题目内容
M: How did you get started in jazz singingW: It was a zigzag mute. I went from country music to singing madrigals, to singing folk, to opera, and then to jazz. People kept offering me differ ent projects, saying ’Well, I know that you have never done this before, so maybe you might not want to’ and I would say, ’ Oh, sure. I’ll try it. ’ So I went from form to form, to form and that is how.M: Are you going to keep moving around or are you stuck on jazz singing nowW: I think jazz is where I’m going to stay. I feel the most comfortable here, I have the most freedom here.M: When were the sessions for this album originally doneW: The session was done in Sept. of 1998 we mixed it down the second week of October, and nothing was done with it. I was busy for five and half years in a life of death battle with a portion of the government’ a le gal battle’ that I bad. So I had to drop everything to deal with it.M: Does anyone in your family have a musical backgroundW: I was brought up in a family that had an awful lot of musicians, and none of them took anything I was doing very seriously at all. I was actually the family joke. I just did this music to get it out of my system. I did not expect anyone to pay much attention to it. I just knew that I had to say it.M: Tbanks for talking with us, best wishes for your career.W: Thank you! What hasn’t Devorah Day involved in().
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
According to Peter Salovey, Yale psychologist and author of the term EQ, IQ gets you hired and EQ gets you promoted.Salovey tells of a simple test. Some four-year-old kids were invited into a room and were given the following instruction: "You can have this marshmallow right now; or if you wait, you can have two marshmallows when I get back. " Then, the researcher left. Some kids grabbed for the treat as soon as the researcher was out the door, while Others waited for the researcher to return. By the time the kids reached high school, significant differences appeared between the two groups. The kids who held out for two marshmallows were better adjusted, more popular, more adventurous, more confident, and more dependable than kids in the quick gratification group. The latter group was also more likely to be lonely, more easily frustrated, more stubborn, more likely to buckle under stress, and more likely to shy away from challenges. When both groups took scholastic aptitude tests, the "hold out group" walloped the "quick gratification group" by 210 points (the test scores range from a minimum of 200 points to a maximum of 800, with an average for all students of 500 points).Researchers have been discussing whether it’s possible to raise a person’s IQ. Geneticists say No, while social scientists say Yes. But while brain power researchers continue the debate, social science re searchers have concluded that it’s possible to improve a person’s EQ, and in particular, a person’s "people skills, " such as empathy, graciousness, and the ability to "read" a social situation.According to the social scientists, there is little doubt that people without sufficient EQ will have a hard time surviving in life. EQ is perhaps best observed in people described as either pessimists or optimists. Optimistic people have high EQ and treat obstacles as minor, while the pessimistic people have low EQ and personalizes all setbacks. In social research circles, EQ denotes one’s ability to survive, and it’s here that there may be an overlap between EQ, IQ, genetics and environment. As to that, I am reminded of the words of Darwin, "The biggest, the smartest, and the strongest are not the survivors. Rather, the survivors are the most adaptable. " Those of us who survive and thrive in this complex world are not only the most adaptable, but also the most optimistic and the most likely to have a high EQ. In the view of social scientists, EQ is ().
Text 3According to Peter Salovey, Yale psychologist and author of the term EQ, IQ gets you hired and EQ gets you promoted.Salovey tells of a simple test. Some four-year-old kids were invited into a room and were given the following instruction: "You can have this marshmallow right now; or if you wait, you can have two marshmallows when I get back. " Then, the researcher left. Some kids grabbed for the treat as soon as the researcher was out the door, while Others waited for the researcher to return. By the time the kids reached high school, significant differences appeared between the two groups. The kids who held out for two marshmallows were better adjusted, more popular, more adventurous, more confident, and more dependable than kids in the quick gratification group. The latter group was also more likely to be lonely, more easily frustrated, more stubborn, more likely to buckle under stress, and more likely to shy away from challenges. When both groups took scholastic aptitude tests, the "hold out group" walloped the "quick gratification group" by 210 points (the test scores range from a minimum of 200 points to a maximum of 800, with an average for all students of 500 points).Researchers have been discussing whether it’s possible to raise a person’s IQ. Geneticists say No, while social scientists say Yes. But while brain power researchers continue the debate, social science re searchers have concluded that it’s possible to improve a person’s EQ, and in particular, a person’s "people skills, " such as empathy, graciousness, and the ability to "read" a social situation.According to the social scientists, there is little doubt that people without sufficient EQ will have a hard time surviving in life. EQ is perhaps best observed in people described as either pessimists or optimists. Optimistic people have high EQ and treat obstacles as minor, while the pessimistic people have low EQ and personalizes all setbacks. In social research circles, EQ denotes one’s ability to survive, and it’s here that there may be an overlap between EQ, IQ, genetics and environment. As to that, I am reminded of the words of Darwin, "The biggest, the smartest, and the strongest are not the survivors. Rather, the survivors are the most adaptable. " Those of us who survive and thrive in this complex world are not only the most adaptable, but also the most optimistic and the most likely to have a high EQ. The word "walloped" (Line 10, Paragraph 2 ) most probably means " ()" .
