题目内容
You will hear three dialogues or monologues. Before listening to each one, you will have time to read the questions related to it. While listening, answer each question by choosing A, B, C or D. After listening, you will have time to read your answer. You will hear each piece once only. Questions 11-13 are based on the following talk about the Space Shuttle Columbia. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 11-13. According to the talk, what will man probably be able to do by the year 2050
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Read the following text. Choose the best word or phrase marked A, B, C or D on ANSWER SHEET 1. Only three strategies are available for controlling cancer: prevention, screening and treatment. Lung cancer causes more deaths than any other types of cancer. A major cause of the disease is not (21) known; there is no good evidence that screening is much helpful, and treatment (22) in about 90 percent of all cases. At present, therefore, the main strategy must be (23) . This may not always be true, of course, as for some other types of cancer, research (24) the past few decades has produced (or suggested) some importance in prevention, screening or treatment. (25) , however, we consider not what research may one day offer but what today’s knowledge could already deliver that is not being delivered, then the most practicable and cost-effective opportunities for (26) . premature death from cancer, especially lung cancer, probably involve neither screening nor improved (27) , but prevention. This conclusion does not depend on the unrealistic assumption that we can (28) tobacco. It merely assumes that we can reduce cigarette sales appreciably by raising prices or by (29) on the type of education that already appears to have a (30) effect on cigarette assumption by whitecollar workers and that we can substantially reduce the amount of tar (31) per cigarette. The practicability of preventing cancer by such measures applies not only in those countries, (32) , the United States of America, because cigarette smoking has been common for decades, 25 to 30 percent of all cancer deaths now involves lung cancer, but also in those where it has become (33) only recently. In China, lung cancer (34) accounts for only 5 to 10 percent of all cancer deaths. This is because it may take as much as half a century (35) the rise in smoking to increase the incidence to lung cancer. Countries where cigarette smoking is only now becoming widespread can expect enormous increase in lung cancer during the 1990’s or early in the next century, (36) prompt effective action is taken against the habit-indeed, such increase is already plainly evident in parts of the (37) . There are four reasons why the prevention of lung cancer is of such overwhelming importance: First, the disease is extremely common, causing more deaths than any other type of cancer now (38) ; Secondly, it is generally incurable; Thirdly, effective, practicable measures to reduce its incidence are already reliably known; and finally, (39) tobacco consumption will also have a substantial (40) on many other diseases.
Read the following text. Choose the best word or phrase marked A, B, C or D on ANSWER SHEET 1. Only three strategies are available for controlling cancer: prevention, screening and treatment. Lung cancer causes more deaths than any other types of cancer. A major cause of the disease is not (21) known; there is no good evidence that screening is much helpful, and treatment (22) in about 90 percent of all cases. At present, therefore, the main strategy must be (23) . This may not always be true, of course, as for some other types of cancer, research (24) the past few decades has produced (or suggested) some importance in prevention, screening or treatment. (25) , however, we consider not what research may one day offer but what today’s knowledge could already deliver that is not being delivered, then the most practicable and cost-effective opportunities for (26) . premature death from cancer, especially lung cancer, probably involve neither screening nor improved (27) , but prevention. This conclusion does not depend on the unrealistic assumption that we can (28) tobacco. It merely assumes that we can reduce cigarette sales appreciably by raising prices or by (29) on the type of education that already appears to have a (30) effect on cigarette assumption by whitecollar workers and that we can substantially reduce the amount of tar (31) per cigarette. The practicability of preventing cancer by such measures applies not only in those countries, (32) , the United States of America, because cigarette smoking has been common for decades, 25 to 30 percent of all cancer deaths now involves lung cancer, but also in those where it has become (33) only recently. In China, lung cancer (34) accounts for only 5 to 10 percent of all cancer deaths. This is because it may take as much as half a century (35) the rise in smoking to increase the incidence to lung cancer. Countries where cigarette smoking is only now becoming widespread can expect enormous increase in lung cancer during the 1990’s or early in the next century, (36) prompt effective action is taken against the habit-indeed, such increase is already plainly evident in parts of the (37) . There are four reasons why the prevention of lung cancer is of such overwhelming importance: First, the disease is extremely common, causing more deaths than any other type of cancer now (38) ; Secondly, it is generally incurable; Thirdly, effective, practicable measures to reduce its incidence are already reliably known; and finally, (39) tobacco consumption will also have a substantial (40) on many other diseases.
Text 2 One of the good things for men in women’s liberation is that men no longer have to pay women the old-fashioned courtesies. In an article on the new manners, Ms. Holmes says that a perfectly able woman no longer has to act helplessly in public as if she were a model. For example, she doesn’t need help getting in and out of cars. "Women get in and out of cars twenty .times a day with babies and dogs. Surely they can get out by themselves at night just as easily." She also says there is no reason why a man should walk on the outside of a woman on the sidewalk. "Historically the man walked on the inside so he caught the garbage thrown out of a window. Today a man is supposed to walk on the outside. A man should walk where he wants to. So should a woman. If, out of love and respect, he actually wants to take the blows, he should walk on the inside-because that’s where attackers are all hiding these days." As far as manners are concerned, I suppose I have always been a supporter of women’s liberation. Over the years, out of a sense of respect, I imagine, I have refused to trouble women with outdated courtesies. It is usually easier to follow rules of social behavior than to depend on one’s own taste. But rules may be safely broken, of course, by those of us with the gift of natural grace. For example, when a man and woman are led to their table in a restaurant and the waiter pulls out a chair the woman is expected to sit in. That is according to Ms. Ann Clark. I have always done it the other way according to my wife. It came up only the other night. I followed the hostess to the table, and when she pulled the chair out I sat on it quite naturally since it happened to be the chair I wanted to sit in. "Well," my wife said when the hostess had gone, "you did it again." "Did what" I asked, utterly confused. "Took the chair." Actually, since I’d walked through the restaurant ahead of my wife, it would have been awkward, I should think, not to have taken the chair. I had got there first after all. Also it has always been my custom to get in a car first and let the woman get in by herself. This is a courtesy. I insist on as the stronger sex, out of love and respect. In times like these, there might be attackers hidden about. It would be unsuitable to put a woman in a car and then shut the door on her, leaving her at the mercy of some bad fellow who might be hiding in the back seat. It can be concluded from the passage that ______.
Text 3Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsides by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies "dumped" their products in the United States at "less than fair value". Even when no unfair practices are all alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient ground to seek relief. Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate Web of marketing, production, and research relationships. The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company. Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports-and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad-the United States company’s products will be uncompetitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties. Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to deice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The "United States" company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the "Canadian" companies included a subsidary of a Chicago firm that was the second largest domestic producer of rock salt. According to the passage, which of the following is most likely to be true of United States trade laws
微信支付 
支付宝支付