问答题People in large cities are surrounded by noise pollution. Everyday their eyes are bombarded by sounds by vehicles, machines, television loud speakers and so on.
问答题Directions:
In this part of the test, you will hear 5 sentences in English. You will hear the sentences ONLY ONCE. After you have heard each sentence, translate it into Chinese and write your version in the corresponding space in your ANSWER BOOKLET.
问答题人们通常喜欢听好听的话，一听到拂耳之言就容易产生不悦甚至愠怒。一个人，特别是身居要职的人，要能够心悦诚服地倾听逆耳之言并从中获得智慧，就需要容忍和大度的雅量，而这往往依赖于人们的心性修养和对人性缺陷的克制；否则，就会给善于运用花言巧语和投其所好的人提供可乘之机，并伤害直言不讳的忠诚之人。 在理智上，人们大概愿意接受“兼听则明，偏信则暗”、“忠言逆耳利于行”等一类古老的真理，或者乐于信服老子说的“美言不信，信言不美”的哲理。但在行为上，人们又容易背离这些古训，不愿意听或听不进“逆耳”之言，最终犯下严重的过失。
问答题There is no better school than adversity. Every defeat, every heartbreak, every loss, contains its own seed, its own lesson on how to improve my performance next time. Never again will I contribute to my downfall by refusing to face the truth and learn from my past mistakes. Because I know: gems cannot shine without polish, and I can not perfect myself without hardship.
Now I know that there are no times in life when opportunity, the chance to be and do, gathers so richly about my soul when it has to suffer cruel adversity. Then everything depends on whether I raise my head or lower it in seeking help. Whenever I am struck down, in the future, by any terrible defeat, I will inquire of myself, after the first pain has passed how I can turn that adversity into good. What a great opportunity that moment may present to take the bitter root I am holding and transform it into fragrant garden of flowers.
Always will I seek the seed of triumph in every adversity.
问答题 Questions 7～10 News of the
worst unemployment numbers in 16 years is enough to create plenty of job jitters
for most workers. But, with performance-review season in full swing, some people
are bound to hear negative comments. In a tough economy, a bad review can seem
insurmountable. But you can recover if you are "willing to self-assess and be
open-minded to what is being told" to you, says Barbara Mohl, president of HR
Connected, a human resources consulting firm. Here's how to bounce back:
—Be open to feedback The review is a
communication tool for you and your manager to begin the conversation about your
performance. You should be ready and willing to accept feedback. Remember, what
you hear is usually meant to help you do your job better. "Realize that this
process is called a performance review, not a performance correction," says John
Heins, senior vice president and chief human resources officer at staffing firm
Spherion Corp. The review isn't the time to debate and resolve the problems.
"That conversation is best-suited for a follow-up meeting," says Mr. Heins.
—Acknowledge your manager's comments. Giving
negative feedback can be stressful for a manager. Listen to and acknowledge what
your manager is saying, regardless of whether you agree with the comments. "The
worst thing you can do is to make excuses or put the blame on someone else,"
says Beth Carvin, CEO and president of Nobscot, a retention management
consulting firm in Honolulu. After you have heard your manager's comments
and you understand what has been said, you can say "I appreciate your feedback
and I understand the issues you have addressed." If you feel strongly and have
proof that the assessment is unfair, then you can say "Thank you for your
feedback, but I don't necessarily agree with X and I look forward to scheduling
a follow-up meeting to discuss your points more specifically. " Schedule that
meeting before you leave the review. —Create an action plan.
Take time to reflect and review your manager's comments. You
might want to discuss difficult issues with a mentor or friend. Then create an
action plan that you can cover and add to in the" follow-up meeting. If you
don't agree with your boss on all points, give specific examples of where you
think your manager is wrong. Keep in mind, though, you'll need to be proactive
about how to turn things around—regardless of whether you agree. "Plan with your
manager exactly what he or she would like you to improve," says Mr. Heins. "Does
something have to be done quicker or faster, or do you have to interact better
with your colleagues? Ask if there might be a colleague who can mentor you and
inquire about resources you can use to improve," recommends Ms. Mohl.
—Schedule periodic follow-up meetings.
Stay on top of the turnaround plan. "Many employees don't take the time or
initiative to check in with their supervisor to see how they're doing," says Ms.
