单选题 We might marvel at the progress made in every field of study, but the methods of testing a person's knowledge and ability remain as primitive as ever they were. It really is extraordinary that after all these years, educationists have still failed to devise anything more efficient and reliable than examinations. For all the pious claim that examinations test what you know, it is common knowledge that they more often do the exact opposite. They may be a good means of testing memory, or the knack of working rapidly under extreme pressure, but they can tell you nothing about a person's true ability and aptitude. As anxiety-makers, examinations are second to none. That is because so much depends on them. They are the mark of success or failure in our society. Your whole future may be decided in one fateful day. It doesn't matter that you weren't feeling very well, or that your mother died. Little things like that don't count: the exam goes on. No one can give of his best when he is in mortal terror, or after a sleepless night, yet this is precisely what the examination system expects him to do. The moment a child begins school, he enters a world of vicious competition where success and failure are clearly defined and measured. Can we wonder at the increasing number of "drop-outs": young people who are written off as utter failures before they have even embarked on a career? Can we be surprised at the suicide rate among students? A good education should, among other things, train you to think for yourself. The examination system does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus, so the student is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely, but to restrict his reading; they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge, but induce cramming. They lower the standards of teaching, for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms. Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching their subjects, they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. The most successful candidates are not always the best educated; they are the best trained in the technique of working under duress. The results on which so much depends are often nothing more than a subjective assessment by some anonymous examiner. Examiners are only human. They get tired and hungry; they make mistakes. Yet they have to mark stacks of hastily scrawled scripts in a limited amount of time. They work under the same sort of pressure as the candidates. And their word carries weight. After a judge's decision you have the right of appeal, but not after an examiner's. There must surely be many simpler and more effective ways of assessing a person's true abilities. Is it cynical to suggest that examinations are merely a profitable business for the institutions that mn them? This is what it boils down to in the last analysis. The best comment on the system is this illiterate message recently scrawled on a wall: "I were a teenage drop-out and now I are a teenage millionaire."

单选题[此试题无题干]

单选题

单选题 {{B}}Questions 27-30{{/B}}

单选题 Directions: In this section, you will read several passages. Each passage is followed by several questions based on its content. You are to choose ONE best answer, (A), (B), (C) or (D), to each question. Answer all the questions following each passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in that passage and write the letter of the answer you have chosen in the corresponding space in your ANSWER BOOKLET. Questions 1-5 Feminist sociolinguists, over the course of the last few decades, have conducted studies that they believe support the conclusion that women are routinely discriminated against in English- speaking society. They point to the words used to describe women, as well as the words used to describe society as a whole, as indications that the English language and therefore the English- speaking culture, is slanted towards the advantage of males. The words used to describe women are used as an instrument by feminist sociolinguists to denote an inherent sexism in the English language. Word pairs such as master and mistress and sir and madam, they claim, epitomize such sexism. All of the words in question once held positive connotations but, while the masculine forms have retained their respectable associations, the feminine forms have undergone pejoration and now imply sexual promiscuity and other negative characteristics. Feminist researchers assume that such pejoration indicate that the status of women in English-speaking society is relatively low. These researchers also find fault with the use of masculine words to describe unisex entities. For example, they feel that there is nothing inherently manly about mankind, the best man for the job, or the common man. Similarly, the use of such constructions as the "the average student is worried about his grades" indicate to these researchers an inherent sexism in English that is reflective of the cultures in which they are produced. Carolyn Jacobson, author of Non-sexist Language has proposed a solution to this conundrum. She advocates the elimination of all sexed words in favor of gender-neutral terms. No longer should we refer to actors and actresses or waiters and waitresses, as such dichotomies allow for the possibility of negative connotations being associated with the feminine designation. Likewise, she believes that phrases such as mankind should give way to human kind and that the use of the masculine pronoun as the default should be abandoned in favor of neutral constructions. Thus, when sexism is eliminated from the English language, the culture will be more amenable to the deliverance of women as well.

单选题

单选题[此试题无题干]

