单选题 Discussion of the assimilation of Puerto Ricans in the United States has focused on two factors: social standing and the loss of national culture. In general, excessive stress is placed on one factor or the other, depending on whether the commentator is North American or Puerto Rican. Many North American social scientists, such as Oscar Handlin, Joseph Fitzpatrick, and Oscar Lewis, consider Puerto Ricans as the most recent in a long line of ethnic entrants to occupy the lowest rung on the social ladder. Such a "sociodemographic" approach tends to regard assimilation as a benign process, taking for granted increased economic advantage and inevitable cultural-integration, in a supposedly egalitarian context. However, this approach fails to take into account the colonial nature of the Puerto Rican case, with this group, unlike their European predecessors, coming from a nation politically subordinated to the United States. Even the "radical" critiques of this mainstream research model, such as the critique developed in Divided Society, attach the issue of ethnic assimilation too mechanically to factors of economic and social mobility and are thus unable to illuminate the cultural subordination of Puerto Ricans as a colonial minority. In contrast, the "colonialist" approach of island-based writers, such as Eduardo Seda Bonilla, Manuel Maldonado Denis, and Luis Nieves Falcon, tends to view assimilation as the forced loss of national culture in an unequal contest with imposed foreign values. There is, of course, a strong tradition of cultural accommodation among other Puerto Rican thinkers. The writings of Eugenio Fernandez Mendez clearly exemplify this tradition, and many supporters of Puerto Rico's commonwealth status share the same universalizing orientation. But the Puerto Rican intellectuals who have written most about the assimilation process in the United States all advance cultural nationalist views, advocating the preservation of minority cultural distinctions and rejecting what they see as the subjugation of colonial nationalities. This cultural and political emphasis is appropriate, but the colonialist thinkers misdirect it, overlooking the class relations at work in both Puerto Rican and North American history. They pose the clash of national cultures as an absolute polarity, with each culture uuderstood as static and undifferentiated. Yet both the Puerto Rican and North American traditions have been subject to constant challenge from cultural forces within their own societies, forces that may move toward each other in ways that cannot be written off as mere "assimilation". Consider, for example, the indigenous and Mro-Caribbean traditions in Puerto Rican culture and how they influence and are influenced by other Caribbean cultures and Black cultures in the United States. The elements of coercion and inequality, so central to cultural contact according to the colonialist framework, play no role in this kind of convergence of racially and ethnically different elements of the same social class.

单选题Bold-faced, with a hyphen and ending in the adjectival, was coined by Shakespeare in Henry VI, Part I, when Lord Talbot, rescuing his son on a French battlefield, spoke of his "proud desire of bold-faced Victoria. " It was picked up in the 19th century by typesetters to describe a type — like Clarendon, Antique or a thick version of Bodoni — that stood out confidently, even impudently, from the page. The adjective was used in an 1880 article in The New York Times (we were hyphenated then) : "One of the handbills" distributed by the Ku Klux Klan, noted a disapproving reporter, was "printed in bold-faced type on yellow paper". Newspaper gossip columnists in the 30's, to catch the reader's eye, began using this bold type for the names that made news in what was then called "care society" (in contrast to "high" society, whose members claimed to prefer to stay out of those columns). In our time, the typeface metaphor was applied to a set of famous human faces. A fashion reporter — John Duka of The Times — was an early user of the phrase, as he wrote acerbically on Sept. 22, 1981: "At the overheated parties at Calvin Klein's apartment, Saks Fifth Avenue, Bergdorf Goodman and Studio 54, the boldfaced names said the week had been so crammed that they were feeling 'a little under the breath, you know. ' " Rita Kempley of The Washington Post noted in 1987 the sought-after status of "a boldfaced name in People magazine"; by 1999, Alan Peppard of The Dallas Morning News recalled to Texas Monthly that he began with a "social column," but "now we live in an age of celebrity, and there are very few people who care about what the debutantes are doing. So I call it celebrity, society, famous people, rich people, boldfaced names. " The New York Times, which never had, does not have and is grimly determined never to have a "gossip column" introduced a "people column" in 2001. (When its current editor, Joyce Wadler, took a six-week break recently, she subheaded that item with a self-mocking "Air Kiss! Smooch! Ciao!") The column covers the doings of celebrities, media biggies, fashion plates, show-biz stars, haut-monde notables, perennial personages and others famous for their fame. It's confident, fashionable and modern moniker became the driving force behind the recent popularization of the phrase with the former compound adjective, now an attributive noun: Boldface Names.

单选题[此试题无题干]

单选题 {{I}} Questions 18-19 are based on the talk you've just heard.{{/I}}

单选题What does the author mean to say when he talks about the damage caused by earthquakes to the buildings?A. It is hard to build structures strong enough to withstand serious temblorsB. Not all structures can be made to withstand the tremor of the earthquakes.C. The degree of damage caused by earthquakes to different buildings can hardly be predicted accurately.D No structures would be strong enough to endure violent earthquakes.

单选题Mary doesn't like bananas. I don't like, ______. [A] too [B] either [C] neither

单选题The author write this passage mainly to______.

单选题[此试题无题干]

单选题The speaker made the point that, although there were many good reasons in favour of equality for women in all spheres, and particularly perhaps in the sphere of political activity where they needed a voice, and above all needed to be able to influence others on their behalf, there were reasons against this as matters stood at the present time. He was asked whether any matters, regardless of how far they seemed to be in the interests of government and leaving aside the question of the popularity or otherwise of the move, could be more important than the liberty of a large section of the population of what was a so-called "free" country. He replied that he had repeated before that the moral issue was a clear one; however, emotional appeals and the use of words like "freedom" and "justice" avoided the most practical aspect of the affair. No government in its senses, however enlightened its leaders, however large its majority, however secure in the favour of the people was going to be able to introduce a motion such as "Votes for Women" without considerable controversy flaring up. How much less were they going to be able to introduce it with a government on the brink of falling, the nation on the edge of war and the country radically opposed to any move which would seem to the electorate to threaten the long established traditions of the British way of life.

