单选题

单选题 {{B}}Questions 15-18{{/B}}

单选题When Steve McDougal says "It's not a financial hardship, but it is an incremental amount of money that's not required," she means that ______.

单选题Questions 16 to 20 are based on the following talk.

单选题Paragraph 5 shows that in 1997, people will: ______.

单选题[此试题无题干]

单选题

单选题

单选题Questions 1 to 5 are based on the following conversation.

单选题For more than fifty years we have known, or could have known, that there is an unconscious to counterbalance consciousness. Medical psychology has furnished all the necessary empirical and experimental proofs of an unconscious psychic reality which demonstrably influences consciousness and behavior. All this is known, but no practical conclusions have been drawn from it. We still go on thinking and acting as if we were simplex and not duplex. Accordingly, we imagine ourselves to be innocuous, reasonable, and human. We do not think of distrusting our motives, or of asking ourselves how the inner man feels about the things we do in the outside world, but actually it is frivolous, superficial, and unreasonable of us, as well as psychically unhygienic, to overlook the reaction and viewpoint of the unconscious. One can regard one's stomach or heart as unimportant or even worthy of contempt, but nevertheless overeating and overexertion have consequences which affect the whole man. Yet we think that psychic mistakes and their consequences can be erased by mere words, for "psychic" means less than air to most people. All the same, nobody can deny that without the psyche there would be no world at all and still less a human world. Virtually everything depends on human soul and its functions. It is worthy of all the attention we can give it, especially today when everyone admits that the weal or woe of the future will be decided not by attacks of wild animals, by natural catastrophes, or by the danger of world-wide epidemics but rather by the psychic changes in man. Only an almost imperceptible disturbance of equilibrium in a few of our rulers' heads could plunge the world into blood, fire, and radioactivity. The technical means to this destruction are available to both sides. And certain conscious deliberations, uncontrolled by an inner opponent, can be all too easily indulged, as we have already seen from the example of one "leader". The consciousness of modern man still clings so much to outward objects that he believes them exclusively responsible, as if it were on them that decisions depended. That the psychic state of certain individuals could emancipate itself for once from the behavior of objects is something that is considered far too little, although irrationalities of this sort are observed every day and can happen to everyone.

单选题Questions 21-25 There are many theories about the beginning of drama in ancient Greece. The one most widely accepted today is based on the assumption that drama evolved from ritual. The argument for this view goes as follows. In the beginning, human beings viewed the natural forces of the world, even the seasonal changes, as unpredictable, and they sought, through various means, to control these unknown and feared powers. Those measures which appeared to bring the desired results were then retained and repeated until they hardened into fixed rituals. Eventually stories arose which explained or veiled the mysteries of the rites. As time passed some rituals were abandoned, but the stories, later called myths, persisted and provided material for art and drama. Those who believed that drama evolved out of ritual also argue that those rites contained the seed of theater because music, dance, masks, and costumes were almost always used. Furthermore, a suitable site had to be provided for performances, and when the entire community did not participate, a clear division was usually made between the "acting area" and the "auditorium". In addition, there were performers, and, since considerable importance was attached to avoiding mistakes in the enactment of rite~, religious leaders usually assumed that task. Wearing masks and costumes, they often impersonated other people, animals, or supernatural beings, and mimed the desired effect--success in hunt or battle, the coming rain, the revival of the Sun--as an actor might. Eventually such dramatic representations were separated from religious activities. Another theory traces the theater"s origin from the human interest in storytelling. According to this view, tales (about the hunt, war, or other feats) are gradually elaborated, at first through the use of impersonation, action, and dialogue by a narrator and then through the assumption of each of the roles by a different person. A closely related theory traces theater to those dances that are primarily rhythmical and gymnastic or that are imitations of animal movements and sounds

单选题WhydoesJanewanttoleaveherpresentjob?[A]Becauseshedoesnotlikethejob.[B]Becauseshewantstodosomethingdifferent.[C]BecauseshedoesnotwanttoliveoutsideLondon.

