In line with the passage, if you don't like to write a letter, it's simply because ______.

A . coiling B . faking C . flemishing D . lining

A . one B . two C . three D . four

A . drill stem guide B . guide frame C . drill string frame D . casing guide

A . without the necessity of manually adjusting the lines B . without the necessity of automatically adjusting the lines C . with the necessity of manually adjusting the lines D . with the un-necessity of automatically adjusting the line

A . a filter B . a strainer C . a magnetic filter D . a fine strainer

The Trouble With Television It is difficult to escape the influence of television. If you fit the statistical averages, by the age of 20 you will have been exposed to at least 20,000 hours of television. You can add 10,000 hours for each decade you have lived after the age of 20. The only things Americans do more than watch television are work and sleep. Calculate for a moment what could be done with even a part of those hours. Five thousand hours, I am told, are what a typical college undergraduate spends working on a bachelor&39;s degree. In 10,000 hours you could have learned enough to become an astronomer or engineer. You could have learned several languages fluently. If it appealed to you, you could be reading Homer in the original Greek or Dostoyevsky in Russian. If it didn&39;t, you could have walked around the world and written a book about it. The trouble with television is that it discourages concentration. Almost anything interesting and rewarding in life requires some constructive, consistently applied effort. The dullest, the least gifted of us can achieve things that seem miraculous to those who never concentrate on anything. But Television encourages us to apply no effort. It sells us instant gratification(满意). It diverts us only to divert, to make the time pass without pain. Television&39;s variety becomes a narcotic(麻醉的), nor a stimulus. Its serial, kaleidoscopic (万花筒般的)exposures force us to follow its lead. The viewer is on a perpetual guided tour: 30 minutes at the museum, 30 at the cathedral, 30 for a drink, then back on the bus to the next attraction—except on television., typically, the spans allotted arc on the order of minutes or seconds, and the chosen delights are more often car crashes and people killing one another. In short, a lot of television usurps(篡夺;侵占) one of the most precious of all human gifts, the ability to focus your attention yourself, rather than just passively surrender it. Capturing your attention—and holding it—is the prime motive of most television programming and enhances its role as a profitable advertising vehicle. Programmers live in constant fear of losing anyone&39;s attention—anyone&39;s. The surest way to avoid doing so is to keep everything brief, not to strain the attention of anyone but instead to provide constant stimulation through variety, novelty, action and movement. Quite simply, television operates on the appeal to the short attention span. It is simply the easiest way out. But it has come to be regarded as a given, as inherent in the medium itself; as an imperative, as though General Sarnoff, or one of the other august pioneers of video, had bequeathed(遗留;传于) to us tablets of stone commanding that nothing in television shall ever require more than a few moments&39; Concentration. In its place that is fine. Who can quarrel with a medium that so brilliantly packages escapist entertainment as a mass-marketing tool？ But I see its values now pervading this nation and its life. It has become fashionable to think that, like fast food, fast ideas are the way to get to a fast-moving, impatient public. In the case of news, this practice, in my view, results in inefficient communication. I question how much of television&39;s nightly news effort is really absorbable and understandable. Much of it is what has been aptly described as "machine-gunning with scraps." I think the technique fights coherence. I think it tends to make things ultimately boring (unless they are accompanied by horrifying pictures) because almost anything is boring if you know almost nothing about it. I believe that TV&39;s appeal to the short attention span is not only inefficient communication but decivilizing as well. Consider the casual assumptions that television tends to cultivate: that complexity must be avoided, that visual stimulation is a substitute for thought, that verbal precision is an anachronism. It may be old-fashioned, but I was taught that thought is words, arranged in grammatically precise. There is a crisis of literacy in this country. One study estimates that some 30 million adult Americans are "functionally illiterate" and cannot read or write well enough to answer the want ad or understand the instructions on a medicine bottle. Literacy may not be an inalienable human right, but it is one that the highly literate Founding Fathers might not have found unreasonable or even unattainable. We are not only not attaining it as a nation, statistically speaking, but we are falling further and further short of attaining it. And, while I would not be so simplistic as to suggest that television is the cause, I believe it contributes and is an influence. Everything about this nation—the structure of the society, its forms of family organization, its economy, its place in the world— has become more complex, not less. Yet its dominating communications instrument, its principal form. of national linkage, is one that sells neat resolutions to human problems that usually have no neat resolutions. It is all symbolized in my mind by the hugely successful art form. that television has made central to the culture, the 30-second commercial: the tiny drama of the earnest housewife who finds happiness in choosing the right toothpaste. When before in human history has so much humanity collectively surrendered so much of its leisure to one toy, one mass diversion？ When before has virtually an entire nation surrendered itself wholesale to a medium for selling？ Some years ago Yale University law professor Charles L. Black. Jr., wrote: "... forced feeding on trivial fare is not itself a trivial matter-" I think this society is being forced-fed with trivial fare, and I fear that the effects on our habits of mind, our language, our tolerance for effort, and our appetite for complexity are only dimly perceived. If I am wrong, we will have done no harm to look at the issue skeptically and critically, to consider how we should be residing it. I hope you will join with me in doing so. 1. In America people do sleeping and watching televisions more than anything else. 2. From the passage we know the time an average American spends on watching TV could have made the person learn to become an astronomer or engineer. 3. The trouble with TV is that it distracts people’s attention and encourages them to make no efforts toward their life. 4. TV programmers base this operation on the attraction of long-span attention of audiences. 5. According to the author the improper television operation in American society will be likely to make things eventually boring. 6. Americans will face a serious problem of illiteracy due to the negative impact of TV. 7. In American society literacy is a certain right that cannot be deprived.

