单选题WhatwillthewomandonextTuesday?A.Visitherparents.B.Gotothedentist.C.Meetherprofessor.D.Haveajobinterview.

单选题Before National Day, these musicians composed some songs {{U}}in honor of{{/U}} this special occasion. A. in celebration of B. in respect of C. in case of D. in excess of

单选题 Passage Five Faith in medicine runs deep in America. We spend more per person on health care than any other nation. Whether we eat too much or exercise too little, whether we're turning gray or feeling blue, we look to some pill or procedure to make us better. We assume that devoting ever more dollars to medicine will bring us longer, healthier lives. But there is mounting evidence that each new dollar we devote to the current health care system brings small and diminishing returns to public health. Today the United States spends more than $4,500 per person per year on health care. Costa Rica spends less than $300. Yet life expectancy at birth is nearly identical in both countries. Despite the highly publicized "longevity revolution," life expectancy among the elderly in the United States is hardly improving. Yes, we are an aging society, but primarily because of falling birthrates. Younger Americans, meanwhile, are far more likely to be disabled than they were 20 years ago. Most affected are people in their thirties, whose disability rates increased by nearly 130 percent, due primarily to overweight. Why has our huge investment in health care left us so unhealthy? Partly it is because so many promised "miracle cures," from interferon to gene therapies, have proven to be ineffective or even dangerous. Partly it's because health care dollars are so concentrated on the terminally ill and the very old that even when medical interventions "work," the gains to average life expectancy are small And partly it is because of medical errors and adverse reaction to prescription drugs, which cause more deaths than motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer or AIDS. Each year roughly 200,000 seniors suffer fatal or life-threatening "adverse drug events" due to improper drug use or drug interaction. Why don't Americans live any longer than Costa Ricans? Overwhelmingly, it's because of differences ill behavior. Americans exercise less, eat more, drive more, smoke more, and lead more socially isolated lives. Even at its best, modern medicine can do little to promote productive aging, because by the time most people come in contact with it their bodies are already compromised by stress, indulgent habits, environmental dangers and injuries.

单选题 Passage Five Since 1975 advocates of humane treatment of animals have broadened their goals to oppose the use of animals for fur, leather, wool, and food. They have mounted protests against all forms of hunting and the trapping of animals in the wild. And they have joined environmentalists in urging protection of natural habitats from commercial or residential development. The occasion for these added emphases was the publication in 1975 of "Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals" by Peter Singer, formerly a professor of philosophy at Oxford University in England. This book gave a new impetus to the animal rights movement. The post-1975 animal rights activists are far more vocal than their predecessors, and the organizations to which they belong are generally more radical. Many new organizations are formed. The tactics of the activists are designed to catch the attention of the public. Since the mid-1980s there have been frequent news reports about animal right organizations picketing stores that sell furs, harassing hunters in the wild, or breaking into laboratories to free animals. Some of the more extreme organizations advocate the use of assault, armed terrorism, and death threats to make their point. Aside from making isolated attacks on people who wear fur coats or trying to prevent hunters from killing animals, most of the organizations have directed their tactics at institutions. The results of the protests and other tactics have been mixed. Companies are reducing reliance on animal testing. Medical research has been somewhat curtailed by legal restrictions and the reluctance of younger workers to use animals in research. New tests have been developed to replace the use of animals. Some well-known designers have stopped using fur. While the general public tends to agree that animals should be treated humanely, most people are unlikely to give up eating meat or wearing goods made from leather and wool. Giving up genuine fur has become less of a problem since fibers used to make fake fur such as the Japanese invention Kanecaron can look almost identical to real fur. Some of the strongest opposition to the animal rights movement has come from hunters and their organizations. But animal rights activists have succeeded in marshaling public opinion to press for State restrictions on hunting in several parts of the nation.

