单选题Because of satellite links which now enable broadcast news organizations to originate live programming from any part of the globe, the entire world is becoming one giant sound stage for television news. As a result, Marshall McLean"s reference to the post-television world as being a single "global village" is gaining new acceptance and Shakespeare"s famous line, "all the world"s a stage," has taken on an interesting new twist in meaning. But, beyond the philosophical dimensions of global television communications there are some dramatic, political implications. Even before today"s worldwide satellite links were possible, the growing effect of broadcast news technology on national and international politics was becoming increasingly evident. Because television is a close-up medium and a medium that seems to most readily involve emotions, it is most effective when it is revealing the plights of people. It was probably the appalling footage of the Nazi death camps that first demonstrated the power of motion pictures and television to affect the collective consciousness of a world audience. In the United States during the 50"s and 60"s the power of television to stir the consciousness of large numbers of people was demonstrated in another way. Night after night graphic news footage of the civil rights struggle was brought into U.S. homes. Years later, this role was to take on a new and even more controversial dimension during the Vietnam War. Reading about war was one thing; but war took on a deeper and more unsavory dimension when it was exported directly into U.S. living rooms night after night by television. Public opinion eventually turned against the war and to some measure against President Johnson who was associated with it. As a result of the public opinion backlash during these times, the Pentagon was thereafter much more careful to control what foreign correspondents and TV crews would be allowed to see and report. It was during this time that President Carter brought the issue of human rights to the centre of his foreign policy, and, to some degree, to the centre of international politics. "Human rights are the soul of our foreign policy," Carter said. "Of all human rights the most basic is to be free of arbitrary violence, whether that violence comes from government, from terrorists, from criminals, or from self-appointed messiahs operating under the cover of politics or religion. " Although political viewpoints have changed since then, because of the emotional nature of human rights, this has emerged as the "soul" of television news. The transgression of human rights has been the focus of many, if not most, major international television news stories. The reporting of these stories has created outrage in the world, prompted attempts at censorship by dictators, and in many cases resulted in the elimination of human rights abuses.

单选题Questions 16～20 The miserable fate of Enron"s employees will be a landmark in business history, one of those awful events that everyone agrees must never be allowed to happen again. This urge is understandable and noble: thousands have lost virtually all their retirement savings with the demise of Enron stock. But making sure it never happens again may not be possible, because the sudden impoverishment of those Enron workers represents something even larger than it seems. It"s the latest turn in the unwinding of one of the most audacious promise of the 20th century. The promise was assured economic security—even comfort—for essentially everyone in the developed world. With the explosion of wealth, that began in the 19th century it became possible to think about a possibility no one had dared to dream before. The fear at the center of daily living since caveman days—lack of food, warmth, and shelter—would at last lose its power to terrify. That remarkable promise became reality in many ways. Governments created welfare systems for anyone in need and separate programs for the elderly (Social Security in the U. S.). Labor unions promised not only better pay for workers but also pensions for retirees. Giant corporations came into being and offered the possibility—in some cases the promise—of lifetime employment plus guaranteed pensions. The cumulative effect was a fundamental change in how millions of people approached life itself, a reversal of attitude that most rank as one of the largest in human history. For millennia the average person"s stance toward providing for himself had been. Ultimately I"m on my own. Now it became, ultimately I"ll be taken care of. The early hints that this promise might be broken on a large scale came in the 1980s. U.S. business had become uncompetitive globally and began restructuring massively, with huge layoffs. The trend accelerated in the 1990s as the bastions of corporate welfare faced reality. IBM ended it"s no-layoff policy. AT ＆ T fired thousands, many of whom found such a thing simply incomprehensible, and a few of whom killed themselves. The other supposed guarantors of our economic security were also in decline. Labor-union membership and power fell to their lowest levels in decades. President Clinton signed a historic bill scaling back welfare. Americans realized that Social Security won"t provide social security for any of us. A less visible but equally significant trend affected pensions. To make costs easier to control, companies moved away from defined-benefit pension plans, which obligate them to pay out specified amounts years in the future, to defined contribution plans, which specify only how much goes into the play today. The most common type of defined-contribution plan is the 401(k). The significance of the 401(k) is that it puts most of the responsibility for a person"s economic fate back on the employee. Within limits the employee must decide how much goes into the plan each year and how it gets invested—the two factors that will determine how much it"s worth when the employee retires. Which brings us back to Enron? Those billions of dollars in vaporized retirement savings went in employees" 401(k) accounts. That is, the employees chose how much money to put into those accounts and then chose how to invest it. Enron matched a certain proportion of each employees 401 (k) contribution with company stock, so everyone was going to end up with some Enron in his or her portfolio; but that could be regarded as a freebie, since nothing compels a company to match employee contributions at all. At least two special features complicate the Enron case. First, some shareholders charge top management with illegally covering up the company"s problems, prompting investors to hang on when they should have sold. Second, Enron"s 401(k) accounts were locked while the company changed plan administrators in October, when the stock was falling, so employees could not have closed their accounts if they wanted to. But by far the largest cause of this human tragedy is that thousands of employees were heavily overweighed in Enron stock. Many had placed 100% of their 401(k) assets in the stock rather than in the 18 other investment options they were offered. Of course that wasn"t prudent, but it"s what some of them did. The Enron employees" retirement disaster is part of the larger trend away from guaranteed economic security. That"s why preventing such a thing from ever happening again may be impossible. The huge attitudinal shift to I"ll-be-taken-care-of took at least a generation. The shift back may take just as long. It won"t be complete until a new generation of employees see assured economic comfort as a 20th century quirk, and understand not just intellectually but in their bones that, like most people in most times and places, they"re on their own.