To "live a completely sedentary life-style" (Line 8, Paragraph 1 ) in the passage means ______. A．to "live an inactive life" B．to "live a decent life" C．to "live a life with complete freedom" D．to "live a life of vice" 此题为多项选择题。

A．Prevent B．Back C．Mislead D．Avoid 此题为多项选择题。

A．hotels and restaurants B．show business C．top management group D．real estate development companies

A．invaluable B．imaginable C．changeable D．indefensible

A．more popular with large corporations. B．more specific. C．less controversial. D．less expensive to enforce. E．easier to comply with.

A．Launch B．Start C．Implement D．Send 此题为多项选择题。

A．loan B．trust C．B/L D．L/C

A.Not long ago a California policeman stopped… B.Thousands of babies are given strange names… C.There’S a Katz Neow in Washington D．C… D.But perhaps the strangest name of all is…

A．the interpretation of the term "environment" B．the discussion on organisms and biological environment C．the comparison between internal and external factors influencing man D．the evaluation of man's influence on culture

A．supporting a proposition B．describing an event C．analyzing a problem objectively D．settling a dispute

Helicopter Moms vs. Free-Range KidsWould you let your fourth-grader ride public transportation without an adult？ Probably not. Still, when Lenore Skenazy, a columnist for the New York Sun, wrote about letting her son take the subway alone to get back to "Long story short:my son got home from a department store on the Upper East Side, she didn’t expect to get hit with a wave of criticism from readers. “Long story short: My son got home, overjoyed with independence,” Skenazy wrote on April 4 in the New York Sun. “Long story longer: Half the people I’ve told this episode to now want to turn on in for child abuse. As if keeping kids under lock and key and cell phone and careful watch is the right way to rear kids. It’s not. It’s debilitating (使虚弱)—for us and for them.” Online message boards were soon full of people both applauding and condemning Skenazy’s decision to let her son go it alone. She wound up defending herself on CNN (accompanied by her son) and on popular blogs like the buffington post, where her follow-up piece was ironically headlined “More From America’s Worst Mom.” The episode has ignited another one of those debates that divides parents into vocal opposing camps. Are Modern parents needlessly overprotective, or is the world a more complicated and dangerous place than it was when previous generations were allowed to wander about unsupervised？ From the “she’s an irresponsible mother” camp came: “Shame on you for being so careless about his safety,” in Comments on the buffongton post. And there was this from a mother of four: “How would you have felt if he didn’t come home？” But Skenazy got a lot of support, too, with women and men writing in with stories about how they were allowed to take trips all by them selves at seven or eight. She also got heaps of praise for bucking the “helicopter parent” trend: “Good for this Mom,” one commenter wrote on the buffongton post. “This is a much-needed reality check.” Last week, encouraged by all the attention, Skenazy started her own blog—Free Range, kids—promoting the idea that modern children need some of the same independence that her generation had. In the good old days nine-year-old baby boomers rode their bikes to school, walked to the store, took buses—and even subways—all by themselves. Her blog, she says, is dedicated to sensible parenting. “At Free Range Kids, we believe in safe kids. We believe in car seats and safety belts. We do NOT believe that every time school-age children go outside, they need a security guard.” So why are some parents so nervous about letting their children out of their sight？ Are cities and towns less safe and kids more vulnerable to crimes like child kidnap and sexual abuse than they were in previous generations？ Not exactly. New York City, for instance, is safer than it’s ever been; it’s ranked 36th in crime among all American cities. Nationwide, stringer kidnaps are extremely rare; there’s a one-in-a-million chance a child will be taken by a stranger, according to the Justice Department. And 90 percent of sexual abuse cases are committed by someone the child knows. Mortality rates from all causes, including disease and accidents, for American children are lower now than they were 25 years’ ago. According to Child Trends, a nonprofit research group, between 1980 and 2003 death rates dropped by 44 percent for children aged 5 to 14 and 32 percent for teens aged 15 to 19. Then there’s the whole question of whether modern parents are more watchful and nervous about safety than previous generations. Yes, some are. Part of the problem is that with wall to wall Internet and cable news, every missing child case gets so much airtime that it’s not surprising even normal parental anxiety can be