单选题Questions 11～15 This month Singapore passed a bill that would give legal teeth to the moral obligation to support one"s parents. Called the Maintenance of Parents Bill, it received the backing of the Singapore Government. That does not mean it hasn"t generated discussion. Several members of the Parliament opposed the measure as un-Asian. Others who acknowledged the problem of the elderly poor believed it a disproportionate response. Still others believe it will subvert relations within the family: cynics dubbed it the "Sue Your Son" law. Those who say that the bill does not promote filial responsibility, of course, are right. It has nothing to do with filial responsibility. It kicks in where filial responsibility fails. The law cannot legislate filial responsibility any more than it can legislate love. All that the law can do is to provide a safety net where this morality proves insufficient. Singapore needs this bill not to replace morality, but to provide incentives to shore it up. Like many other developed nations, Singapore faces the problems of an increasing proportion of people over 60 years of age. Demography is inexorable. In 1980, 7.2% of the population was in this bracket. By the end of the century that figure will grow to 11%. By 2030, the proportion is projected to be 26%. The problem is not old age per se. It is that the ratio of economically active people to economically inactive people will decline. But no amount of government exhortation or paternalism will completely eliminate the problem of old people who have insufficient means to make ends meet. Some people will fall through the holes in any safety net. Traditionally, a person"s insurance against poverty in his old age was his family. This is not a revolutionary concept. Nor is it uniquely Asian. Care and support for one"s parents is a universal value shared by all civilized societies. The problem in Singapore is that the moral obligation to look after one"s parents is unenforceable. A father can be compelled by law to maintain his children. A husband can be forced to support his wife. But, until now, a son or daughter had no legal obligation to support his or her parents. In 1989, an Advisory Council was set up to look into the problems of the aged. Its report stated with a tinge of complacency that 950% of those who did not have their own income were receiving cash contributions from relations. But what about the 5% who aren"t getting relatives" support? They have several options:a. get a job and work until they die;b. apply for public assistance (you have to be destitute to apply);c. starve quietly. None of these options is socially acceptable. And what if this 5% figure grows, as it is likely to do, as society ages? The Maintenance of Parents Bill was put forth to encourage the traditional virtues that have so far kept Asian nations from some of the breakdowns encountered in other affluent societies. This legislation will allow a person to apply to the court for maintenance from any or all of his children. The court would have the discretion to refuse to make an order if it is unjust. Those who deride the proposal for opening up the courts to family lawsuits miss the point. Only in extreme cases would any parent take his child to court. If it does indeed become law, the bill"s effect would be far more subtle. First, it will reaffirm the notion that it is each individual"s—not society"s—responsibility to look after his parents. Singapore is still conservative enough that most people will not object to this idea. It reinforces the traditional values and it doesn"t hurt a society now and then to remind itself of its core values. Second, and more important, it will make those who are inclined to shirk their responsibilities think twice. Until now, if a person asked family elders, clergymen or the Ministry of Community Development to help get financial support from his children, the most they could do was to mediate. But mediators have no teeth, and a child could simply ignore their pleas. But to be sued by one"s parents would be a massive loss of face. It would be a public disgrace. Few people would be so thick-skinned as to say, "Sue and be damned". The hand of the conciliator would be immeasurably strengthened. It is far more likely that some sort of amicable settlement would be reached if the recalcitrant son or daughter knows that the alternative is a public trial. It would be nice to think Singapore doesn"t need this kind of law. But that belief ignores the clear demographic trends and the effect of affluence itself on traditional bends. Those of us who pushed for the bill will consider ourselves most successful if it acts as an incentive not to have it invoked in the first place.

单选题

单选题

单选题One afternoon I was sitting at my favorite table in a restaurant，waiting for the food I had ordered．Suddenly I{{U}} (32) {{/U}}that a man sitting at a table near the window kept glancing in my direction，{{U}} (33) {{/U}}he knew me．The man had a newspaper{{U}} (34) {{/U}}in front of him，which he was{{U}} (35) {{/U}}to read，but I could{{U}} (36) {{/U}}that he was keeping an eye on me．When the waiter brought my{{U}} (37) {{/U}}，the man was clearly puzzled(困惑)by the{{U}} (38) {{/U}}way in which the waiter and I{{U}} (39) {{/U}}each other．He seemed even．more puzzled as{{U}} (40) {{/U}}went on and it became{{U}} (41) {{/U}}that all the waiters in the restaurant knew me．Finally he got up and went into the{{U}} (42) {{/U}}．When he came out，he paid his bill and{{U}} (43) {{/U}}without another glance in my direction． I called the owner of the restaurant and asked what the man had{{U}} (44) {{/U}}．"Well，"he said，“that man was a detective(侦探)．He{{U}} (45) {{/U}}you here because he thought you were the man he{{U}} (46) {{/U}}．""What?"I said．showing my{{U}} (47) {{/U}}．The owner continued．"He came into the kitchen and showed me a photo of the wanted man．I{{U}} (48) {{/U}}say he looked very much like you! Of course，since we know you，we told him that he had made a{{U}} (49) {{/U}}．”“Well，it's really{{U}} (50) {{/U}}I came to a restaurant where I'm known．"I said．"{{U}} (51) {{/U}}．I might have been in trouble．/