单选题Questions 1-5 I live in the land of Disney, Hollywood and year-round sun, You may think people in such a glamorous, fun-filled place are happier than others. If so, you have some mistaken ideas about the nature of happiness. Many intelligent people still equate happiness with fun. The truth is that fun and happiness have little or nothing in common. Fun is what we experience during an act. Happiness is what we experience after an act. It is a deeper, more abiding emotion. Going to an amusement park or ball game, watching a movie or television, are fun activities that help us relax, temporarily forget our problems and maybe even laugh. But they do not bring happiness, because their positive effects end when the fun ends. I have often thought that if Hollywood stars have a role to play, it is to teach us that happiness has nothing to do with fun. These rich, beautiful individuals have constant access to glamorous parties, fancy cars, expensive homes, everything that spells "happiness". But in memoir after memoir, celebrities reveal the unhappiness hidden beneath all their fun: depression, alcoholism, drug addiction, broken marriages, troubled children and profound loneliness. Ask a bachelor why he resists marriage even though he finds dating to be less and less satisfying. If he"s honest, he will tell you that he is afraid of making a commitment. For commitment is in fact quite painful. The single life is filled with fun, adventure and excitement. Marriage has such moments, but they are not its most distinguishing features. Similarly, couples that choose not to have children are deciding in favor of painless fun over painful happiness. They can dine out whenever they want and sleep as late as they want. Couples with infant children are lucky to get a whole night"s sleep or a three-day vacation. I don"t know any parent who would choose the word fun to describe raising children. Understanding and accepting that true happiness has nothing to do with fun is one of the most liberating realizations we can ever come to. It liberates time. now we can devote more hours to activities that can genuinely increase our happiness. It liberates money, buying that new car or those fancy clothes that will do nothing to increase our happiness now seems pointless. And it liberates us from envy: we now understand that all those rich and glamorous people we were so sure are happy because they are always having so much fun actually may not be happy at all.

单选题Questions 27-30

单选题According to the passage, which of the following is NOT true about NNI?

单选题{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} In this part of the test, you will hear several short talks and conversations. After each of these, you will hear a few questions. Listen carefully because you will hear the talk or conversation and questions {{B}}ONLY ONCE.{{/B}} When you hear a question, read the four answer choices and choose the best answer to that question. Then write the letter of the answer you have chosen in the corresponding space in your {{B}}ANSWER BOOKLET.{{/B}} {{B}}Questions 11—14{{/B}}