Nowadays, air travel is very (21) . We are not surprised when we watch on TV that a politician has talked with French President in Paris and attended a meeting in Beijing on the same day. (22) , if a person takes long-distance flying frequently, he can be so tired that he maybe feel his brain is in one country, his (23) in another. (24) , he (25) knows where he is.When we fly from east to west or (26) versa, the (27) we experience after taking a long distance flying is (28) , because we cross time zones. According to doctors, air travelers, after crossing several time zones, are in no (29) to go to work, and they should go (30) to bed (31) arrival.As to airline pilots who often live (32) their own watches and ignore local time, there is no need for them to worry about their health although they sometimes have breakfast at midnight, be cause they are used to (33) and are (34) fit.Many businessmen like long-distance flights, thinking they are (35) to have been chosen and they are out for promotion. They are lucky if the company follows the doctor’s advice and al low them to rest for a day or two (36) working. However, sometimes the manager is so energetic that he believes everyone is (37) to be as fit as he is. Since he has never felt (38) after fly ing himself, the work he assigns is so (39) that the employee is too (40) to carry the work out satisfactorily. That is disastrous for the employee’s health and the company’s reputation. 22().
Text 2Now the politics of US health reform is in a mess but the odds on a bill passing in the end are improving. It will not be a tidy thing, but if it moves the country close to universal health insurance the administration will call it a success.At this moment, that point of view may seem too optimistic. Last Friday, the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives had hoped to produce a finished bill. But they failed, because the party’s fiscal conservatives demanded further savings. House Democrats are also divided on revenue-raising measures.The Senate is dealing with the same problems: how to contain the cost of expanded insurance coverage, and how to pay for what remains, so that the reform adds nothing to the budget deficit o ver the course of 10 years.Where the money comes from remains the crucial problem. Apparently, the answer is straight forward: tax employer-provided health benefits. At present, an employer in the U. S. is free from paying tax if he pays the health insurance while an individual purchaser has to buy it with after-tax dollars. This anomaly costs nearly $ 250bn a year in revenue—enough to pay for universal cover age, and then some. Yet many Democrats in both the House and the Senate oppose to ending it. Will there be a breakthrough in terms of that aspectHowever, to get employers out of health insurance should be an aim, not something to be feared. Many US workers have complained that if they lose their job, their health insurance will go with it and tying insurance to employment will undoubtedly worsen the insecurity.What about high-risk workers who are thrown on to the individual market If the tax break were abolished as part of a larger reform which obliges insurers to offer affordable coverage to all people regardless of pre-existing conditions, it will not be a problem. It’s true this change needs to increase tax, and many people in Congress are reluctant to contemplate in any form. But some kind of increase is inescapable. This one makes more sense than most.The President should say so. His Republican opponent John McCain called for this change during the election campaign and Mr Obama and other Democrats assailed the idea. So what Mr. Obama has changed his ideas on other aspects of health reform. For example, it seems that he now prefers an individual mandate to buy insurance. Let us see a similar flexibility on taxing employer provided insurance. In the author’s opinion, which of the following is "revenue-raising measures"().
微信支付 
支付宝支付