单选题Many countries have made it illegal to talk into a hand-held mobile phone while driving. But the latest research provides further confirmation that the danger lies less in what a motorist's hands do when he takes a call than in what the conversation does to his brain. Even using a "hands-free" device can impair a driver's attention to an alarming extent. Melina Kunar of the University of Warwick and Todd Horowitz of the Harvard Medical School ran a series of experiments in which two groups of volunteers had to pay attention and respond to a series of moving tasks on a computer screen that were reckoned equivalent in difficulty to driving. One group was left undistracted while the other had to engage in a conversation about their hobbies using a speakerphone. As Dr. Kunar and Dr. Horowitz report in Psycbonomic Bulletin & Review, those who were making the equivalent of a hands-free call had an average reaction time 212 milliseconds slower than those who were not. That, they calculate, would add 5.7 meters to the braking distance of a car traveling at 100 kph. They found that the group using the hands-free kit made 83 percent more errors in their tasks than those who were not talking. They also explored the effect of simply listening to something—such as a radio programme. For this they played a recording of the first chapter of Bram Stoker's "Dracula." Even though the test subjects were told to pay attention because they would be asked questions about the story afterwards, it had little effect on their reaction time. The research led by Frank Drews of the University of Utah suggests the same thing is true of the idle chatter of a passenger. Dr. Kunar reckons that having to think about responses during a phone conversation competes for the brain's resources in a way that listening to a monologue does not. Punishing people for using hand-held gadgets while driving is difficult enough, even though they can be seen from outside the car. Stopping people making hands-free calls would probably be impossible—especially because more and more vehicles are now being fitted with the necessary equipment as standard. Persuading people to switch their phones off altogether when they get behind the wheel might be the only answer. Who knows, they might even come to enjoy not having to take calls. And they'll be more likely to arrive in one piece.

单选题I didn't know it then, but this {{U}}disruptive{{/U}} way of reading started with the very first novel I ever picked up. A. harmful B. persistent C. interruptive D. characteristic

单选题She is______a musician than her brother. A. much of B. more of C. much as D. more as

单选题 Everyone knows about straight-A students. They get high grades, all right, but only by becoming dull and diligent students, their noses always stuck in a book. How, then, do we account for Paul Melendres? Melendres, now a freshman at the University of New Mexico, was student-body president at Valley High School in Albuquerque. He joined the soccer and basketball teams of his school, exhibited at the science fair, was chosen for the National Honor Society and he achieved straight A's in all his classes. How do super-achievers like Melendres do it? Brains aren't the only answer. "Top grades don't always go to the brightest students," declares Herbert Walberg, professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, who has conducted major studies of super-achieving students. "Knowing how to make the most of your innate abilities counts for more. Infinitely more." Hard work isn't the whole story, either. "It's not how long you sit there with the books open," said one of the many a students we interviewed. "It's what you do while you're sitting." Indeed, some of these students actually put in fewer hours of homework time than their lower-scoring classmates. The kids at the top of the class get there by mastering a few basic techniques that others can readily learn. Set priorities. {{U}}Top students brook no intrusions on study time{{/U}}. Once the books are open or the computer is booted up, phone calls go unanswered, TV shows unwatched, snacks ignored. Study is business; business comes before recreation. Study anywhere—or everywhere. A cross-country runner who worked out every day used the time to memorize biology terms. Another student posted a vocabulary list by the medicine cabinet and learned a new word every day while brushing his teeth. Get organized. In high school, McCray ran track, played rugby and was in the band and orchestra. "I was so busy. I couldn't waste time looking for a pencil or missing paper. I kept everything right where I could put my hands on it," he says. Among the students we interviewed, study times were strictly a matter of personal preference. Some worked late at night when the house was quiet. Others awoke early. Still others studied as soon as they came home from school when the work was fresh in their minds. All agreed, however, on the need for consistency.

单选题As political stability is one of our prime concerns, we have much faith in the government.

单选题

单选题He displayed a complete lack of {{U}}courtesy{{/U}} and tact in dealing with his employer. A. tenacity B. curiosity C. civility D. hostility

单选题 Marriage was one of the first non-biological factors identified as improving life expectancy. The explanation given was that married people tend to take fewer risks with their health and enjoy better mental and emotional health. Marriage also provides more social and material support. The difference between married people and single people, in terms of health, is narrowing. To really understand this, we have to be precise about terms. Researchers typically distinguish between never married, currently married, widowed and divorced. As we look in-depth into this issue of marriage and health, we'll see that things get pretty {{U}}fuzzy{{/U}} nowadays. No one is saying that having a piece of paper that says "married" on it is going to improve your life expectancy. There is something about people who live in marriage that improves life expectancy—or to be more precise, there was something about people who lived in marriage in the 70s that was found to improve life expectancy. Now, people could be listed as "single never married" in census data, but be living with someone and be experiencing all the health benefits of marriage without having the marriage certificate. This complicates research on marriage and health. Even using the traditional categories of "currently married" or "never married," singles are catching up, but only men. Men who were never married typically had the lowest life expectancy (in 1972). Now, the never married men are closing in on their currently married counterparts. The difference in life expectancy is becoming smaller because that single men now have access to support and health resources that only came because their wife took care of them. In other words, in the 1970s, married men had the advantage because they had their wives to make sure they went to the doctor and took care of themselves. Now, men are taking more responsibility for their own health and take action. Compared to 1972, people who are widowed now report poorer health than their married counterparts. In the 70s, they reported their health as the same as married people, now their health is about 7% worse. No one really knows why widowhood is more damaging to health now than in the 70s. My guess is that widowed people in the 70s had more of a community and extended family to help them out. Now, the widowed are more likely to be isolated.