单选题

单选题

单选题 Questions 16～20 The striving of countries in Central Europe to enter the European Union may offer an unprecedented chance to the continent's Gypsies (or Roman) to be recognized as a nation, albeit one without a defined territory. And if they were to achieve that they might even seek some kind of formal place—at least a total population outnumbers that of many of the Union's present and future countries. Some experts put the figure at 4m-plus; some proponents of Gypsy rights go as high as 15m. Unlike Jews, Gypsies have had no known ancestral land to hark back to. Though their language is related to Hindi, their territorial origins are misty. Romanian peasants held them to be born on the moon Other Europeans (wrongly) thought them migrant Egyptians, hence the derivative Gypsy. Most probably they were itinerant metal workers and entertainers who drifted west from India in the 7th century. However, since communism in Central Europe collapsed a decade ago, the notion of Romanestan as a landless nation founded on Gypsy culture has gained ground. The International Romany Union, which says it stands for 10m Gypsies in more than 30 countries, is fostering the idea of "self-rallying". It is trying to promote a standard and written form of the language; it waves a Gypsy flag (green with a wheel) when it lobbies in such places as the United Nations; and in July it held a congress in Prague, The Czech capital, where President Vaclav Havel said that Gypsies in his own country and elsewhere should have a better deal. At the congress a Slovak-born lawyer, Emil Scuka, was elected president of the International Romany Union. Later this month a group of elected Gypsy politicians, including members of parliament, mayors and local councilors from all over Europe (OSCE), to discuss how to persuade more Gypsies to get involved in politics. The International Romany Union is probably the most representative of the outfits that speak for Gypsies, but that is not saying a lot. Of the several hundred delegates who gathered at its congress, few were democratically elected; oddly, none came from Hungary, whose Gypsies are perhaps the world's best organized, with some 450 Gypsy bodies advising local councils there. The union did, however, announce its ambition to set up a parliament, but 'how it would actually be elected was left undecided. So far, the European Commission is wary of encouraging Gypsies to present themselves as a nation. This might, it is feared, open a Pandora's Box already containing Basques, Corsicans and other awkward peoples. Besides, acknowledging Gypsies as a nation might backfire, just when several countries, particularly Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, are beginning to treat them better, in order to qualify for EU membership. "The EU's whole premise is to overcome differences, not to highlight them," says a nervous Eurocrat. But the idea that the Gypsies should win some kind of special recognition as Europe's largest continent wide minority, and one with a terrible history of persecution, is catching on. Gypsies have suffered many pogroms over the centuries. In Romania, the country that still has the largest number of them (more than 1m), in the 19th century they were actually enslaved. Hitler tried to wipe them out, along with the Jews. "Gypsies deserve some space within European structures," says Jan Marinus Wiersma, a Dutchman in the European Parliament who suggests that one of the current commissioners should be responsible for Gypsy affairs. Some prominent Gypsies say they should be more directly represented, perhaps with a quota in the European Parliament. That, they argue, might give them a boost. There are moves afoot to help them to get money for, among other things, a Gypsy university. One big snag is that Europe's Gypsies are, in fact, extremely heterogeneous. They belong to many different, and often antagonistic, clans and tribes, with no common language or religion, Their self-proclaimed leaders have often proved quarrelsome and corrupt. Still, says, Dimitrina Petrova, head of the European Roma Rights Center in Budapest, Gypsies' shared experience of suffering entitles them to talk of one nation; their potential unity, she says, stems from "being regarded as sub-human by most majorities in Europe. " And they have begun to be a bit more pragmatic. In Slovakia and Bulgaria, for instance, Gypsy political parties are trying to form electoral blocks that could win seats in parliament. In Macedonia, a Gypsy party already has some—and even runs a municipality. Nicholas Gheorge, an expert on Gypsy affairs at the OSCE, reckons that, spread over Central Europe, there are now about 20 Gypsy MPS and mayors, 400-odd local councilors, and a growing number of businessmen and intellectuals. That is far from saying that they have the people or the cash to forge a nation. But, with the Gypsy question on the EU's agenda in Central Europe, they are making ground.

单选题Questions 11 to 15 are based on the following interview.