Carvin. "Don't be afraid to toot your own horn," she says, "and let your boss
know what you're accomplishing. Check in at least every two to three weeks or
sooner if you've achieved a success at work. "
问答题Questions 1～3 Europeans have mixed feelings about class. They deplore the idea that people may remain mired in poverty, and they have large welfare program to help them move up. They also resent the sight of rich families staying at the top for generations, and so impose high taxes to redistribute wealth and income. On the other hand, compared with Americans, Europeans cling to a somewhat static view of society. They dislike the extremes of wealth and poverty that accompany America's supposed free-for-all meritocracy. They look askance at "excessive" job mobility, which breeds insecurity. Polls show that, compared with Americans, Europeans are more likely to dislike unfettered market competition and to believe that success is outside their own control. With some exceptions (e.g. Dick Whittington), they lack the equivalent of Horatio Alger's myth of rags to riches. In short, in the European view, social stability is desirable, and if a certain amount of inflexibility is needed to underpin it, that is a price worth paying to avoid the restless uncertainties of America' s market-driven model. Yet the curious thing is that European society—at least in the Nordic countries—is far less stable than America's. Two new research papers confirm that, if one compares the incomes of children with those of their parents, or considers how long people in one income group stay there, Nordic countries emerge far more mobile than America. Britain shows more class stability than its northern neighbors, but it is still a lot closer to them than it is to America. The authors rank countries on a scale from one to zero, with one meaning no mobility at all (i. e. a child's income is identical to its parents') and zero meaning perfect mobility (i. e. a child's income bears no relation to its parents'). The Nordic countries score around 0.2 for sons, Britain scores 0.36, and America 0.54 (meaning that a son's earnings are more closely related to his father's in America). These figures are roughly in line with the conclusions of other studies, though they have the advantage of using standardized data, thereby minimizing problems of definition that usually bedevil cross-country comparisons. The biggest finding of the studies is not, however, about overall social mobility, but about mobility at the bottom. This is the most distinctive feature of. Nordic societies, and it is also perhaps the most significant difference with America. Around three quarters of sons born into the poorest fifth of the population in Nordic countries in the late 1950s had moved out of that category by the time they were in their early 40s. In contrast, only just over half of American men born at the bottom later moved up. This is another respect in which Britain is more like the Nordics than like America. some 70% of its poorest sons escaped from poverty within a generation. The Nordic countries are distinctive in one further way. the sons born at the bottom (into the poorest fifth) earn roughly the same as those born a rung above them (the second-poorest fifth). In other words, Nordic countries have almost completely snapped the link between the earnings of parents and children at and near the bottom. That is not at all true of America. Social mobility at middle-income levels is more similar everywhere (it is a bit higher in most European countries, but not by much). That may partly explain why Americans think their society is more mobile than it is (the middle classes tend to set the political agenda, and mobility is genuine enough for them). It may also explain why few Europeans appreciate quite how much movement up and down the income ladder there is, because much of it takes place off the radar screen of the politically influential. The obvious explanation for greater mobility in the Nordic countries is their tax and welfare systems, which (especially when compared with America's) deliberately try to help the children of the poor to do better than their parents. One might expect social mobility and economic flexibility to go together—in fact, to be two sides of the same coin. But to the extent that redistribution is an explanation, it implies the opposite: that social mobility is a product of high public spending, a bit like the low incidence of poverty or longer life expectancy (on both of which Europe also does better than America). But greater public spending tends also to be associated with less economic flexibility—which is why Nordic countries have sought to limit the more arthritis-inducing features of their tax-and-spend programs. Yet redistributive fiscal policies cannot be all there is to it. If they were, Nordic countries would not do as well as they do (their welfare states are not appreciably more generous than Britain's). The other part of the explanation seems to be their superior education systems. Education has long been recognized as the most important single trigger of social mobility—and all four Nordic countries do unusually well in the school-appraisal system developed by the OECD. That in turn may explain why the bigger continental European countries, notably France, Germany, Italy, are not as mobile as Nordic ones. With relatively poor education systems, they are bound to perform more like Britain. But that still makes them socially (if not economically) more flexible than the land of the free. For Europe, the secrets of greater social mobility are, first, tough redistribution policies that particularly benefit those at the bottom; and, especially in Nordic countries, a suppler and less class-ridden education system, running from top to bottom. America could learn something from that.1.In what ways are Europeans different from Americans in their view of society?
问答题[此试题无题干]
问答题落实2030年可持续发展议程是世界各国的共同任务。当前世界经济复苏乏力，南北发展差距拉大，国际发展合作动力不足，难民危机、恐怖主义、公共卫生、气候变化等问题困扰国际社会。各国要携手将领导人的承诺转化为实际行动，认真推进落实2030年可持续发展议程。通过发展，应对各种全球性挑战，助力各国经济转型升级，携手走上公平、开放、全面、创新的可持续发展之路，共同提高全人类的福祉。
问答题Controversy has been aroused about the works of Jin Yong, a famous martial-arts fiction writer in China, being used in the students" Chinese textbooks. Some experts in the field of education welcome the practice, while others are strongly against it.
Topic: Should martial-arts fictions be integrated into the Chinese textbook?
