单选题Professor Lee's book will show you {{U}}how you have observed that{{/U}} can be used in other contexts.

单选题It is difficult to comprehend, but everything you have ever seen, smelt, heard or felt is merely your brain"s interpretation of incoming stimuli.

单选题The professor recommended in his last lecture that English learners______on the lookout for tenses. A．will be B．are C．should be D．must be

单选题The old man is in______habit of going for______walk along______river every morning except that it rains.

单选题Had I run out of gas, I ought to have called the garage.

单选题His heavy drinking and fond of gambling makes him a poor role model.

单选题______umbrellas are commonly used to protect______people from______rain.

单选题The poison, ______ in a small quantity, will be a medicine.

单选题The police have of offered a large ______ for information leading to the robber's arrest.

单选题Cancer of the liver, if malicious, in ordinary ______, will surely lead to death.

单选题It is not as difficult to store information as it is to ______ it quickly when it is wanted again.

单选题He was frightened by______lightning.

单选题Without the friction between their feet and the ground, people would ______ be able to walk. A. in no time B. by all means C. in no way D. on any account

单选题{{B}}Passage Four{{/B}} Legislation, Lawsuits Cover Both Sides on Same-sex Marriage 法律，在同性婚姻问题上诉讼两边不得罪 In courtrooms and state capitols nationwide, opponents and supporters of gay marriage have embarked on a collision course, pursuing lawsuits and legislation so deeply at odds that prolonged legal chaos is likely. One plausible result:a nation divided, at least briefly, between a handful of states recognizing gay marriage and a majority which do not. The most clear-cut option for averting such chaos is a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. However, despite support from President Bush, the amendment is given little chance of winning the needed two-thirds support in both the House and Senate this year. Without it, experts say, the rival sides are likely to litigate so relentlessly that the US Supreme Court will eventually be compelled to intercede and clarify whether a legal same-sex union in one state must be recognized in other states. "It's going to be complicated for many years—we're going to have some free-marriages states, and some that are not," said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. "This is not a new situation in our country," Foreman addeD．"We have had a hodgepodge of laws on different social issues. Invariably, we come to widespread consensus, and that's going to happen to this issue. " For now, though, consensus seems distant as two contrasting legal offensives take shape. On one hand, courts in five relatively liberal states—California, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Washington—are being asked to consider whether same-sex marriages should be alloweD． In each of these states, local officials have recently performed gay marriages. Gay-rights supporters predict the supreme courts in at least a couple of the states will join Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court in authorizing such marriages. Meanwhile, legislators in many states are moving to amend their constitutions to toughen existing bans on gay marriage and explicitly deny recognition to same-sex unions forged elsewhere. Four states—Alaska, Hawaii, Nebraska and Nevada—already have such constitutional amendments. Similar measures are either certain or likely to go before voters in several other states in November or thereafter, including Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Utah and Wisconsin. In 10 other legislatures, proposed constitutional amendments are pending—their fate not yet certain. Matt Daniels, who as head of the Alliance for Marriage helped draft the proposed federal constitutional amendment, sees the developments in state,legislatures as proof of strong grass-roots opposition to gay marriage. "As the courts push the envelope, public opinion moves in our direction," he said, "It's a great national referendum...on whether we as a society are going to send a message through our laws that there's something uniquely special about marriage between a man and a woman. " However, Daniels is convinced that without an amendment putting that definition in the US Constitution, the courts will eventually strike down state down state laws banning gay marriage, as well as the federal Defense of Marriage Act. That measure, signed by President Clinton in 1996, allows states to refuse to honor same-sex unions performed elsewhere, and denies federal recognition to such unions. Daniels said the proposed federal amendment, if it did clear Congress, would easily win the required ratification by at least 38 state legislatures. He acknowledged that the measure may have difficulty getting two-thirds backing in the current Senate, where few Democrats support it. But he predicted that pressure on politicians to approve the amendment will increase, once gay couples married in Massachusetts or elsewhere successfully sue to have their marriage honored in other states. "When the lawsuits start to export what happens in Massachusetts, you will have a political powder keg for politicians who refuse to pay heed to public opinion," Daniels saiD．"This will change the political landscape. " William Reppy, a Duke University law professor, agreed that a challenge to the non- recognition of gay marriages across state lines will be critical—perhaps what ultimately decides the issue. "There will be a split of authority—one state court will say it's valid, another will say it isn't," Reppy predicteD．"Then the US Supreme Court would have their hand forced, and hear the case. They don't let splits of authority run rampant around the country for very long. "

