the swimmer's mouth. But little progress was achieved in the invention of diving devices until about 1490, when the famous Italian painter, Leonardo da Vinci, designed a complete diving suit. In 1680, an Italian professor invented a large air bag with a glass window to be worn over the diver's head. To "clean" the air a breathing pipe went from the air bag, through another bag to remove moisture, and then again to the large air bag. The plan did not work, but it gave later inventors the idea of moving air around in diving devices. In 1819, a German, Augustus Siebe, developed a way of forcing air into the head-covering by a machine operated above the water. Finally, in 1837, he invented the "hard-hat suit" which was to be used for nearly a century. It had a metal covering for the head and an air pipe attached to a machine above the water. It also had small openings to remove unwanted air. But there were two dangers to the diver inside the "hard-hat suit". One was the sudden rise to the surface, caused by a too great supply of air. The other was the crushing of the body, caused by a sudden diving into deep water. The sudden rise to the surface could kill the diver; a sudden dive could force his body up into the helmet, which could also result in death. Gradually the "hard-hat suit" was improved so that the diver could be given a constant supply of air. The diver could then move around under the ocean without worrying about the air supply. During the 1940s diving underwater without a special suit became popular. Instead, divers used a breathing device and a small covering made of rubber and glass over parts of the face. To improve the swimmer's speed another new invention was used: a piece of rubber shaped like a giant foot, which was attached to each of the diver's own feet. The manufacture of rubber breathing pipes made it possible for divers to float on the surface of the water, observing the marine life underneath them. A special rubber suit enabled them to stay in cold water for long periods, collecting specimens of animal and vegetable life that had never been obtained in the past. The most important advance, however, was the invention of a self-contained underwater breathing apparatus, which is called a "scuba". Invented by two Frenchmen, Jacques Cousteau and Emile Gagnan, the scuba consists of a mouthpiece joined to one or two tanks of compressed air which are attached to the diver's back. The scuba makes it possible for a diver-scientist to work 200 feet underwater or even deeper for several hours. As a result, scientists can now move around freely at great depths, learning about the wonders of the sea.

单选题Questions 11 to 14 are based on the following talk on manufacturing. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 11 to 14.

单选题 {{I}}Questions 17 to 20 are based on an introduction to modern artist Olafur Eliasson and his works. You now have 20 seconds to read Questions 17 to 20.{{/I}}

单选题{{B}}Part A{{/B}}Read the following texts and-answer the questions which accompany them by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. Text 1 The destruction of our natural resources and contamination of our food supply continue to occur, largely because of the extreme difficulty in affixing legal responsibility on those who continue to treat our environment with reckless abandon. Attempts to prevent pollution by legislation, economic incentives and friendly persuasion have been met by lawsuits, personal and industrial denial and long delays — not only in accepting responsibility, but more importantly, in doing something about it. It seems that only when the government decides it can afford tax incentives or production sacrifices is there any initiative for change. Where is industry's and our recognition that protecting mankind's great treasure is the single most important responsibility? If ever there will be time for environmental health professionals to come to the frontlines and provide leadership to solve environmental problems,that time is now. We are being asked, and, in fact, the public is demanding that we take positive action. It is our responsibility as professionals in environmental health to make the difference. Yes, the ecologist, the environmental activists and the conservationists serve to communicate, stimulate thinking and promote behavioral change. However, it is those of us who are paid to make the decisions to develop, improve and enforce environmental standards, I submit, who must lead the charge. We must recognize that environmental health issues do not stop at city limits, county lines, state or even federal boundaries. We can no longer afford to be tunnel-visioned in our approach. We must visualize issues from every perspective to make the objective decisions. We must express our views clearly to prevent media distortion and public confusion. I believe we have a three-part mission for the present. First, we must continue to press for improvements in the quality of life that people can make for themselves. Second, we must investigate and understand the link between environment and health. Third, we must be able to communicate technical information in a form that citizens can understand. If we can accomplish these three goals in this decade, maybe we can finally stop environmental degradation, and not merely hold it back. We will then be able to spend pollution dollars truly on prevention rather than on bandages.