单选题The US debate on human cloning gathered steam recently, moving toward federal legislation that could affect both next fall"s Congressional elections and the pre-eminence of US scientists in the worldwide race to turn research on human embryonic stem cells into a therapeutic revolution. Testimony at a US Senate hearing on 5 March debated a bill proffered by Republican Senator Sam Brownback (Kansas) that would impose criminal penalties on all attempts at transferring a human somatic cell nucleus into a human egg, whether the purpose was to create an infant (usually called reproductive cloning) or to derive embryonic stem cells for disease research (usually called therapeutic cloning.) The US House of Representatives passed a similar total ban last year. Two other bills have also been introduced into the Senate; both would ban reproductive human cloning but permit therapeutic cloning. Meanwhile, President Bush is expected to fill the long-vacant top job at the National Institutes of Health this week with Elias Zerhouni, executive vice dean of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Balthnore. For several months the front-runner for NIH director had been AIDS expert Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Immunological Diseases and Stroke. The campaign against Fanci was led by Brownback, who regarded him as insufficiently pro-life. Zerhouni is said to have endorsed Brownbacks anti-cloning bill in writing. The Bush administration also proposed last week that the United Nations adopt a Brownback type worldwide ban on human cloning, including therapeutic cloning. The UN is considering prohibiting reproductive cloning, but delegates from Europe and Asia oppose interfering with cloning to produce embryonic stem cells for research. The US Senate hearing starred Christopher Reeve, Hollywood"s former Superman, a persuasive high-profile advocate for stem cell research who is handsome as ever, but paralyzed from the shoulders down and unable to breathe on his own because of a riding accident some years ago. Testifying against the Brownback bill, Reeve told the hearing that only human embryonic stem cells carrying his own DNA offered hope for remyelinating his devastated spinal nerves via an immunologically compatible cell transplant. Also testifying against the bill was the hearing"s scientific star, Nobel laureate Paul Berg of Stanford University. Berg argued that human stem cells not only could solve the problem of transplant rejections, they also could provide a unique source of information about common chronic late-onset diseases such as cancer. Studying cells from young people carrying mutations that predispose them to complex disorders could illuminate the disease process and generate clues to prevention or cure, he said. As both these applications are based on transfer of particular nuclei into human eggs, he pointed out, none of the existing 78 human embryonic stem cell lines President Bush approved for federally funded research last summer would be useful either for complex disease research or for compatible transplants. Berg also objected strongly to both the Brownback and the House bills" ban on importing therapies based on human embryonic stem cell research done elsewhere in the world. That would prevent 280 million Americans from taking advantage of treatments developed in nations such as the UK where some of this research is permitted, he pointed out. It might even mean that Americans who seek such treatments abroad could be arrested and fined when they return, he predicted. Both Reeve and Berg have suggested that a comprehensive ban on human cloning would put US scientists at a competitive disadvantage. The US would take a giant step backward in research leadership, Reeve noted, and anyway the work would be done abroad, for example in Europe. "Those are not rogue nations behaving irresponsibly," he told the Senate. Berg has said that he hopes China"s openness to therapeutic cloning will help the US set aside some of its misgivings, lest it fall behind in a biotech race with China. Carl B. Feldbaum, president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the biggest trade group, has also weighed in. "Criminalizing therapeutic cloning and treatments based on the technology, as Senator Sam Brownback proposes, would move the research and its benefits overseas, and out of reach to Americans," he said on Tuesday.

单选题{{B}}Questions 1 to 5 are based on the following conversation.{{/B}}

单选题

单选题

单选题 If you intend using humor in your talk to make people smile, you must know how to identify shared experiences and problems. Your humor must be relevant to the audience and should help to show them that you are one of them or that you understand their situation and are in sympathy with their point of view. Depending on whom you are addressing, the problems will be different. If you are talking to a group of managers, you may refer to the disorganized methods of their secretaries; alternatively if you are addressing secretaries, you may want to comment on their disorganized bosses. Here is an example, which I heard at a nurses' convention, of a story which works well because the audience ail shared the same view of doctors. A man arrives in heaven and is being shown around by St. Peter. He sees wonderful accommodations, beautiful gardens, sunny weather, and so on. Everyone is very peaceful, polite and friendly until, waiting in a line for lunch, the new arrival is suddenly pushed aside by a man in a white coat, who rushes to the head of the line, grabs his food and stomps over to a table by himself. "Who is that?" the new arrival asked St. Peter. "Oh, that's God," came the reply, "but sometimes he thinks he's a doctor." If you are part of the group which you are addressing, you will be in a position to know the experiences and problems which are common to all of you and it'll be appropriate for you to make a passing remark about the inedible canteen food or the chairman's notorious bad taste in ties. With other audiences you mustn't attempt to cut in with humor as they will resent an outsider making disparaging remarks about their canteen or their chairman. You will be on safer ground if you stick to scapegoats like the Post Office or the telephone system. If you feel awkward being humorous, you must practice so that it becomes more natural. Include a few casual and apparently off-the-cuff remarks which you can deliver in a relaxed and unforced manner. Often it's the delivery which causes the audience to smile, so speak slowly and remember that a raised eyebrow or an unbelieving look may help to show that you are making a light-hearted remark. Look for the humor. It often comes from the unexpected. A twist on a familiar quote "If at first you don't succeed, give up" or a play on words or on a situation. Search for exaggeration and understatements. Look at your talk and pick out a few words or sentences which you can mm about and inject with humor.