单选题BQuestions 1 to 5 are based on the following conversation./B

单选题Near the border between Florida and Georgia, lives a rare tree called a stinking cedar. Once common, Torreya taxi folia seems to have got stuck in this tiny pocket as the continent warmed after the last ice age. It cannot migrate northward because the surrounding soils are too poor. Attacked by fungi, just a few hundred stinking cedars remain there. Rising temperatures now threaten to kill them off entirely. Spying a looming extinction, a group of people is engaged in a kind of ecological vigilantism. The self-styled "Torreya Guardians" collect thousands of seeds a year and plant them in likely places across the eastern United States. Stinking cedar turns out to thrive in North Carolina. The Torreya Guardians are now trying to plant it in colder states like Ohio and Michigan as well. By the time the trees are fully grown, they reason, temperatures might be ideal there. Some are dubious. The Torreya Guardians were at first seen as "eco-terrorists spreading an invasive species", remembers Connie Barlow, the group"s chief propagandist. She rejects that charge, pointing out that she is only moving the tree within America. She also thinks that drastic action of this kind will soon be widespread: "We are the radical edge of what is going to become a mainstream action." Conservation is nearly always backward-looking. It aims to keep plants and animals not just where they are but where they were before humans meddled. The only real debate is over how far to turn back the clock. Scotland and Wales have been heavily grazed for centuries, giving them a bald beauty. Should they now he reforested, or "rewilded"? Should wolves be encouraged to reclaim their ancient territory in America"s Rocky Mountains? In a rapidly warming world, this attitude is becoming outdated. No part of the Earth can be returned to a natural state that prevailed before human interference, because humans are so rapidly changing the climate. Conservation is being overtaken by fast-moving reality. In future the question will no longer be how to preserve species in particular places but how to move them around to ensure their survival. Global warming has already set off mass migrations. Having crossed the Baltic Sea, purple emperor butterflies are fluttering northward through Scandinavia in search of cooler temperatures. Trees and animals are climbing mountains. The most spectacular migrations have taken place in the oceans, says Elvira Poloczanska of Australia"s national science agency. Many sea creatures can move quickly, which is just as well: in the oceans it is generally necessary to travel farther than on land to find lower temperatures. Phytoplankton populations are moving by up to 400km a decade. Not all plants and animals can make it to new homes, though. Some will be hemmed in by farmland, cities or coasts. Animals that live in one mountain range might be unable to cross a hot plain to reach higher mountains. And many will find that the species they eat move at a different speed from their own: carnivorous mammals can migrate more quickly than rodents, which in turn migrate faster than trees. The creatures that already inhabit the poles and the highest mountains cannot move to cooler climes and might be done for. It is not clear that climate change has yet driven any species to extinction. Frogs native to Central and South America have been wiped out by a fungus to which they may or may not have become more vulnerable as a result of changing temperatures. Yet the speed at which species habitats are shifting suggests they are already under great pressure—which will only increase in the next few decades. Chris Thomas, an evolutionary biologist at the University of York in England, has estimated that by 2050 between 18% and 35% of species could be on the path to extinction. A few years ago Mr. Thomas helped transport hundreds of butterflies to Durham, at least 50km north of their usual range, and released them into the cooler air. The butterflies fared well. These days he thinks bigger. Why not move creatures farther, he suggests, to places where they have never lived? He suggests several candidates for "assisted colonization" to Britain. The Caucasian wingnut tree, which clings on in a few moist parts of Turkey and Iran, could probably be planted widely. De Prunner"s ringlet, an endangered butterfly native to southern Europe, feeds on grasses that are common in Britain. The Iberian lynx, an endangered cat, would find lots of rabbits to eat. Britain is a highly suitable ark for other countries" endangered species: thanks to the Gulf Stream, its climate is expected to remain broadly constant over the next few decades. The notion of deliberately moving species a long way from home is starting to look a little less heretical. The International Union for Conservation of Nature, which shapes biodiversity policy, recently revised its guidelines, apparently giving a slight nod to such relocations. It insists upon great caution. But "if you have too much risk assessment, nothing will happen, and these species will go extinct," says Mr. Thomas.

单选题

单选题

单选题[此试题无题干]

