题目内容
Questions 26～30It was books that first captured my imagination about faraway places. TV travelogues always seemed the poor relation to the classic written accounts, although of course the pictures were rather better. And then there was the issue of authenticity. All those pretentious theatrical types dying of thirst in the desert, as if we didn’t realize there was a camera crew on hand to cater for their every need. These days programme-makers know that the audience is more sophisticated and the presence of the camera is acknowledged. But can a journey with filming equipment ever be anything other than a cleverly constructed fictionI recently got the chance to find out, when I was asked to present two one-hour programmes for an adventure travel series. The project was the brainchild of the production company Trans-Atlantic Films, which wanted the series presented by writers and adventurers, as well as TV professionals. My sole qualification was as a journalist specialising in "adventure" travel. However, I was thought to have "on-screen" potential.The first programme was filmed in Costa Rica. Within 24 hours of my arrival, I realized that this was going to be very different from my usual "one man and his laptop" expeditions. For a start, there were five of us—director, cameraman, sound recordist, producer and presenter. And then there was the small matter of ￡100,000 worth of equipment. I soon realized that the director, Peter Macpherson, was a vastly experienced adventure film-maker. In his case, the term "adventure" meant precisely that. "Made a film with X," he would say (normally a famous mountaineer or skier), before describing a death-defying sequence at the top of a glacier in Alaska or hand-gliding off the Angel Falls in Venezuela. Invariably, these reminiscences would end with the words: "Had a great deal of respect for X. Dead now, sadly... "Part of the brief for the series was to put the presenter in unusual situations and see how he or she coped. One such sequence was the night we spent in the rainforest canopy near the National Park in Guanacaste province. I don’t have a head for heights and would make a poor rock-climber, so my distress is real enough as the camera catches me dangling on a rope some 30 metres up, well short of the canopy platform.Ironically, it was the presence of the camera, looking down on me from above, that gave me the impetus for the final push to the top. By this time, I’d learnt how "sequences" were cut together and realized that one last effort was required. I had to struggle to stay coherent while the camera swooped within a few millimeters of my face for my reaction In the end, it was a magical experience, hightened all the more by the sounds of the forest—a family of howler monkeys in a nearby tree, amplified through the sound recordist’s headphones.Learning how to establish a rapport with the camera is vital and it took me a while to think of it as a friend rather than a judge and jury. The most intimidating moments were when Peter strolled up to me, saying that the light would only be right for another 10 minutes, and that he needed a "link" from one sequence to another. The brief was simple. It needed to be 30 seconds long, sum up my feelings, be informative, well-structured and, most important of all, riveting to watch "Ready to go in about five minutes" he would say breezily. The writer uses the sequence filmed in the National Park as an example of （）.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Questions 21～25While other members of my team explored the wreck of a small Greek merchant ship that sank off the Turkish coast more than 2,400 years ago, I hovered above them in a submarine. One diver, an archaeologist, placed an amphora, or two-handled jar, inside a lifting basket. Another vacuumed sediment from the site by fanning sand into the mouth of a nearly vertical pipe. Two more were taking measurements, carefully, but of necessity quickly, for at this depth each diver had only 20 minutes to complete the morning’s assigned task. Any longer, and they would require lengthy medical treatment, to avoid the divers’ ailment known as the bends.In four decades of diving on shipwrecks, I’ d been too engrossed in carrying out similar tasks to think of the families whose loved ones may have disappeared long ago. I had always concentrated on the technical features of my trade. I had stopped diving regularly 15 years before this exploration, turning over the bulk of the underwater work to a younger generation, but I continue to make inspection dives on most wrecks we excavate.This was not just any wreck. Although I’ve been involved in uncovering the remains of much older ships, and of more than a hundred ancient shipwrecks along the Turkish coast. I had never even seen a wreck from the fifth century BC. Preliminary photographs of the cargo dated it to the third quarter of the century, during the Golden Age of classical Greece. Athens, then as now the major city in Greece, controlled an empire stretching from one side of the Aegean Sea to the other. None of this would have been possible without naval might and maritime commerce.During our three-year exploration of the wreck we excavated examples of nearly every type of jar that the classical Greeks made for wine or water. Many types might have been used as tableware by the ship’s crew, but they were far in excess of what would have been required. We concluded therefore that they must have been cargo. We also discovered in the seabed two marble discs, which we guessed were the ship’s eyes. It has long been known from vase paintings that classical Greek ships—like those from other cultures—had eyes to give them life or help them see their way through the waves. Although warships were known to have had naturalistic marble eyes attached to them, most scholars assumed that the eyes on more modest merchant ships were depicted as simple circles painted onto the sides of the vessel.Did the sailors who depended on these eyes for safety survive the ship’s last voyage They could have lived through the actual sinking. The ship was less than a hundred yards from land when it sank, so they might have swum towards the shore. And we know from Greek literature that some ships had lifeboats. But proximity to land and having lifeboats are no guarantee of safety. Even if some had swum to shore, it’s hard to imagine that many managed to crawl up on the exposed and sharp rocks while being smashed by waves like those that almost certainly sank their ship. Which of the following is TRUE about the ship’s eyes that were found（）