单选题The government's full public disclosure of the decision only swelled the chorus of protests. A. checked B. diminished C. intensified D. retrieved

单选题Some ancient people were able to tell the time by the shadow______by the sun on the slate. A. thrown B. flung C. cast D. tossed

单选题Some politicians in Japan still believe that the Nanjing Massacre is nothing but a ______. A. novel B. flaw C. truth D. myth

单选题It is considered a crime to ______ an election of any kind by bribing voters. A. fabricate B. launch C. populate D. manipulate

单选题Most staff in this office did not like the manageress, for she was known to be sly, selfish and______. A. manifested B. manipulative C. conscientious D. controversial

单选题According to psychology professor Carol Dweck of Stanford University, "Praising children for being smart can backfire." If this doesn't get the attention of Millennium parents, I'm not sure what will. It is my observation that so many parents today believe that if their child appears to be the least bit "advanced" for his age, he's destined to be the next Albert Einstein, Tiger Woods, or Bill Gates. It's human nature for room and dad to show much admiration for their child and dish out praise for accomplishments achieved. The problem is, according to this study, parents may not be doing the best thing by praising their child for his intelligence. Dweck's research involved junior high students in New York and concluded that "classroom performance improved when her study subjects believed the brain is like a muscle that can grow." Students who "focused on the learning process (effort, concentration or strategies used) asked for feedback and did better in all subjects." Feedback such as, "You did well because you worked so hard" or "You used so many descriptive words to make this story interesting" can encourage children to try new things, as they are being rewarded for their effort. When the "time and effort" strategy is being positively reinforced, the child will probably use the same strategy next time they are learning something. Over time new strategies can be introduced, so the child's repertoire of strategies is broadened. Dweck goes on to say that "they (students who improved) performed better because their success was being measured by effort, not by test scores or grades." Parents should praise effort, not just results. Children who received praise about their innate abilities (talents or strengths) had less chance of trying new things and became anxious and under-performed as things became more difficult. That is one of the greatest dangers to continually praising children for whatever they do in order to falsely raise a child's self-esteem. What are mom and dad to do? Offer genuine praise and encouragement for efforts and successes, but balance this with setting appropriate expectations and following up with consequences when the child falls short due to laziness. Don't make excuses. Your child will better face the challenges life has to offer in the future when you as a parent recognize the efforts he is making today.

单选题We must take part in physical labor in order to ______ ourselves more closely with the working people. A. identify B. incorporate C. combine D. involve

单选题 {{B}}Passage Five{{/B}} Botany, the study of plants, occupies a peculiar position in the history of human knowledge. For many thousands of years it was the one field of awareness about which humans had anything more than the vaguest of insights. It is impossible to know today just what our Stone Age ancestors knew about plants, but from what we can observe of pre-industrial societies that still exist, a detailed learning of plants and their properties must be extremely ancient. This is logical. Plants are the basis of the food pyramid for all living things, even for other plants. They have always been enormously important to the welfare of peoples, not only for food, but also for clothing, weapons, tools, dyes, medicines, shelter, and a great many other purposes. Tribes living today in the jungles of the Amazon recognize literally hundreds of plants and know many properties of each. To them botany, as such, has no name and is probably not even recognized as a special branch of "knowledge" at all. Unfortunately, the more industrialized we become, the farther away we move from direct contact with plants, and the less distinct our knowledge of botany grows. Yet everyone comes unconsciously on an amazing amount of botanical knowledge, and few people will fail to recognize a rose, an apple, or an orchid. When our Neolithic ancestors, living in the Middle East about 10,000 years ago, discovered that certain grasses could be harvested and their seeds planted for richer yields the next season, the first great step in a new association of plants and humans was taken. Grains were discovered and from them flowed the marvel of agriculture: cultivated crops. From then on, humans would increasingly take their living from the controlled production of a few plants, rather than get a little here and a little there from many varieties that grew wild and the accumulated knowledge of tens of thousands of years of experience and intimacy with plants in the wild would begin to fade away.