amplified. And many middle-class parents have gotten used to managing their children’s time and shuttling them to various enriching activities, so the idea of letting them out on their own can seem like a risk. Back in 1972, when many of today’s parents were kids, 87 percent of children who lived within a mile of school walked or biked every day. But today, the Centers for Disease Control report that only 13 percent of children bike, walk or otherwise t themselves to school. The extra supervision is both a city and a suburb phenomenon. Parents are worried about crime, and they are worried about kids getting caught in traffic in a city that’s not used to pedestrians. On the other hand, there are still plenty of kids whose parents give them a lot of independence, by choice or by necessity. The After School Alliance finds that more than 14 million kids aged 5 to 17 are responsible for taking care of themselves after school. Only 6.5 million kids participate in organized programs. “Many children who have working parents have to take the subway or bus to get to school. Many do this by themselves because they have no other way to get to the schools,” says Dr. Richard Gallagher, director of the Parenting Institute at the New York University Child Study Center. For those parents who wonder how and when they should start allowing their kids more freedom, there’s no clear-cut answer. Child experts discourage a one-size-fits-all approach to parenting. What’s right for Skenazy’s nine-year-old could be inappropriate for another one. It all depends on developmental issue, maturity, and the psychological and emotional makeup of that child. Several factors must be taken into account, says Gallagher. “The ability to follow parent guidelines, the child’s level of comfort in handling such situations, and a child’s general judgment should be weighed.” Gallagher agrees with Skenazy that many nine-year-olds are ready for independence like taking public transportation alone. “At certain times of the day, on certain routes, the subways are generally safe for these children, especially if they have grown up in the city and have been taught how to be safe, how to obtain help if they are concerned for their safety, and how to avoid unsafe situations by being watchful and on their toes.” But even with more traffic and fewer sidewalks, modern parents do have one advantage their parents didn’t: the cell phone. Being able to check in with a child anytime goes a long way toward relieving parental anxiety and may help parents loosen their control a little sooner. Skenazy got a lot of criticism because she didn’t give her kid her cell phone because she thought he’d lose it and wanted him to learn to go it alone without depending on mom—a major principle of free-range parenting. But most parents are more than happy to use cell phones to keep track of their kids. And for those who like the idea of free-range kids but still struggle with their inner helicopter parent, there may be a middle way. A new generation of GPS cell phones with tracking software make it easier than ever to follow a child’s every movement via the Internet—without seeming to interfere or hover. Of course, when they go to college, they might start objecting to being monitored as they’re on parole (假释). 注意：此部分试题请在答题卡1上作答。 1. When Lenore Skenazy’s son was allowed to take the subway alone, he ________. A．was afraid that he might get lost B．enjoyed having the independence C．was only too pleased to take the risk D．thought he was an exceptional child

A．described B．advantaged C．identified D．bothered

？If a line is correct, write CORRECT on your Answer Sheet. ？If there is an extra word in the line, write the extra word in CAPITAL LETTERS on your Answer Sheet. Know the needs of' your audience. Put what you have to say in a logical sequence. Ensure your speech will be captivating up to 34 your audience as well as worth their time and attention. Practice 35 and rehearse of your speech at home or where you can be at ease 36 and comfortable, in the front of a mirror, your family, friends or 37 your colleagues. Use a tape-recorder and listen to yourself. Videotape 38 your presentation and analyze on it. Know what your strong and 39 weak points are. Emphasize your strong points during your presentation. 40 When you are presenting it in front of an audience, you are performing 41 as an actor is on stage. How much you are being perceived is very 42 important. Dress appropriately for the occasion, Be solemn if your 43 topic is serious. Present the desired image to your audience. Speak 44 slowly, enunciate clearly, and show off appropriate emotion and feeling 45 relating to your topic subject. Vary the tone of your voice and dramatize if necessary. (34)

A．mostly painted indoor scenes B．painted a portrait of one of his daughter C．was very wealthy D．did not produce a large number of paintin