单选题Certain animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities, They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book The Natural History of Selbourne (1786), the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover's nest, and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one. He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five — never four, never six — caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch. Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces. These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than human can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times. Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species — as in the case of the eggs — or survive as individuals — as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can "count" only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small — no more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to "count" one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals' admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

单选题 Many Americans find silence uncomfortable during a buffet or a formal dinner. {{U}}(21) {{/U}}in the States there is the {{U}}(22) {{/U}} practice of making "small talk" in certain social situation. Small talk deals {{U}}(23) {{/U}} various topics, superficially, simply for the sake of keeping a conversation {{U}}(24) {{/U}}. The topics {{U}}(25) {{/U}} include the weather, sports, college courses, clothing, food, etc. Small talk is {{U}}(26) {{/U}} useful at social gathering when you meet someone for the first time, or when polite conversation is expected but no serious discussion {{U}}(27) {{/U}}. It is common but not necessarily expected that one should know {{U}}(28) {{/U}} in a group before engaging him or her in conversation. {{U}}(29) {{/U}}, at a party or {{U}}(30) {{/U}} informal social gatherings, a simple " May I join you?" and a self-introduction is normally sufficient {{U}}(31) {{/U}} acceptance into a group and to join in a conversation. In some {{U}}(32) {{/U}} , such as the lobby of a concert hall or theater, a waiting room or a classroom, it is common for {{U}}(33) {{/U}} to start a conversation even {{U}}(34) {{/U}} an introduction. {{U}} (35) {{/U}} the informality that pervades U. S. society, people in the States expect those whom they {{U}}(36) {{/U}} to put aside {{U}}(37) {{/U}} they are doing and listen. As a {{U}}(38) {{/U}}, the conversation distance between two people is at least two or three {{U}}(39) {{/U}}. Standing at a closer range will make many Americans feel {{U}}(40) {{/U}}.

单选题 In search of other energy alternatives, the United States has been developing its synfuels industry, which is the production of synthetic fuels to{{U}} {{U}} 1 {{/U}} {{/U}}the place of oil, coal, and natural gas. One of the new technological processes{{U}} {{U}} 2 {{/U}} {{/U}}with the production of gasohol, a{{U}} {{U}} 3 {{/U}} {{/U}}of 90 percent gasoline and 10 percent alcohol. There are two types of alcohol used as fuels: ethanol, produced{{U}} {{U}} 4 {{/U}} {{/U}}corn and other grains, and methanol, produced from coal and city wastes. Either can be mixed with gasoline, but ethanol is preferred. The{{U}} {{U}} 5 {{/U}} {{/U}}fuel, methanol, can be{{U}} {{U}} 6 {{/U}} {{/U}}by extra refining processes, but this increases the cost and{{U}} {{U}} 7 {{/U}} {{/U}}the energy input-output ratio. Service stations{{U}} {{U}} 8 {{/U}} {{/U}}the country are already selling gasohol．{{U}} {{U}} 9 {{/U}} {{/U}}discouragement from many large oil companies, ethanol may provide a sensible, quick alternative to fossil fuels. Still{{U}} {{U}} 10 {{/U}} {{/U}}alternative to fossil fuels can be{{U}} {{U}} 11 {{/U}} {{/U}}in energy from the sun.{{U}} {{U}} 12 {{/U}} {{/U}}energy provides a good{{U}} {{U}} 13 {{/U}} {{/U}}of heat that can be collected and even{{U}} {{U}} 14 {{/U}} {{/U}}for later use. Already many homes and office buildings have been designed to take{{U}} {{U}} 15 {{/U}} {{/U}}of the sun's warmth. The sun can also be used to produce electricity. Solar energy generators are already providing power for{{U}} {{U}} 16 {{/U}} {{/U}}Indian villages in Arizona and{{U}} {{U}} 17 {{/U}} {{/U}}in Alaska. Solar-generated electricity also may be the airplane fuel of the future. Solar-powered aircraft have succeeded in crossing the English Channel and{{U}} {{U}} 18 {{/U}} {{/U}}may become{{U}} {{U}} 19 {{/U}} {{/U}}for extended distances, as more efficient, lighter, and cheaper solar{{U}} {{U}} 20 {{/U}} {{/U}}are developed.

单选题{{I}} Questions 17-20 are based on the following passage. You now have 20 seconds to read questions 17-20.{{/I}}

单选题According to the text, which of the following is true?