单选题Imagine a world in which there was suddenly no emotion--a world in which human beings could feel no love or happiness, no terror or hate. Try to imagine the consequences of such a transformation. People might not be able to stay alive, knowing neither joy nor pleasure, neither anxiety nor fear, they would be as likely to repeat acts that hurt them as acts that were beneficial. They could not learn, they could not benefit from experience because this emotionless world would lack rewards and punishments. Society would soon disappear: people would be as likely to harm one another as to provide help and support. Human relationships would not exist, in a world without friends or enemies, there could be no marriage, affection among companions, or bonds among members of groups. Society's economic underpinnings would be destroyed, since earning $10 million would be no more pleasant than earning $10, there would be no incentive to work. In fact, there would be no incentives of any kind. For as we will see, incentives imply a capacity to enjoy them. In such a world, the chances that the human species would survive are next to zero, because emotions are the basic instrument of our survival and adaptation. Emotions structure the world for us in important ways. As individuals, we categorize objects on the basis of our emotions. True we consider the length, shape, size, or texture, but an object's physical aspects are less important than what it has done or can do to us--hurt us, surprise us, anger us or make us joyful. We also use categorizations coloured by emotions in our families, communities, and overall society. Out of our emotional experiences with objects and events comes a social feeling of agreement that certain things and actions are "good" and others are "bad", and we apply these categories to every aspect of our social life--from what foods we eat and what clothes we wear to how we keep promises and which people our group will accept. In fact, society exploits our emotional reactions and attitudes, such as loyalty, morality, pride, shame, guilt, fear and greed, in order to maintain itself. It gives high rewards to individuals when perform important tasks such as surgery, makes heroes out of individuals for unusual or dangerous achievements such flying fighter planes in a war, and uses the legal and penal system to make people afraid to engage in antisocial acts.

单选题 Questions 17—20 are based on the following passage about the changing family. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 17—20.

单选题College sports in the United States are a huge deal. Almost all major American universities have football, baseball, basketball and hockey programs, and (21) millions of dollars each year to sports. Most of them earn millions (22) as well, in television revenues, sponsorships. They also benefit (23) from the added publicity they get via their teams. Big-name universities (24) each other in the most popular sports. Football games at Michigan regularly (25) crowds of over 90,000. Basketball's national collegiate championship game is a TV (26) on a par with (与…相同或相似)any other sporting event in the United States, (27) perhaps the Super Bowl itself. At any given time during fall or winter one can (28) one's TV set and see the top athletic programs--from schools like Michigan, UCLA, Duke and Stanford -- (29) in front of packed houses and national TV audiences. The athletes themselves are (30) and provided with scholarships. College coaches identify (31) teenagers and then go into high schools to (32) the country's best players to attend their universities. There are strict rules about (33) coaches can recruit--no recruiting calls after 9 p. m., only one official visit to a campus--but they are often bent and sometimes (34) Top college football programs (35) scholarships to 20 or 30 players each year, and those student-athletes, when they arrive (36) campus, receive free housing, tuition, meals, books, etc. In return, the players (37) the program in their sport. Football players at top colleges (38) two hours a day, four days a week from January to April. In summer, it's back to strength and agility training four days a week until mid-August, when camp (39) and preparation for the opening of the September-to-December season begins (40) . During the season, practices last two or three hours a day from Tuesday to Friday. Saturday is game day. Mondays are an officially mandated day of rest.

单选题Why does the author think many pains better than pleasures?

单选题An auction catalogue gives buyers______.

单选题To paraphrase 18th-century statesman Edmund Burke, "all that is needed for the triumph of a misguided cause is that good people do nothing. " One such cause now seeks to end biomedical research because of the theory that animals have rights ruling out their use in research. Scientists need to respond forcefully to animal rights advocates, whose arguments are confusing the public and thereby threatening advances in health knowledge and care. Leaders of the animal rights movement target biomedical research because it depends on public funding, and few people understand the process of health care research. Hearing allegations of cruelty to animals in research settings, many are perplexed that anyone would deliberately harm an animal. For example, a grandmotherly woman staffing an animal rights booth at a recent street fair was distributing a brochure that encouraged readers not to use anything that comes from or is tested in animals— no meat, no fur, no medicines. Asked if she opposed immunizations, she wanted to know if vaccines come from animal research. When assured that they do, she replied, "Then I would have to say yes. " Asked what will happen when epidemics return, she said, "Don't worry, scientists will find some way of using computers. " Such well-meaning people just don't understand. Scientists must communicate their message to the public in a compassionate, understandable way— in human terms, not in the language of molecular biology. We need to make clear the connection between animal research and a grandmother's hip replacement, a father's bypass operation, a baby's vaccinations, and even a pet's shots. To those who are unaware that animal research was needed to produce these treatments, as well as new treatments and vaccines, animal research seems wasteful at best and cruel at worst. Much can be done. Scientists could "adopt" middle school classes and present their own research. They should be quick to respond to letters to the editor, lest animal rights misinformation go unchallenged and acquire a deceptive appearance of truth. Research institutions could be opened to tours, to show that laboratory animals receive humane care. Finally, because the ultimate stakeholders are patients, the health research community should actively recruit to its cause not only well-known personalities such as Stephen Cooper, who has made courageous statements about the value of animal research, but all who receive medical treatment. If good people do nothing, there is a real possibility that an uninformed citizenry will extinguish the precious embers of medical progress.