单选题Whenaconsumerfindsthathispurchasehasafaultinit,whatisthefirstthingheshoulddo?A.Complainpersonallytothemanager.B.Threatentotakethemattertocourt.C.Writeafirmletterofcomplainttothestoreofpurchase.D.Showsomewrittenproofofthepurchasetothestore.

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

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

单选题Questions 1--3 Choose the best answer.

单选题The effects of almost universal employment were overwhelming in that

单选题Questions 1--3 Choose the best answer.

单选题The writer uses exaggeration in order to

单选题{{B}}Part A{{/B}} Read the following texts answer the questions accompany them by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1.{{B}}Text 1{{/B}} The British psychoanalyst John Bowlby maintains that separation from the parents during the sensitive "attachment" period from birth to three may sear a child's personality and predispose to emotional problems in later life. Some people have drawn the conclusion from Bowlby's work that children should not be subjected to day care before the age of three because of the parental separation it entails, and many people do believe this. But there are also arguments against such a strong conclusion. Firstly, anthropologists point out that the insulated love affair between children and parents found in modern societies does not usually exist in traditional societies. For example, in some tribal societies, such as the Ngoni, the father and mother of a child did not rear their infant alone-far from it. Secondly, common sense tells us that day care would not be so widespread today if parents, care-takers found children had problems with it. Statistical studies of this kind have not yet been carried out, and even if they were, the results would be certain to be complicated and controversial. Thirdly, in the last decade there have been a number of careful American studies of children in day care, and they have uniformly reported that day care had a neutral or slightly positive effect on children's development. But tests that have had to be used to measure this development are not widely enough accepted to settle the issue. But Bowlby's analysis raises the possibility that early day care has delayed effects. The possibility that such care might lead to, say, more mental illness or crime 15 or 20 years later can only be explored by the use of statistics. Whatever the long-term effects, parents sometimes find the immediate effects difficult to deal with. Children under three are likely to protest at leaving their parents and show unhappiness. At the age of three or three and a half almost all children find the transition to nursery easy, and this is undoubtedly why more and more parents make use of child care at this time. The matter, then, is far from clear-out, though experience and available evidence indicate that early care is reasonable for infants.

单选题Chaucer's English belongs to the period of ______. A. Old English B. Middle English C. Early Modern English D. Modern English

单选题Managers spend a great deal of their time in meetings. According to Henry Mintzbery, in his book, The Nature of Managerial Work, managers in large organizations spend only 22 per cent of their time on meetings. So what are the managers doing in those meetings? There have conventionally been two answers. The first is the academic version: Managers are coordinating and controlling, making decisions, solving problems and planning. This interpretation has been largely discredited because it ignores the social and political forces at work in meetings. The second version claims that meetings provide little more than strategic sites for corporate gladiators to perform before the organizational emperors. This perspective is far more attractive, and has given rise to a large, and often humorous, body of literature on gamesmanship and posturing in meetings. It is, of course, true that meeting rooms serve as shop windows for managerial talent, but this is far from the truth as a whole. The suggestion that meetings are actually battle grounds is misleading since the raison d'etre of meetings has far more to do with comfort than conflict. Meetings are actually vital props, both for the participants and the organization as a whole. For the organization, meetings represent recording devices. The minutes of meetings catalogue the change of the organization, at all levels, in a more systematic way than do the assorted memos and directives which are scattered about the company. They enshrine the minutes of corporate history, they itemize proposed actions and outcomes in a way which makes one look like the natural culmination of the other. The whole tenor of the minutes is one of total premeditation and implied continuity. They are a sanitized version of reality which suggests a reassuring level of control over events. What is more, the minutes record the debating of certain issues in an official and democratic forum, so that those not involved in the process can be assured that decision was not taken lightly. As Dong Bennett, an administrative and financial manager with Allied Breweries, explains: "Time and effort are seen to have been invested in scrutinizing a certain course of action. " Key individuals are also seen to have put their names behind that particular course of action. The decision can therefore proceed with the full weight of the organization behind it, even if it actually went through" on the nod ". At the same time, the burden of responsibility is spread, so that no individual takes the blame. Thus, the public nature of formal meetings confers a degree of legitimacy on what happens in them. Having a view pass unchallenged at a meeting can be taken to indicate consensus. However, meetings also serve as an alibi for action, as demonstrated by one manager who explained to his subordinates: "I did what I could to prevent it—I had our objections minutes in two meetings. "The proof of conspicuous effort was there in black and white. By merely attending meetings, managers buttress their status, while non-attendance can carry with it a certain stigma. Whether individual managers intend to make a contribution or not, it is satisfying to be considered one of those whose views matter. Ostracism, for senior managers, is not being invited to meetings. As one cynic observed, meetings are comfortingly tangible: "Who on the shop floor really believes that managers are working when they tour the works? But assemble them behind closed doors and call it a meeting and everyone will take it for granted that they are hard at work. " Managers are being seen to earn their corn. Meetings provide managers with another form of comfort too—that of formality. Meetings follow a fixed format: Exchanges are ritualized, the participants are probably known in advance, there is often a written agenda, and there is a chance to prepare. Little wonder then, that they come as welcome relief from the upheaval and uncertainty of life outside the meeting room. Managers can draw further comfort from the realization that their peers are every bit as bemused and fallible as themselves. Meetings provide constant reminders that they share the same problems, preoccupations and anxieties, that they are all in the same boat. And for those who may be slightly adrift, meetings are ideal occasions for gently pulling them round. As Steve Styles, the process control manager (life services) at Legal & General, puts it: "The mere presence of others in meetings adds weight to teasing or censure and helps you to 'round up the strays'. " Such gatherings therefore provide solace and direction for the management team—a security blanket for managers. Meetings do serve a multitude of means as well as ends. They relieve managerial stress and facilitate consensus. For the organization, they have a safety-net-cum-rubber-stamping function without which decisions could not proceed, much less gather momentum. In short, meetings are fundamental to the well-being of managers and organizations alike.