单选题How efficient is our system of criminal trial? Does it really do the basic job we ask of it — convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent? It is often said that the British trial system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice. The lawyers on each side are so engrossed in playing bard to win, Challenging each other and the judge on technical points, that the object of finding out the truth is almost forgotten. All the effort is concentrated on the big day, on the dramatic cross examination of the key Witnesses in front of the jury. Critics like to compare our "adversarial" system (resembling two adversaries engaged in a contest) with the continental "inquisitorial" system, under which the judge play a more important inquiring role. In early times, in the Middle Ages, the systems of trial across Europe were similar. At that time trial by "ordeal" — especially a religious event — was the main way of testing guilt or innocence. When this way eventually abandoned the two systems parted company. On the continent church-trained legal officials took over the function of both prosecuting and judging, while in England these were largely left to lay people, the Justice of the Peace and the jurymen who were illiterate and this meant that all the evidence had to be put to them orally. This historical accident dominates procedure even today, with all evidence being given in open court by word of mouth on the crucial day. On the other hand, in France for instance, all the evidence is written before the trial under supervision by an investigating judge. This exhaustive pretrial looks very undramatic; much of its is just a public checking of the written records already gathered. The Americans adopted the British system lock, stock and barrel and enshrined it in their constitution. But, while the basic features of our systems are common, there are now significant differences in the way serious cases are handled. First, because the USA has virtually no contempt of court laws to prevent pretrial publicity in the newspaper and on television, Americans lawyers are allowed to question jurors about knowledge and beliefs. In Britain this is virtually never allowed, and a random selection of jurors who are presumed not to be prejudiced are empanelled. Secondly, there is no separate profession of barrister in the United States, and both prosecution and defense lawyers who are to present cases in court prepare themselves. They go out and visit the scene, track down and interview witnesses, and familiarize themselves personally with the background. In Britain it is the solicitor who prepares the case, and the barrister who appears in court is not even allowed to meet witnesses beforehand. British barristers also alternate doing both prosecution and defense work. Being kept distant from the preparation and regularly appearing for both sides, barristers are said to avoid becoming too personally involved, and can approach cases more dispassionately. American lawyers, however, often know their cases better. Reformers rightly want to learn from other countries' mistakes and successes. But what is clear is that justice systems, largely because they are the result of long historical growth, are peculiarly difficult to adapt piecemeal.

单选题Comparisons were drawn between the development of television in the 20th century and the diffusion of printing in the 15th and 16th centuries. Yet much has happened 1 . As was discussed before, it was not 2 the 19th century that the newspaper became the dominant pre-electronic 3 , following in the wake of the pamphlet and the book and in the 4 of the periodical. It was during the same time that the communications revolution 5 up, beginning with transport, the railways and leading 6 through the telegraph, the telephone, radio and motion pictures 7 the 20th century world of the motor car and the airplane. Not everyone sees that process in 8 . It is important to do so. It is generally recognized, 9 , that the introduction of the computer in the early 20th century, 10 by the invention of the integrated circuit during the 1960s, radically changed the process, 11 its impact on the media was not immediately 12 . As time went by, computers became smaller and more powerful, and they became personal too, as well as 13 , with display becoming sharper and storage 14 increasing. They were thought of, like people, 15 generations, with the distance between generations much 16 . It was within the computer age that the term information society began to be widely used to describe the 17 within which we now live. The communications revolution has 8 both work and leisure and how we think and feel both about place and time, but there have been 19 views about its economic, political, social and cultural implications. Benefits have been weighed 20 harmful outcomes. And generalizations have proved difficult.

单选题What does the author probably foresee?

单选题What is the author's main purpose?

单选题 Why do so many Americans distrust what they read in their newspapers? The American Society of Newspaper Editors is trying to answer this painful question. The organization is deep into a long self-analysis known as the journalism credibility project. Sad to say, this project has turned out to be mostly low-level findings about factual errors and spelling and grammar mistakes, combined with lots of head-scratching puzzlement about what in the world those readers really want. But the sources of distrust go way deeper. Most journalists learn to see the world through a set of standard templates patterns)into which they plug each days events. In other words, there is a conventional story line in the newsroom culture that provides a backbone and a ready-made narrative structure for otherwise confusing news. There exists a social and cultural disconnect between journalists and their readers, which helps explain why the" standard templates" of the newsroom seem alien to many readers. In a recent survey, questionnaires were sent to reporters in five middle-size cities around the country, plus one large metropolitan area. Then residents in these communities were phoned at random and asked the same questions. Replies show that compared with other Americans ,journalists are more likely to live in upscale neighborhoods, have maids, own Mercedeses, and trade stocks, and they're less likely to go to church, do volunteer work, or put down roots in a community. Reporters tend to be part of a broadly defined social and cultural elite, so their work tends to reflect the conventional values of this elite. The astonishing distrust of the news media isn't rooted in inaccuracy or poor reportorial skills but in the daily clash of world views between reporters and their readers. This is an explosive situation for any industry, particularly a declining one. Here is a troubled business that keeps hiring employees whose attitudes vastly annoy the customers. Then it sponsors lots of symposiums and a credibility project dedicated to wondering why customers are annoyed and fleeing in large numbers. But it never seems to get around to noticing the cultural and class biases that so many former buyers are complaining about. If it did, it would open up its diversity program, now focused narrowly on race and gender, and look for reporters who differ broadly by outlook, values, education, and class.