Questions 21～25While other members of my team explored the wreck of a small Greek merchant ship that sank off the Turkish coast more than 2,400 years ago, I hovered above them in a submarine. One diver, an archaeologist, placed an amphora, or two-handled jar, inside a lifting basket. Another vacuumed sediment from the site by fanning sand into the mouth of a nearly vertical pipe. Two more were taking measurements, carefully, but of necessity quickly, for at this depth each diver had only 20 minutes to complete the morning’s assigned task. Any longer, and they would require lengthy medical treatment, to avoid the divers’ ailment known as the bends.In four decades of diving on shipwrecks, I’ d been too engrossed in carrying out similar tasks to think of the families whose loved ones may have disappeared long ago. I had always concentrated on the technical features of my trade. I had stopped diving regularly 15 years before this exploration, turning over the bulk of the underwater work to a younger generation, but I continue to make inspection dives on most wrecks we excavate.This was not just any wreck. Although I’ve been involved in uncovering the remains of much older ships, and of more than a hundred ancient shipwrecks along the Turkish coast. I had never even seen a wreck from the fifth century BC. Preliminary photographs of the cargo dated it to the third quarter of the century, during the Golden Age of classical Greece. Athens, then as now the major city in Greece, controlled an empire stretching from one side of the Aegean Sea to the other. None of this would have been possible without naval might and maritime commerce.During our three-year exploration of the wreck we excavated examples of nearly every type of jar that the classical Greeks made for wine or water. Many types might have been used as tableware by the ship’s crew, but they were far in excess of what would have been required. We concluded therefore that they must have been cargo. We also discovered in the seabed two marble discs, which we guessed were the ship’s eyes. It has long been known from vase paintings that classical Greek ships—like those from other cultures—had eyes to give them life or help them see their way through the waves. Although warships were known to have had naturalistic marble eyes attached to them, most scholars assumed that the eyes on more modest merchant ships were depicted as simple circles painted onto the sides of the vessel.Did the sailors who depended on these eyes for safety survive the ship’s last voyage They could have lived through the actual sinking. The ship was less than a hundred yards from land when it sank, so they might have swum towards the shore. And we know from Greek literature that some ships had lifeboats. But proximity to land and having lifeboats are no guarantee of safety. Even if some had swum to shore, it’s hard to imagine that many managed to crawl up on the exposed and sharp rocks while being smashed by waves like those that almost certainly sank their ship. The writer uses the words’not just any wreck’ in paragraph 3 to imply that （）.
Questions 1～5Writing articles about films for The Front Page was my first proper job. Before then I had done bits of reviewing—novels for other newspapers, films for a magazine and anything I was asked to do for the radio. That was how I met Tom Seaton, the first arts editor of The Front Page, who had also written for radio and television. He hired me, but Tom was not primarily a journalist, or he would certainly have been more careful in choosing his staff.At first, his idea was that a team of critics should take care of the art forms that didn’t require specialized knowledge: books, TV, theatre, film and radio. There would be a weekly lunch at which we would make our choices from the artistic material that Tom had decided we should cover, though there would also be guests to make the atmosphere sociable.It all felt a bit of a dream at that time: a new newspaper, and I was one of the team. It seemed so unlikely that a paper could he introduced into a crowded market. It seemed just as likely that a millionaire wanted to help me personally, and was pretending to employ me. Such was my lack of self-confidence. In fact, the first time I saw someone reading the newspaper on the London Underground, then turning to a page on which one of my reviews appeared, I didn’t know where to look.Tom’s original scheme for a team of critics for the arts never took off. It was a good idea, but we didn’t get together as planned and so everything was done by phone. It turned out, too, that the general public out there preferred to associate a reviewer with a single subject area, and so I chose film. Without Tom’s initial push, though, we would hardly have come up with the present arrangement, by which I write an extended weekly piece, usually on one film.The space I am given allows me to broaden my argument—or forces me, in an uninteresting week, to make something out of nothing. But what is my role in the public arena I assume that people choose what films to go to on the basis of the stars, the publicity or the director. There is also such a thing as loyalty to "type" or its opposite. It can only rarely happen that someone who hates westerns buys a ticket for one after reading a review, or a love story addict avoids a romantic film because of what the papers say.So if a film review isn’t really a consumer guide, what is it I certainly don’t feel I have a responsibility to be "right" about a movie. Nor do I think there should be a certain number of "great" and "bad" films each year. All I have to do is put forward an argument. I’m not a judge, and nor would I want to be. According to the author, his articles （）.
For centuries people have been fighting over whether governments should allow trade between countries. There have been, and probably always will be, (1) to the argument. Some people argue that just (2) is best for both the country and the world. Others argue that trade with other countries (3) for some people to make a good living. Both sides are at least (4) .International trade matters a lot. Its effects on (5) are enormous. Imagine a world in which your country (6) at all with other countries. Imagine what kind of job you would be (7) and what goods you could buy or not buy in such a world.For the United States, for example, start by imagining that it lived without its (8) a year in imported oil, and cut back on its (9) because the remaining domestic oil and other energy sources were (10) . Producers and consumers in other parts of the economy would (11) if they were suddenly stripped of foreign-made goods like CD players and clothing. On the (12) side, suppose that Boeing could sell airplanes, and farmers could sell their crops, (13) the United States, and that U. S. universities could admit only (14) . In each case there are people who gain and people who lose from (15) international trade. In any case, less or more international trade will have (16) on your career as well as your life.For years, American companies are often faced with the choice of buying (17) , which are expensive, and foreign-made goods, which are cheap. If the company buys American goods, it may (18) taxpayers by failing to keep prices low. But if it buys foreign goods, it may (19) the jobs of American workers. Recently, Congress has passed a law compelling American companies with government contracts to (20) domestic goods and services. 8（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付