单选题Whatdoesthemando?A.Ataxi-driver.B.Abusdriver.C.Apoliceman.D.Atouristguide.

单选题Questions 14 to 16 are based on the talk about the changing of world population.

单选题 Opinion polls are now beginning to show a reluctant consensus that, whoever is to blame and whatever happens from now on, high unemployment is probably here to stay. This means we shall have to find ways of sharing the available employment more widely. But we need to go further. We must ask some fundamental questions about the future of work. Should we continue to treat employment as the norm? Should we not rather encourage many other ways for self-respecting people to work? Should we not create conditions in which many of us can work for ourselves, rather than for an employer? Should we not aim to revive the household and the neighbourhood, as well as the factory and the office, as centres of production and work? The industrial age has been the only period of human history in which most people's work has taken the form of jobs. The industrial age may now be coming to an end, and some of the changes in work patterns which it brought may have to be reversed. This seems a daunting thought. But, in fact, it could offer the prospect of a better future for work. Universal employment, as its history shows, has not meant economic freedom. Employment became widespread when the enclosures of the 17th and 18th centuries made many people dependent on paid work by depriving them of the use of the land, and thus of the means to provide a living for themselves. Then the factory system destroyed the cottage industries and removed work from people's homes. Later, as transport improved, first by rail and then by road, people commuted longer distances to their places of employment until, eventually, many people's work lost all connection with their home lives and the places in which they lived. Meanwhile, employment put women at a disadvantage. In pre-industrial times, men and women had shared the productive work of the household and village community. Now it became customary for the husband to go out to paid employment, leaving the unpaid work of the home and family to his wife. Tax and benefit regulations still assume this norm today, and restrict more flexible sharing of work roles between the sexes. It was not only women whose work status suffered. As employment became the dominant form of work, young people and old people were excluded—a problem now, as more teenagers become frustrated at school and more retired people want to live active lives. All this may now have to change. The time has certainly come to switch some effort and resources away from the utopian goal of creating jobs for all, to the urgent practical task of helping many people to manage without full-time jobs.

单选题Questions 17 to 20 are based on the following news report. You now have 20 seconds to read Questions 17 to 20.

单选题According to the passage, which of the statements is NOT true?

单选题{{B}}Text 2{{/B}} No people doubt the fundamental importance of mothers in childrearing, but what do fathers do? Much of what they contribute is simply being the second adult in the home. Bringing up children is demanding, stressful and exhausting. Two adults can support and make up for each other's deficiencies and build on each other's strength. As we all know, fathers also bring an array of unique qualities. Some are familiar: protector and role model. Teen age boys without fathers are notoriously prone to trouble. The pathway to adulthood for daughters is somewhat easier, but they must still learn from their fathers, in ways they cannot from their mothers, such as how to relate to men. They learn from their fathers about heterosexual trust, intimacy and difference. They learn to appreciate their own femininity from the one male who is most special in their lives. Most important, through loving and being loved by their fathers, they learn that they are love-woruhy. Current research gives much deeper—and mole surprising insight into the father's role in child rearing. One significantly overlooked dimension of fathering is play. From their children's birth through adolescence, fathers tend to emphasize game more than caretaking. The father's style of play is likely to be both physically stimulating and exciting. With older children it involves more teamwork, requiring competitive testing of physical and mental skills. It frequently resembles a teaching relationship: come on, let me show you how. Mothers play more at the child's level. They seem willing to let the child directly play. Kids, at least in the early years, seem to prefer to play with daddy. In one study of 21/2(下标)-year-olds who were given a choice, more than two-thirds chose to play with their fathers. The way fathers' play has effects on everything from the management of emotions to intelligence and academic achievement. It is of particular importance in promoting self-control. According to one expert, "children who roughhouse with their fathers quickly learn that biting, kicking and other forms of physical violence are not acceptable." They learn when to "shut it down". At play and in other realms, fathers tend to lay stress on competition, challenge, initiative, risk-taking and independence. Mothers, as caretakers, stress emotional security and personal safety. On the playground fathers often try to get the child to swing ever higher, while mothers are cautious, worrying about an accident. We know, too, that fathers' involvement seems to be linked to enhanced verbal and problem-solving skills and higher academic achievement. Several studies found that along with paternal strictness, the amount of time fathers spent reading with them was a strong predictor of their daughters' verbal ability. For sons the results have been equally striking. Studies uncovered a strong relationship between fathers' involvement and the mathematical abilities of their sons. Other studies found a relationship between paternal nurturing and boys' verbal intelligence.