单选题 Novel approaches to baby making seem to be coming at us so fast that we hardly have time to digest one before the next one hits — test-tube babies, egg donation, surrogacy, cloning and now sex selection. And just as with earlier methods, the new sperm-separation technique announced last week has triggered plenty of ethical concern. Only a few critics have argued that tampering with nature to avoid a sex-linked genetic disease should be taboo. But plenty have expressed misgivings about using the new technology more casually, to balance families, or simply because parents prefer boys or girls. Such choices, critics say, could lead to an imbalance in the sex ratio, with drastic consequences for society. These arguments are not very persuasive. In some developing countries where boys are more highly valued than girls, sex selection is already standard practice, accomplished by means of infanticide of amniocentesis and abortion. The new sperm-separation technique makes it easier for more people to practice sex selection in these countries. This could skew the already tilting sex ratio even further in favor of boys. In the short term, such demographic shifts could cause enormous societal problems as men, for example, find it increasingly difficult to find women to marry. In the long term, however, both evolutionary and economic theories tell us that as girls become scarcer, they will become more highly valued, perhaps to the point at which more people will select for girls than against them. In America and other Western countries there seems to be little chance of the sexes going far out of balance at all. Polls show that a majority of Americans view a perfect family as having one boy and one girl. If everyone used sex selection to achieve perfection, the result would be perfect balance. Of course, some prospective parents do prefer children of one sex or the other. But such preferences would presumably balance out as well. Regarding the argument that choosing gender goes against nature: the same objection was used in earlier times by people horrified by vaccines or heart transplants, which are now completely acceptable. Every time we use medicine to cure a disease or prevent a death, we go against nature willingly. Admittedly, sex selection for family balancing cures no disease. In fact, though, no form of baby making solves a medical problem. Sex selection, moreover, is medically benign in comparison with most reproductive technologies. No surgery is involved, and the entire process can theoretically be performed without a physician. Children born through this process can't distinguish from other children. For these reasons, I suspect that as sex selection and other reproductive technologies become more efficient and less costly, they may be embraced by American families of even modest means who ask themselves, why not? What was once unimaginable could become routine and the link between the sex act and reproduction will no longer be seen as sacred. Ultimately, this may prove to be the real significance of sex selection: by breaching a powerful psychological barrier, it will pave the way for true designer babies, who could really turn society upside down.

单选题 Myths, fallacies and fads (一时的风尚) have been built up over centuries. They change a bit but they are endurable and keep coming back in a slightly different form. From the medicine man to the present food faddist, it has been a profitable business to exploit them. But many people sincerely believe them. The primitive hunter believed that his courage would be increased if he ate the heart of a hero or a lion. This is one myth that most of us can laugh about, but don't be too sure someone doesn't still believe this. The belief that fish is brain food may have orginated in some areas where protein foods were scarce except for fish. It may well have been that those pregnant women and infants who ate fish were more intelligent than those who ate exclusively vegetables, fruits and grains. A relatively new fact resulting from research has shown that the number of brain cells is smaller when the protein eaten by the mother and the baby is lower than it should be. In that case, fish was a brain food, but so are all sources of protein. Many religions use food for symbolism as in the bread and wine of communion or in the restriction of certain foods on special occasions such as the use of meats on fast days by the Catholic or the use of pork by the Jews and Mohammedans(伊斯兰教徒). The rules for slaughtering animals by the Jews and the Mohammedans are another example. And to a Hindu(印度教的信仰者), a cow is a sacred animal protected from slaughter and from use as food. Other foods are forbidden to Hindus and the most pious are strict vegetarians who do not even eat eggs. Many young people today are turning to Hinduism and Buddhism and adopting the food restrictions of those religions. Class and wealth determine food habits also. In many cultures, the lower classes were forbidden to eat some foods. These were usually reserved for the higher classes. The use of white rice in many Asian countries was limited to the wealthy because they could afford the cost of milling. This constituted status. When people came to Hawaii they found that white rice was available to everyone, but they still felt that they had reached a higher status even though the white rice was lower in nutritional value than the whole grain rice. Food gives emotional satisfaction in many ways. Some people eat because they are frustrated and unhappy. The reducing diets which promise that you can eat your weight off appeal to this kind of person. Milk is tied of memories of home and mother so people away from home drink more milk. The scare technique of telling people that their food is poisoned by sprays or chemical fertilizers, or does not have adequate nutritive value because it is grown on worn-out soil, seems to be modern. These people claim that organic fertilizer is the only way to grow high value foods. Actually, if soil is worn out, the nutritive value of a pound of food grown on it is the same as that grown on soil fertilized either organically or inorganically. There simply will be more pounds growing on the fertilized field. The highest yield of all is reported by some as coming from soil which is fertilized both ways.