单选题 Questions 16-20 are based on the following passage. What is intelligence, anyway? When I was in the army, I received a kind of aptitude test that all soldiers took and, against a normal of 100, scored 160. No one at the base had ever seen a figure like that, and for two hours they made a big fuss over me. (It didn't mean anything. The next day I was still a buck private with KP—kitchen police—as my highest duty. ) All my life I've been registering scores like that, so that I have the complacent feeling that I'm highly intelligent, and I expect other people to think so, too. Actually, though, don't such scores simply mean that I am very good at answering the type of academic questions that are considered worthy of answers by the people who make up the intelligence tests—people with intellectual bents similar to mine? For instance, I had an auto-repair man once, who, on these intelligence teste, could not possibly have scored more than 80, by my estimate. I always took it for granted that I was far more intelligent than he was. Yet, when anything went wrong with my car I hastened to him with it, watched him anxiously as he explored its vitals, and listened to his pronouncements as though they were divine oracles—and he always fixed my car. Well, then, suppose my auto-repair man devised questions for an intelligence test.Or suppose a carpenter did, or a farmer, or, indeed, almost anyone but an academician. By every one of those thests, I'd prove myself a moron. And I'd be a moron, too. In the world where I could not use my academic training and my verbal talents but had to do something intricate or hard, working with my hands, I would do poorly. My intelligence, then, is not absolute but is a function of the society I live in and of the fact that a small subsection of that society has managed to foist itself on the rest as an arbiter of such matters. Consider my auto-repair man, again. He had a habit of telling me jokes whenever he saw me. One time he raised his head from under the automobile hood to say: "Doc, a deaf-and-mute guy went into a hardware store to ask for some nails. He put two fingers together on the counter and made hammering motions with the other hanD．The clerk brought him a hammer. He shook his head and pointed to the two fingers he was hammering. The clerk brought him nails. He picked out the sizes he wanted, and left. Well, doc, the next guy who came in was a blind man. He wanted scissors. How do you suppose he asked for them?" In dulgently, I lifted my fight hand and made scissoring motions with my first two fingers. Whereupon my auto-repair man laughed and said, "Why, you dumb jerk, he used his voice and asked for them. " Then he said smugly, "I've been trying that on all my customers today. " "Did you catch many?" I askeD．"Quite a few," he said, "but I knew for sure I'd catch you. " "Why is that?" I askeD．"Because you're so goddamned educated, Doc, I knew you couldn't be very smart. " And I have an uneasy feeling he had something there.

单选题In 1937 Eleanor Roosevelt, who was a {{U}}disceming{{/U}} stateswoman in her own right, became the first wife of a United States President to hold a press conference.

单选题Iceland has the oldest parliament, which goes as far back to 930 A.D. when Althing, the legislative {{U}}organization{{/U}}, was established.

单选题His heavy drinking and fond of gambling, makes him a poor role model. A. and fact that he gambles B. and that he gambles C. and he gambles which D. and gambling

单选题What they never take into account is the frazzled woman who is leading a ______ life-trying to be a good mother while having to pretend at work that she doesn't have kids at all.

单选题 Before, whenever we had wealth, we started discussing poverty. Why not now? Why is the current politics of wealth and poverty seemingly about wealth alone? Eight years ago, when Bill Clinton first ran for president, the Dow Jones average was under 3,500, yearly federal budget deficits were projected at hundreds of billions of dollars forever and beyond, and no one talked about the "permanent boom" or the "new economy." Yet in that more {{U}}straitened{{/U}} time, Clinton made much of the importance of "not leaving a single person behind." It is possible that similar "compassionate" rhetoric might yet play a role in the general election. But it is striking how much less talk there is about the poor than there was eight years ago, when the country was economically uncertain, or in previous eras, when the country felt {{U}}flush{{/U}}. Even last summer, when Clinton spent several days on a remarkable, Bobby Kennedy-like pilgrimage through impoverished areas from Indian reservations in South Dakota to ghetto neighborhoods in East St. Louis, the administration decided to refer to the effort not as a poverty tour but as a "new market initiative." What is happening is partly a logical, policy-driven reaction. Poverty really is lower than it has been in decades, especially for minority groups. The most attractive solution to it — a growing economy — is being applied. The people who have been totally left out of this boom often have medical, mental or other problems for which no one has an immediate solution. "The economy has {{U}}sucked in{{/U}} anyone who has any preparation, any ability to cope with modem life," says Franklin D. Raines, the former director of the Office of Management and Budget who is now head of Fannie Mae. When he and other people who specialize in the issue talk about solutions, they talk analytically and on a long-term basis: education, development of work skills, shifts in the labor market, adjustments in welfare reform. But I think there is another force that has made this a rich era with barely visible poor people. It is the unusual social and imaginative separation between prosperous America and those still left, out... It's simple invisibility, because of increasing geographic, occupational, and social barriers that block one group from the other's view.