单选题The population of the world today is about______ .

单选题A mystery over what caused the brightest supernova ever observed finally appears to have been solved. Two astronomers in the Netherlands say the explosion was the result of a cosmic pileup: dozens of massive stars crashing into each other, producing a monstrous heavyweight star that eventually exploded, leaving a giant black hole in its wake. Supernova 2006gy burst into view in September 2006 in a distant galaxy, 240 million light years away. The blast was 100 times more powerful than a normal supernova, suggesting the exploding star weighed in at more than a hundred times the mass of the Sun. But astronomers found a puzzling detail in their observations: the supernova debris contained large amounts of hydrogen, which they would not have expected for such a massive star: It should have shed its outer hydrogen layers at an earlier stage. Although several possible explanations have been put forward to explain the massive blast— including the formation of a quark star and the production of huge quantities of antimatter—no single theory could easily explain all of the observations. Now, in the journal Nature, Simon Portegies Zwart and Edward van den Heuvel of the University of Amsterdam say 2006gy may have been the result of a multiple-star collision in a dense stellar cluster. They say dozens of stars—some of them hydrogen-rich—collided to form a giant weighing in at over 100 Suns. Unable to support its own weight, the colossus blew itself to smithereens in an explosion that outshone its home galaxy. Computer simulations reveal that multiple collisions are quite likely in very dense star clusters. Our own galaxy, the Milky Way, contains two such superdense clusters (the Arches cluster and the Quintuplet cluster), close to its centre. Indeed, supernova 2006gy also occurred close to the core of its host galaxy. If Portegies Zwart and van den Heuvel are right, the dense cluster of stars should become visible once the supernova has faded sufficiently. This should happen a few years from now, they say. There may be another explanation for the brightness of the supernova, however. In the same issue of Nature, Stan Woosley of the University of California at Santa Cruz and his colleagues show how multiple explosions in a single, very massive star could account for 2006gy's behaviour. In this model, every explosion produces an expanding shell of material. When new ejecta catches up and collides with an older shell, so much energy is released that the result will look like an over-luminous supernova. "One could, I suppose, make our massive star by merging smaller ones," Woosley said, "but that was not part of our model and does not seem necessary." According to Woosley's calculations, the star may not yet have collapsed into a black hole. A new explosion might happen in about 10 years or so, he says.