单选题The Supreme Court"s decisions on physician-assisted suicide carry important implications for how medicine seeks to relieve dying patients of pain and suffering. Although it ruled that there is no constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide, the Court in effect supported the medical principle of "double effect", a centuries-old moral principle holding that an action having two effects--a good one that is intended and a harmful one that is foreseen—is permissible if the actor intends only the good effect. Doctors have used that principle in recent years to justify using high doses of morphine to control terminally ill patients" pain, even though increasing dosages will eventually kill the patient. Nancy Dubler, director of Montefiore Medical Center, contends that the principle will shield doctors who "until now have very, very strongly insisted that they could not give patients sufficient medication to control their pain if that might hasten death." George Annas, chair of the health law department at Boston University, maintains that, as long as a doctor prescribes a drug for a legitimate medical purpose, the doctor has done nothing illegal even if the patient uses the drug to hasten death. "It"s like surgery," he says. "We don"t call those deaths homicides because the doctors didn"t intend to kill their patients, although they risked their death. If you"re a physician, you can risk your patient"s suicide as long as you don"t intend their suicide." On another level, many in the medical community acknowledge that the assisted-suicide debate has been fueled in part by the despair of patients for whom modem medicine has prolonged the physical agony of dying. Just three weeks before the Court"s ruling on physician-assisted suicide, the National Academy of Science (NAS) released a two-volume report, Approaching Death: Improving Care at the End of Life. It identifies the undertreatment of pain and the aggressive use of "ineffectual and forced medical procedures that may prolong and even dishonor the period of dying" as the twin problems of end-of-life care. The profession is taking steps to require young doctors to train in hospices, to test knowledge of aggressive pain management therapies, to develop a Medicare billing code for hospital-based care, and to develop new standards for assessing and treating pain at the end of life. Annas says lawyers can play a key role in insisting that these well-meaning medical initiatives translate into better care. "Large numbers of physicians seem unconcerned with the pain their patients are needlessly and predictably suffering," to the extent that it constitutes "systematic patient abuse". He says medical licensing boards "must make it clear... that painful deaths are presumptively ones that are incompetently managed and should result in license suspension."

单选题

单选题The plane ______ a few minutes after it took off and most of the passengers died. A. collided B. crushed C. crashed D. smashed

单选题 In his classic novel, "The Pioneers", James Fenimore Cooper has his hero, a land developer, take his cousin on a tour of the city he is building. He describes the broad streets, rows of houses, a teeming metropolis. But his cousin looks around bewildered. All she sees is a stubby forest. "Where are the beauties and improvements which you were to show me?" she asks. He's astonished she can't see them." Where! Why everywhere," he replies. For though they are not yet built on earth, he has built them in his mind, and they are as concrete to him as if they were already constructed and finished. Cooper was illustrating a distinctly American trait, future-mindedness: the ability to see the present from the vantage point of the future; the freedom to feel unencumbered by the past and more emotionally attached to things to come. "America is therefore the land of the future," the German philosopher Hegel wrote. "The American lives even more for his goals, for the future, than the European," Albert Einstein concurred. "Life for him is always becoming, never being." In 2012, America will still be the place where the future happens first, for that is the nation's oldest tradition. The early Puritans lived in almost Stone Age conditions, but they were inspired by visions of future glories, God's kingdom on earth. The early pioneers would sometimes travel past perfectly good farmland, because they were convinced that even more amazing land could be found over the next ridge. The founding Fathers took 13 scraggly colonies and believed they were creating a new nation on earth. The railroad speculators envisioned magnificent fortunes built on bands of iron. It's now fashionable to ridicule the visions of dot-com entrepreneurs of the 1990s, but they had inherited the urge to leap for the horizon. "The Future is endowed with such a life, that it lives to us even in anticipation," Herman Melville wrote. "The Future is the Bible of the Free." This future-mindedness explains many modern features of American life. It explains workaholism: the average American works 350 hours a year more than the average European. Americans move more, in search of that brighter tomorrow, than people in other land. They also, sadly, divorce more, for the same reason. Americans adopt new technologies such as online shopping and credit cards much more quickly than people in other countries. Forty-five percent of world Internet use takes place in the United States. Even today, after the bursting of the stock-market bubble, American venture-capital firms—which are in the business of betting on the future—dwarf the firms from all other nations. Future-mindedness contributes to the disorder in American life, the obliviousness to history, the high rates of family breakdown, the frenzied waste of natural resources. It also leads to incredible innovations. According to the Yale historian Paul Kennedy, 75 percent of the Nobel laureates in economies and the sciences over recent decades have lived or worked in the United States. The country remains a magnet for the future-minded from other nations. One in twelve Americans has enjoyed the thrill and challenge of starting his own business. A study published in the Journal of International Business Studies in 2000 showed that innovative people are spread pretty evenly throughout the globe, but Americans are most comfortable with risk. Entrepreneurs in the U. S. are more likely to believe that they possess the ability to shape their own future than people in, say, Britain, Australia or Singapore. If the 1990s were a great decade of future-mindedness, we are now in the midst of a season of experience. It seems cooler to be skeptical, to pooh-pooh all those IPO suckers who lost their money betting on the telecom future. But the world is not becoming more French. By 2012, this period of chastisement will likely have run its course, and future-mindedness will be back in vogue, for better or worse. We don't know exactly what the next future-mindedness frenzy will look like. We do know where it will take place: the American suburb. In 1979, three quarters of American office space were located in central cities. The new companies, research centers and entrepreneurs are flocking to these low buildings near airports, highways and the Wal-Mart malls, and they are creating a new kind of suburban life. There are entirely new metropolises rising-boom suburbs like Mesa, Arizona, that already have more people than Minneapolis or St. Louis. We are now approaching a moment in which the majority of American office space, and the hub of American entrepreneurship, will be found in quiet office parks in places like Rockville, Maryland, and in the sprawling suburbosphere around Atlanta. We also know that future-mindedness itself will become the object of greater study. We are discovering that there are many things that human beings do easily that computers can do only with great difficulty, if at all. Cognitive scientists are now trying to decode the human imagination, to understand how the brain visualizes, dreams and creates. And we know, too, that where there is future-mindedness, there is hope.