单选题 An industrial society, especially one as centralized and concentrated as that of Britain, is heavily dependent on certain essential services: for instance, electricity supply, water, rail and road transport, the harbours. The area of dependency has widened to include removing rubbish, hospital and ambulance services, and, as the economy develops, central computer and information services as well. If any of these services ceases to operate, the whole economic system is in danger. It is this interdependency of the economic system which makes the power of trade unions such an important issue. Single trade unions have the ability to cut off many countries' economic blood supply. This can happen more easily in Britain than in some other countries, in part because the labour force is highly organized. About 55 per cent of British workers belong to unions, compared to under a quarter in the United States. For historical reasons, Britain's unions have tended to develop along trade and occupational lines, rather than on an industry-by-industry basis, which makes a wages policy, democracy in industry and the improvement of procedures for fixing wage levels difficult to achieve. There are considerable strains and tensions in the trade union movement, some of them arising from their outdated and inefficient structure. Some unions have lost many members because of industrial changes. Others are involved in arguments about who should represent workers in new trades. Unions for skilled trades are separate from general unions, which means that different levels of wages for certain jobs are often a source of bad feeling between unions. In traditional trades which are being pushed out of existence by advancing technologies, unions can fight for their members' disappearing jobs to the point where the jobs of other unions' members are threatened or destroyed. The printing of newspapers both in the United States and in Britain has Frequently been halted by the efforts of printers to hold onto their traditional highly-paid jobs. Trade unions have problems of internal communication just as managers in companies do, problems which multiply in very large unions or in those which bring workers in very different industries together into a single general union. Some trade union officials have to be re-elected regularly; others are elected, or even appointed, for life. Trade union officials have to work with a system of "shop stewards" in many unions, "shop stewards" being workers elected by other workers as their representatives at factory or works level.

单选题In the art of the Middle Ages, we never encounter the personality of the artist as an individual; rather it is diffused through the artistic genius of centuries embodied in the rules of religious art. Art of the Middle Ages is first a sacred script, the symbols and meanings of which were well settled. The circular halo placed vertically behind the head signifies sainthood, while the halo impressed with a cross signifies divinity. By bare feet, we recognize God, the angels, Jesus Christ and the apostles, but for an artist to have depicted the Virgin Mary with bare feet would have been tantamount to heresy. Several concentric, wavy lines represent the sky, while parallel lines water or the sea. A tree, which is to say a single stalk with two or three stylized leaves, informs us that the scene is laid on earth. A tower with a window indicates a village, and, should an angel be watching from depicted with curly hair, a short beard, and a tonsure, while Saint Paul has always a bald head and a long beard. A second characteristic of this iconography is obedience to a sacred mathematics. "The Divine Wisdom," wrote Saint Augustine, "reveals itself everywhere in numbers", a doctrine attributable to the neo—Platonists who revived the genius of Pythagoras. Twelve is the master number of the Church and is the product of three, the number of the Trinity, and four, the number of material elements. The number seven, the most mysterious of all numbers, is the sum of four and three. There are the seven ages of man, seven virtues, seven planets. In the final analysis, the seven-tone scale of Gregorian music is the sensible embodiment of the order of the universe. Numbers require also symmetry. At Charters, a stained glass window shows the four prophets, Isaac, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Jeremiah, carrying on their shoulders the four evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. A third characteristic of art is to be a symbolic language, showing us one thing and inviting us to see another. In this respect, the artist was called upon to imitate God, who had hidden a profound meaning behind the literal and wished nature itself to be a moral lesson to man. Thus, every painting is an allegory. In a scene of the final judgment, we can see the foolish virgins at the left hand of Jesus and the wise at his right, and we understand that this symbolizes those who are lost and those who are saved. Even seemingly insignificant details carry hidden meaning. The lion in a stained glass window is the figure of the Resurrection. These, then, are the defining characteristics of art of the Middle Ages, a system within which even the most mediocre talent was elevated by the genius of the centuries. The artists of the early Renaissance broke with traditional at their own peril. When they are not outstanding, they are scarcely able to avoid insignificance and banality in their religious works, and, even when they are great, they are no more than the equals of the old masters who passively followed the sacred rules.

单选题

单选题