单选题Drunken driving—sometimes called America"s socially accepted form of murder—has become a national epidemic. Every hour of every day about three Americans on average are killed by drunken drivers, adding up to an incredible 250,000 over the past decade. A drunken driver is usually defined as one with a 0.10 blood alcohol content or roughly three beers, glasses of wine or shots of whisky drunk within two hours. Heavy drinking used to be an acceptable part of the American manly image and judges were not severe in most courts, but the deaths caused by drunken driving have recently caused so many well-publicized tragedies, especially involving young children, that public opinion is no longer so tolerant. Twenty states have raised the legal drinking age to 21, changing a trend in the 1960s to reduce it to 18. After New Jersey lowered it to 18, the number of people killed by 18-20 year-old drivers more than doubled, so the state recently upped it back to 21. Reformers, however, fear that raising the drinking age will have little effect unless accompanied by educational programs to help young people to develop "responsible attitudes" about drinking and teach them to resist peer pressure to drink. Tough new laws have led to increased arrests and tests and, in many areas already, to a marked decline in fatalities. Some states are also punishing bars for serving customers too many drinks. A bar or pub in Massachusetts was fined for serving six or more brandies to a customer who was "obviously drunk" and later drove off the road, killing a nine-year-old boy. As the fatalities continue to occur daily in every state, some Americans are even beginning to speak well of the 13 years of national prohibition of alcohol that began in 1919, what President Hoover called the "noble experiment". They forget that legal prohibition didn"t stop drinking, but encouraged political corruption and organized crime. As with the booming drug trade generally, there is no easy solution.

单选题Questions 1～5 There has been an ecological triumph in the province of Sweden where I"ve spent the past three weeks. The wolf and the lynx have both returned to the forests. The naturalists have been rejoicing. There"s been a TV documentary. Meanwhile the local farmers and hunters have disappeared into the forests with their rifles. Jan and Lennart, the sons of the farmer at the end of the lake, were particularly aggrieved that the lynx (that"s a wild cat to you townies) was killing "their" deer, and the urban bureaucrats who had decided to protect it only increased their rage. They vowed to track the animal down. "Did they kill it?" I asked one local man. "They didn"t say", he replied with a hint of a wink. What does the word "rural" mean to you? Organic, perhaps. Wholesome. Gemeinschaft (or do I mean Gesellschaft ?). Conservative. Marx"s "rural idiocy" maybe. To me the countryside is about paranoia. It breeds independence and idiosyncrasy and other nice things but also the sort of people who wander onto Capitol Hill in order to kill some senators or declare war on the FBI for being an essentially socialist organization. For people who live in and off the countryside, there always seems to be the idea that "they"—the bureaucrats, the government, the city folk—are out to get them. What they despise almost as much as city folk themselves are the sort of things that city folk like about the countryside, footpaths, beauty spots, old buildings, rare flora and fauna, ancient sites of historical interest. To select from my experience of the past few weeks, the land that was once owned by my late grandparents contained a meadow that was famous across Sweden (well, it was once featured on the front page of the local newspaper) for its rare plants. A couple of weeks ago my cousin—an engineer and part-time farmer with a flock of four sheep and one ram—fenced the meadow off, set the sheep loose into it and within two days it duly looked like a bit of scrub in a corner of a derelict industrial estate. Incidentally, when your correspondent went to investigate this vandalism, the said ram pursued him across the field in a way that was later said to be hilarious to onlookers. Another local man carries around a special bullet in case he should ever get on the trail of a wolf. The normal bullets used for hunting deer and elk have soft tips so that they spread out on contact and cause devastating fatal wounds. But this special wolf bullet has a hard tip so that it will pass right through the animal, leaving a relatively small (though almost certainly fatal) wound. The dying wolf will then probably walk tens of miles before it dies, thus preventing "them" from identifying the slayers of this absurdly protected predator. And this happens in a province which has a wolf as its official symbol. There"s more. A neighboring lake has become home to what I was informed is an exceedingly rare kind of hawk. But the local people who have spotted it have kept its presence a closely guarded secret. If they told ornithologists about it, then the next thing that would happen is that they would probably want to come into the area and start to look at the bloody thing, and once these bureaucrats and scientists get their claws into an area, who knows where it will end? Much of this is probably true of rural areas everywhere, but in Sweden it has been exacerbated by the Byzantine bureaucracy that was generated by 40 years of social democracy, a system that led both to some of the finest public services and to the situation in which the country"s greatest living artist, Ingmar Bergman, under suspicion of a minor tax transgression, was publicly arrested and interrogated in a manner that might have been thought excessive by Beria. One of the fundamental Swedish rights is entitled allamansrdtt , which permits anybody to walk, pick berries or mushrooms virtually anywhere. Some local businessmen have hired Polish workers to come up to Sweden and pick mushrooms but they haven"t been to our area more than once. When they emerged from this forest they found that the tyres in their bikes and cars were mysteriously flat. It"s somehow a typically Swedish paradox: you have the legal right to go where you like, hut don"t let that give you the idea that you can just go anywhere.