单选题 Questions 16～20 Stratford-on-Avon, as we all know, has only one industry—William Shakespeare—but there are two distinctly separate and increasingly hostile branches. There is the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC), which presents superb productions of the plays at the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre on the Avon. And there are the townsfolk who largely live off the tourists who come, not to see the plays, but to look at Anne Hathaway's Cottage, Shakespeare's birthplace and the other sights. The worthy residents of Stratford doubt that the theatre adds a penny to their revenue. They frankly dislike the RSC's actors, them with their long hair and beards and sandals and noisiness. It's all deliciously ironic when you consider that Shakespeare, who earns their living, was himself an actor (with a beard) and did his share of noise-making. The tourist streams are not entirely separate. The sightseers who come by bus—and often take in Warwick Castle and Blenheim Palace on the side—don't usually see the plays, and some of them are even surprised to find a theatre in Stratford. However, the playgoers do manage a little sight- seeing along with their play going. It is the playgoers, the RSC contends, who bring in much of the town's revenue because they spend the night (some of them four or five nights) pouring cash into the hotels and restaurants. The sightseers can take in everything and get out of town by nightfall. The townsfolk don't see it this way and local council does not contribute directly to the subsidy of the Royal Shakespeare Company. Stratford cries poor traditionally. Nevertheless every hotel in town seems to be adding a new wing or cocktail lounge. Hilton is building its own hotel there, which you may be sure will be decorated with Hamlet Hamburger Bars, the Lear Lounge, the Banquo Banqueting Room, and so forth, and will be very expensive. Anyway, the townsfolk can't understand why the Royal Shakespeare Company needs a subsidy. (The theatre has broken attendance records for three years in a row. Last year its 1,431 seats were 94 percent occupied all year long and this year they'll do better.) The reason, of course, is that costs have rocketed and ticket prices have stayed low. It would be a shame to raise prices too much because it would drive away the young people who are Stratford's most attractive clientele. They come entirely for the plays, not the sights. They all seem to look alike (though they come from all over)—lean, pointed, dedicated faces, wearing jeans and sandals, eating their buns and bedding down for the night on the flagstones outside the theatre to buy the 20 seats and 80 standing-room tickets held for the sleepers and sold to them when the box office opens at 10:30 a. m.