单选题 Some people ought to defend the workaholic. These people are unjustly accused, abused, and defamed--often termed sick or morbid or on the border of pathology. About 30% of American business and commerce is carried on the shoulders of workaholics. The ratio might exist in art and science too. Workaholics are the achievers, the excellers. There is a national conspiracy against excellence and undue admiration of commonness and mediocrity. It is as if we are against those who make uncommon sacrifices because they enjoy doing something. Some famous psychologists say that the workaholic has an inferiority complex which leads m overcompensation. This is certainly not the case. Inferiority, or low esteem, describes laziness more accurately than it describes dedication. We do not seem to realize that very little excellence is achieved by living a well-balanced life. Edison, Ford, Einstein and Freud all had single-minded devotion to work whereby they sacrificed many things, including family and friendship. The accusation is made that workaholics bear guilt by not being good parents or spouses. But guilt can exist in the balanced life also. Think how many "normal" people and middle-aged who have never done anything well--they are going to settle for less than what they could have become.

单选题When European education ministers met in Bologna in 1999 and promised within a decade to forge a common market for universities, it seemed mere Euro-rhetoric. Big obstacles stopped students nipping abroad for a term, or getting degrees recognized. Many countries offered no degree below Masters level. Some examined course modules separately, others all in one go. Under the Erasmus programmed many students traveled to other European countries for between a term and a year—but they often found their universities reluctant to give them credit for it. Yet on April 28th no fewer than 46 European education ministers—from the European Union and 19 other countries, including Russia and Turkey—will gather in another ancient university city, Leaven, to declare the "Bologna process" a triumph. A "European credit-transfer system" is on its way; next year will bring a "European higher education area". There will be a standardized "diploma supplement" giving details of what students have learnt. And three-year Bachelors degrees followed by two-year Masters are now the general rule, with few exceptions. "The big surprise was that the Bologna process worked at all," says Jean-Marc Rapp, president of the European University Association. Bologna is neither an inter-governmental treaty nor an EU law. It credits the eastern European countries that joined Bologna in 1999 for some of the success. Their governments were itching to reform communist-era universities and delighted to have a template for it and their students were wild to travel. Another reason why some governments embraced Bologna was to give cover for reforms they wanted anyway. Shorter, more work-related degrees appealed to the Germans, keen to stop students hanging on for years at taxpayers' expense. In France, changes to university financing have been called "Bologna". In Spain "Bologna" is the excuse for introducing fees for Masters degrees. Many students now anathematize "Bologna" as a capitalist plot. They plan protests in given; already, students have taken to the streets in France, Italy, Spain and Greece. The resemblance to the Anglo-American system, plus Bologna's emphasis on graduate employability, is big grievances. Some academics fret that the secret aim is to privatize universities. Bologna's endorsement of more autonomy could lead (horrors!) to more freedom for universities in hiring, promotion and pay. Europe is littered with historic universities (Bologna is the oldest, founded in 1088). But the paucity of European institutions and the ubiquity of American ones at the top of international league tables are a constant reminder of the gap between glorious past and mediocre present. For believers, Bologna shows the way to a future that will be glorious once more. Yet this vision of self-governing universities, footloose students and job ready graduates omits one big reason for European universities' decline: money. In America, the gap between what governments pay and what universities need is made up privately, mainly by tuition fees. In most of Europe students pay nothing. Even in England, tuition fees are capped by the government at low levels. Europe's universities have seen funding per student fall behind wage inflation by 1—2% a year over three decades. America devotes far more of its GDP to higher education. Burgle, a Brussels-based think-tank, finds that universities carrying out top-class research and leading league tables have both more autonomy and more money. If Europe delivers only one of these, it may not be enough.