Questions for Reference:
1. Some people think the martial-arts fictions full of violence and romance are not suitable for the students. What"s your opinion?
2. What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of Jin Yong"s martial-arts fictions as textbook material?
3. What are the possible negative effects and how can we reduce them?
问答题
问答题手机(移动电话)、寻呼机和便携式计算机成为我们的生活的一部分，它们提高了上百万用户的生产力和效率。然而，一项调查却显示这些便携式设备所释放出的巨量信息有可能变得无法驾驭。从掌上电脑的电子信函到手机的语音邮件，使用者都面临着一个严重的管理问题，即如何控制这些接收信息的渠道。
由于本身小巧玲珑，又具备种种先进的特点，便携式电子设备为消费者带来了自由，提高了生产力，改进了对信息的组织。但是，信息发送与接收的便捷发展得如此之快，以至于很多人每天都会收到各种各样、成百上千的电子邮件。结果造成很多人无法充分发挥设备的特点，这些特点将有助于他们对超载信息进行管理。
信息超载所造成的影响已经超出了专业领域。它引起的紧张与焦虑会给家庭关系和友情带来消极的影响。人们会有一种被信息淹没的感觉，这使得他们紧张、心事重重，很少有时间与家人和朋友相聚。所以，有必要为人们建立一种处理电子信息的管理系统。当人们掌握了这种数码管理方法后，他们的工作与个人生活都会得以极大地简化和改善。
问答题[此试题无题干]
问答题太湖明珠无锡，位于江苏省南部，地处美丽富饶的长江三角洲中心地带。这里气候宜人，物产丰富，风景优美，是中国重点风景旅游城市。与万里长城齐名的古京杭大运河纵贯市区，泛舟河上，能领略水乡的民俗风情。 距市区七公里的太湖梅粱景区是太湖风景之精华，碧波万顷，渔帆点点，湖光山色，令人陶醉。其中的鼋头渚巨石状如鼋头，远眺烟波浩渺的太湖，被诗人郭沫若誉为“太湖佳绝处”。
问答题[此试题无题干]
问答题谁是你最景仰的人?据某一中学中开展的调查显示：40%的学生景仰科学家，35%的学生景仰体育、影视明星，只有1.5%的学生景仰自己的父母。为什么如此少的孩子景仰父母?许多孩子认为，父母没做什么惊天动地的大事，至于父母日常对他们的关怀照料，则被视为理所应当。
一些教育专家认为，许多家长在任劳任怨的同时，盲目地关心孩子的学习成绩，容易造成孩子的冷漠和自私，缺乏感恩之心。长此以往，孩子永远不能真正懂得孝敬父母，理解他人，更不会主动帮助别人。父母应该让孩子知道，亲人对他们的付出不是理所应当的。
问答题August was once a time for dreaming, wandering the empty streets of this city, reading silly-season newspaper stories after a leisurely lunch, gazing at square where fountains plashed and the pregnant or the old chatted on benches at dusk. Then something happened. The world speeded up. Stress levels soared. Idle moments evaporated. Egos expanded. Money outpaced politics. Rages surged.
August aborted this year. It morphed into the serious season. The beach lost out to the barricades. A time of outrage is upon us. Now a feeling has grown in Western societies that uncontrollable forces are at work shrinking possibility. History has never seen a global power shift as radical as the current one that managed to be peaceful.
Growth, jobs, expansion, excitement-and, yes, possibility-lie in the great non-Western arc from China through India to South Africa and Brazil. The world has been turned upside down. What we are witnessing is how shaken Western societies are by such inversion. As new powers emerge, globalization has altered the relationship between capital and labor in the former's favor. Returns on capital have proved higher relative to wages. The gap between rich and poor has become a gulf. The only people who walked away unscathed from the great financial binge were its main architects and greatest beneficiaries: such as bankers and financiers. This, too, is fueling a time of outrage that has left western politicians chasing shadows.
问答题
问答题
问答题
问答题It is no coincidence that the relationship between our countries has accompanied a period of positive change. China has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty--an accomplishment unparalleled in human history--while playing a larger role in global events. And the United States has seen our economy grow. There is a Chinese proverb: "Consider the past, and you shall know the future. " Surely, we have known setbacks and challenges over the last 30 years. Our relationship has not been without disagreement and difficulty. But the notion that we must be adversaries is not predestined--not when we consider the past. Indeed, because of our cooperation, both the United States and China are more prosperous and more secure. We have seen what is possible when we build upon our mutual interests, and engage on the basis of mutual respect. And yet the success of that engagement depends upon understanding--on sustaining an open dialogue, and learning about one another and from one another. For just as that American table tennis player pointed out--we share much in common as human beings, but our countries are different in certain ways.