单选题

单选题{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} In this section, you will read several passages. Each passage is followed by several questions based on its content. You are to choose {{B}}ONE{{/B}} best answer to each question. Answer all the questions following each passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in that passage and write the letter of the answer you have chosen in the corresponding space in your {{B}}ANSWER BOOKLET.{{/B}} Coca-Cola has been operating internationally for most of its 100 year history. Today the company has operations in 160 countries and employs over 400,000 people. The firm's human resource management (HRM) strategy helps to explain a great deal of its success. In one recent year Coca-Cola transferred more than 300 professional and managerial staff from one country to another under its leadership development program, and the number of international transferees is increasing annually. One senior-level HRM manager explained the company strategy by noting: We recently concluded that our talent base has to be multilingual and multicultural…. To use a sports analogy, you want to be sure that you have a lot of capable and competent bench strength, ready to assume broader responsibilities as they present themselves. In preparing for the future, Coca-Cola includes a human resources recruitment forecast in its annual and long-term business strategies. The firm also has selection standards on which management can focus when recruiting and hiring. For example, the company likes applicants who are fluent in more than one language because they can be transferred to other geographic areas where their fluency will help them be part of Coca-Cola's operation. This multilingual multicultural emphasis starts at the top with the president, Roberto Goizueta, a Cuban-born American who has been chairman for over a decade, and with the 21 members of the board of whom only four are American. The firm also has a recruitment program that helps it to identify candidates at the college level. More than just seeking students abroad, Coca-Cola looks for foreign students who are studying in the United States at domestic universities. The students are recruited stateside and then provided with a year's training before they go back to their home country. Coca-cola also has an internship program for foreign students who are interested in working for the company during school break, either in the United States or back home. These interns are put into groups and assigned a project that requires them to make a presentation to the operations personnel on their project. This presentation must include a discussion of what worked and what did not work. Each individual intern is then evaluated, and management decides the person's future potential with the company. Coca-Cola believes that these approaches are extremely useful in helping the firm to find talent on a global basis. Not only is the company able to develop internal sources, but also the intern program provides a large number of additional individuals who would otherwise end in with other companies. Coca-Cola earns a greater portion of its income and profit overseas than it does in the United States. The company's human resource management strategy helps to explain how Coke is able to achieve this feat.

单选题

单选题 Questions 16 to 20 are based on the following talk.

单选题Questions 6-10 Most of us are taught to pay attention to what is said—the words. Words do provide us with some information, but meanings are derived from so many other sources that it would hinder our effectiveness as a partner to a relationship to rely too heavily on words alone. Words are used to describe only a small part of the many ideas we associate with any given message. Sometimes we can gain insight into some of those associations if we listen for more than words. We don"t always say what we mean or mean what we say. Sometimes our words don"t mean anything except " I"m letting off some steam. I don"t really want you to pay close attention to what I"m saying. Just pay attention to what I"m feeling. " Mostly we mean several things at once. A person wanting to purchase a house says to the current owner, "This step has to be fixed before I"ll buy. " The owner says, " It"s been like that for years." Actually, the step hasn"t been like that for years, but the unspoken message is.. " I don"t want to fix it. We put up with it. Why can"t you?" The search for a more expansive view of meaning can be developed of examining a message in terms of who said it, when it occurred, the related conditions or situations, and how it was said. When a message occurs can also reveal associated meaning. Let us assume two couples do exactly the same amount of kissing and arguing. But one couple always kisses after an argument and the other couple always argues after a kiss. The ordering of the behaviors may mean a great deal more than the frequency of the behavior. A friend"s unusually docile behavior may only be understood by noting that it was preceded by situations that required an abnormal amount of assertiveness. Some responses may be directly linked to a developing pattern of responses and defy logic. For example, a person who says "No!" to a series of charges like "You"re dumb," "You"re lazy," and "You"re dishonest," may also say "No!" and try to justify his or her response if the next statement is "And you"re good looking. " We would do well to listen for how messages are presented. The words, "It sure has been nice to have you over," can be said with emphasis and excitement or ritualistically. The phrase can be said once or repeated several times. And the meanings we associate with the phrase will change accordingly. Sometimes if we say something infrequently it assumes more importance; sometimes the more we say something, the less importance it assumes.