单选题

单选题Questions 17 to 20 are based on the following conversation between Dr. Smith and his student. You have 20 seconds to read Questions 17 to 20.

单选题 Questions 14 to 16 are based on a talk about business management. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 14 to 16.

单选题{{B}}Text 2{{/B}} As the 2lst century begins, a number of leaders in politics, education, and other professions believe that the United States must adopt some new values to go along with the old traditional ones. What new values should Americans adopt? This is a very difficult question to answer. Certainly, a greater value should be placed on the conservation of natural resources; Americans should learn to use less and waste less. But conservation has never been a strong value to Americans, who have believed that their country offered an endless, abundant supply of natural resources.Recently, progress has been made--more and more Americans are recycling their paper, cans, bottles, and other goods--but old wasteful habits die hard. Furthermore, the need to protect the environment may conflict with the need for jobs, as in the Northwest, where conservationists battle lumber companies that want to cut down ancient redwood trees. A belief in the value of conservation is still compared with other American values; it can become stronger only as Americans see the need for it more clearly.In addition, Americans may need to place a strong value on cooperation on a national scale to achieve important national objectives. The American idea of the national good has never been based on national cooperation but rather on the freedom of the individual, maintaining those conditions that provide the greatest freedom and prosperity for the individual. It is far more difficult for Americans to accept shared sacrifice for the common good and well-being of the entire country. For example, although the majority of Americans believe that it is extremely important to balance the national budget and reduce the deficit, they do not want to see cuts in government programs that benefit them personally.The American value of competition also hinders the development of a spirit of national cooperation. Competition sometimes encourages feelings of suspicion rather than the mutual trust that is necessary for successful national cooperation. Although Americans often cooperate successfully on the local level--in neighborhood groups and churches, for example—they become suspicious when the national government becomes involved. For example, on the national level, they may see themselves as part of an interest group that is competing with other interest groups for government funds. A request by the national government for shared sacrifice may be seen as coercive and destructive rather than voluntary and constructive. However, the demands of the 21st century may compel Americans to place a greater value on national cooperation to solve problems that affect them all, directly and indirectly.

单选题The atmosphere and the ocean

单选题Questions 11 to 13 are based on the following talk about the biggest movie event ,Oscars. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 11 to 13.

单选题When it comes to the slowing economy, Ellen Spero isn"t biting her nails just yet. But the 47-year-old manicurist isn"t cutting, filling or polishing as many nails as she"d like to, either. Most of her clients spend $12 to$ 50 weekly, but last month two longtime customers suddenly stopped showing up. Spero blames the softening economy. "I"m a good economic indicator," she says, "I provide a service that people can do without when they"re concerned about saving some dollars." So Spero is downscaling, shopping at middle-brow Dillard"s department store near her suburban Cleveland home, instead of Neiman Marcus. "I don"t know if other clients are going to abandon me, too." she says. Even before Alan Greenspan"s admission that America"s red-hot economy is cooling, lots of working folks had already seen signs of the slowdown themselves. From car dealerships to gap outlets, sales have been lagging for months as shoppers temper their spending. For retailers, who last year took in 24 percent of their revenue between Thanksgiving and Christmas, the cautious approach is coming at a crucial time. Already, experts say, holiday sales are off 7 percent from last year"s pace. But don"t sound any alarms just yet. Consumers seem only concerned, not panicked, and many say they remain optimistic about the economy"s long-term prospects, even as they do some modest belt-tightening. Consumers say they"re not in despair because, despite the dreadful headlines, their own fortunes still feel pretty good. In Manhattan, "there"s a new gold rush happening in the $ 4 million to $10 million range, predominantly fed by Wall Street bonuses," says broker Barbara Corcoran. In San Francisco, prices are still rising even as frenzied overbidding quiets. "Instead of 20 to 30 offers, now maybe you only get two or three," says John Deadly, a Bay Area real-estate broker. And most folks still feel pretty comfortable about their ability to find and keep a job. Many folks see silver linings to this slowdown. Potential homebuyers would cheer for lower interest rates. Employers wouldn"t mind a little fewer bubbles in the job market. Many consumers seem to have been influenced by stock-market swings, which investors now view as a necessary ingredient to a sustained boom. Diners might see act upside, too. Getting a table at Manhattan"s hot new Alain Ducasse restaurant need to be impossible. Not anymore. For that, Greenspan & Co. may still be worth toasting.