单选题Text 2 For the past six years, crime rates have been falling all over America. In some big cities, the fall has been extraordinary. Between 1993 and 1997 in New York city violent crime fell by 39% in central Harlem and by 45% in the once-terrifying South Bronx. The latest figures released by the FBI, for 1997, show that serious crime continued to fall in all the larger cities, though a little more slowly than in 1996. Violent crime fell by 5% in all and by slightly more in cities with over 250,000 people. Property crimes have fallen, too, by more than 20% since 1980, so that the rates for burglary and car-theft are lower in America than they are in supposedly more law-abiding Britain and Scandinavia. And people have noticed. In 1994, 31% of Americans told pollsters that crime was the most important challenge facing the country, while in 1997, only 14% thought so. Some cities' police departments are so impressed by these figures, it is said, that they have lately taken to exaggerating the plunge in crime. Why this has happened is anyone's guess. Many factors — social, demographic, economic, and political — affect crime rate, so it is difficult to put a finger on the vital clue. In March this year, the FBI itself admitted it had "no idea" why rates were falling so fast. Politicians think they know, of course. Ask Rudy Giuliani, the mayor of New York, why his city has made such strides in beating crime that it accounts for fully a quarter of the national decline. He will cite his policy of "zero tolerance". This concept, which sprang from a famous article by two criminologists in Atlantic Monthly in March 1982, maintains that by refusing to tolerate tiny infractions of the law — dropping litter, spray — painting walls — the authorities can create a climate in which crime of more dangerous kinds finds it impossible to flourish. The Atlantic article was called "Broken Windows"; if one window in a building was left broken, it argued, all the others would soon be gone. The answer: mend the window, fast. The metro system in Washington, D.C was the first place where zero tolerance drew public attention, especially when one passenger was arrested for eating a banana. The policy seemed absurdly pernickety, yet it worked: in a better environment, people's behavior improved, and crime dropped. Mr. Giuliani, taking this theme to heart, has gone further. He has cracked down on windscreen-cleaners, public urinates, graffiti, and even jaywalkers. He has excoriated New York's famously sullen cabdrivers, and wants all New Yorkers to be nicer to each other. Tony Blair, visiting from London, has been hugely impressed. But is this cleanliness and civility the main reason why crime has fallen? It seems unlikely "Zero tolerance" can also be a distraction, making too many policemen spend too much time handing out littering tickets and parking fines while, some streets away, young men are being murdered for their trainers. It is localized, too: though lower Manhattan or the Washington metro can show the uncanny orderliness of a communist regime, other parts of the city — the areas of highest crime maybe left largely untreated. William Bratton, New York's police commissioner until Mr. Giuliani fired him for stealing his thunder, has a different explanation for the fall in crime. It came about mostly, he believes, because he reorganized the police department and restored its morale: giving his officers better guns, letting them take more decisions for themselves, and moving them away from desk jobs and out into the struts. Mr. Bratton made his precinct commanders personally responsible for reducing crimes on their own beats. There was no passing the buck, and those who failed were fired. Within a year, he had replaced half of them.

单选题What did the author feel about being rejected by her dates?

单选题Have you heard about the book which pushes blood types as determining whether somebody should be vegetarian or not? The idea of choosing foods based on your blood type was popularized by Peter J. D'Adamo, ND, in his book, Eat Right For Your Type (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1996). D'Adamo, a naturopath, proposes that those who have blood type A should be vegetarian, while those with blood type O must eat meat and eliminate wheat and some other grains. He says that following the correct diet for your blood type will help you maintain optimal health and weight, avoid many infections, and fight back against life-threatening illnesses. Is there any truth to his claims? While D'Adamo spends more than 350 pages explaining the minute details of the foods, supplements, medications, and exercise regimens which should be followed by people with each blood type, he fails to scientifically document the effectiveness of his recommendations. Many of the claims which he makes are not backed up by published research. For example, depending on your blood type, you are presented with detailed lists of foods which are highly beneficial, neutral, or to be avoided. How were these lists generated? Has any research been published showing adverse health effects from use of foods which should be avoided? No studies are presented which support what appear to be the author's speculations. Numerous studies have shown that vegetarians live longer than non-vegetarians and have a lower risk of a number of chronic diseases. These studies are likely to be based on people from all blood type groups. It certainly seems that a vegetarian diet has benefits for those studied, regardless of their blood type. Similarly, studies like those of Dean Ornish appear to demonstrate the beneficial effect of a vegetarian diet and other lifestyle changes on a number of individuals, and not just those of a certain blood type. Eat Right For Your Type should not be used as the basis for dietary change. Statements like "I could never be a vegetarian, I'm type O" are not based on scientific evidence and may even lead people to avoid making dietary changes which could benefit both their health and the health of our planet. Our advice? Stick with a varied, whole foods-based vegetarian diet regardless of your blood type.

单选题 Questions 17—20 are based on the following passage.

单选题