It was two years ago today that the hunting ban came into force, supposedly ending centuries of tradition. However, the law has been an unmitigated failure—not that either side is shouting about it. It was a nightmare vision that struck fear and loathing into the hearts of millions. When the hunting ban became law, it was said, 16,000 people would lose their jobs, thousands of hounds would be put down, rotting carcasses would litter the countryside, hedgerows would disappear, riders would face on-the-spot fines, law-abiding people from doctors to barristers would be dragged from their horses and carted off to prison, while dog owners would be prosecuted if their mutt caught a rabbit. These were just some of the claims as desperate countryside campaigners battled to save their sport in the lead-up to the hunting ban, which Labour rammed into law using the Parliament Act on November 18, 2004. For many, the fears were real. Others exaggerated as they fought an increasingly aggressive anti-hunting lobby which had rejected acres of independent evidence affirming that hunting is the most humane way of killing foxes. In the battle to "fight prejudice, fight the ban", every emotive argument was deployed. For its part, the anti-hunting brigade extravagantly claimed that the ban would put an end to the rich parading in red jackets. A senior Labour MP, Peter Bradley, admitted in this newspaper that it was, as many suspected, about "class war". He lost his seat shortly afterwards. But people in red coats did not disappear. In fact, none of the forecasts came true. What did happen was something nobody had predicted: the spectacular revival and growth of hunting with hounds. In short, the hunting ban has been a failure. Today, on the second anniversary of the ban's coming into force on February 18, 2005, new figures show that participation in the sport has never been higher. It is so cheerful that two new packs have been formed, something that has not happened for centuries. They include the seductively named Private Pack, set up by the financier Roddy Fleming in Gloucestershire. It operates on an invitation-only basis, a sort of hunting private members club. This can only mean one thing: like it or not, hunting is cool. Young people are taking it up, enticed by the element of rebellion and the mystique of what actually happens as hunts attempt to keep within the law. The hunting ban has been a complete failure because ______.

According to the speaker

______ in doing an examination

Competition, they believe

If you want this pain killer

The sales manager was so adamant about her idea that it was out of the question for any one to talk her out of it.

The low interest rates on banks loans provided an impetus for many to buy homes.

Linguists have understood for decades that language and thought are closely related. Humans construct reality using thought and express these thoughts through the use of language. Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Whorl are credited with developing the most relevant explanation outlining the relationship between thought and language, the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. The hypothesis consists of two parts, linguistic relativity and linguistic determinism. Supporters of linguistic relativity assume that culture is shaped by language. Terwilliger defines linguistic determinism as the process by which "the functions of one's mind are determined by the nature of the language which one speaks." In simpler terms, the thoughts that we construct are based upon the language that we speak and the words that we use. In its strongest sense, linguistic determinism can be interpreted as meaning that language determines thought. In its weakest sense, language partially influences thought. Whorf was careful to avoid authoritative statements which would permanently commit him to particular position. Because of the broad nature of his statements, it is difficult to distinguish exactly to what extent Whorl believes that language determines thought. Heated debate among modern linguists demonstrates that disagreement exists about the accuracy and correctness of Whorf's studies and of the actual level of influence of language on thought processes. The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis essentially consists of two distinct statements connecting the relation of thought and language. Whorf believes that humans may be able to think only about objects, processes, and conditions that have language associated with them. The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis also explains the relationship between different languages (French, English, German, Chinese, and so on) and thought. Whorl demonstrated that culture is largely determined by language. Different cultures perceive the world in different ways. Culturally essential objects, conditions and processes usually are defined by a plethora of words, while things that cultures perceive as unimportant are usually assigned one or two words. Whorf developed this theory while studying the Hopi Indian tribe. Whorf was amazed that the Hopi language has no words for past, present, and future. The Hopi have only one word for flying objects. A dragonfly, an airplane, and a pilot are defined using the same word. Whorf questioned whether or not the Hopi view the world differently than western peoples. After further interpretation and analysis he concluded that the Hopi have a sense for the continuum of time despite having no words to specifically describe past, present, and future. It is commonly believed that the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis possesses some truth, but the extent to which it is applicable to all situations is questioned. Linguists generally support a "strong" or a "weak" interpretation. Linguists who study the hypothesis tend to cite examples that support their beliefs but are unable or unwilling to refute the opposing arguments. Examples exist that strengthen the arguments of everyone who studies the hypothesis. Nobody has gained significant ground in proving or refuting the hypothesis because the definitions of Sapir and Whorl are very vague and incomplete, leaving room for a significant amount of interpretation. Advocates of linguistic determinism insist that ______.

He knew that he would be punished severely because of his serious error. Therefore he ______ away the day before yesterday.

They managed to______the sound on TV every time when the alleged victim's name was spoken.

Jean holds very ______ opinions about food; she won't eat anything new or foreign.

早期的移动电话只能用于通话，不仅体积大、重量大，而且经常接不通。如今，移动电话不仅可以打电话，还可以上网、办公、看电影、玩游戏，已不是一部单一的电话了。

He cannot see anything without his glasses, so he made a______of remembering to get them fixed before he went to work.

None of the students in the class likes the mistress, who is used to being______ of everything they do.

He had been ______ to appear in court on charges of incitement of lawbreaking.

Stratford-on-Avon, as we all know

As a salesman, he works on a______basis, taking 10% of everything he sells.

The ______ of the word is unknown

She felt dizzy and had to______something to steady herself.

It is a legal ______ for parents to ensure that their children are provided with efficient education suitable to their age.