题目内容
It has been justly said that while" we speak with our vocal organs we (1) with our whole bodies." All of us communicate with one another (2) , as well as with words. Sometimes we know what we’re doing, as with the use of gestures such as the thumbs-up sign to indicate that, we (3) . But most of the time we’re not aware that we’re doing it. We gesture with eyebrows or a hand, meet someone else’s eyes and (4) . These actions we (5) are random and incidental. But researchers (6) that there is a system of them almost as consistent and comprehensible as language, and they conclude that there is a whole (7) of body language, (8) the way we move, the gestures we employ, the posture we adopt, the facial expression we (9) , the extent to which we touch and the distance we stand (10) each other.The body language serves a variety of purposes. Firstly it can replace verbal communication, (11) with the use of gesture. Secondly it can modify verbal communication, loudness and (12) of voice is an example here. Thirdly it regulates social interaction: turn taking is largely governed by non-verbal (13) . Finally it conveys our emotions and attitudes. This is (14) important for successful cross-culture communication.Every culture has its own" body language", and children absorb its nuances (15) with spoken language. The way an Englishmen crosses his legs is (16) like the way a mate American does it. When we communicate with people from other, cultures, the body language sometimes help make the communication easy and (17) , such as shaking hand is such a (18) gesture that people all over the world know that it is a signal for greeting. But sometimes--the body language can cause certain misunderstanding (19) people of different cultures often have different forms behavior for sending the same message or have different (20) towards the same body signals. Read the following text. Choose the best word (s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D on ANSWER SHEET 1.10（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Directions:In the following article, some sentences have been removed. For Question 41--45, choose the most suitable one the list A--G to fit into each of the numbered blank. There are extra choices, which do not fit in any of the gaps. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1.It has often been remarked that the saddest thing about youth is that it is wasted on the young. Reading a recent newspaper report on a survey conducted among college freshmen, I recalled the regret,"If only I knew then what I know now."The survey disclosed what I had already suspected from informal polls of students. According to the survey, which was based on the responses of over 188,000 students, today’s traditional-age college freshmen are" more materialistic and less altruistic".41. ______. It follows then that today the most popular course is not literature or history but accounting. Interest in teaching, social service and the" altruistic" fields is at a low, along with ethnic and women’s studies. On the other hand, enrollment in business programs, engineering and computer science is way up.42. ______.Frankly, I’m proud of the young lady (not her attitude but her success). But why can’t we have it both ways Can’t we educate people for life as well as for a career I believe we can. If we’re not, then that is a fault of our educational system--elementary, secondary and higher. In a time of increasing specialization, a time when 90 percent of all the scientists who have ever lived are currently alive, more than ever we need to know what is truly important in life.43. ______.Most of us finally come to realize that quality of life is not entirely determined by how much we earn. Sure, everyone wants to be financially comfortable, but we also want to feel that we have a perspective on the world beyond the confines of our occupation; we want to be able to render service to our fellow man and to the world.44. ______.It is equally true that, in studying the diverse wisdom of others, we learn how to think. More important, perhaps, education teaches us to see the connections between things, as well as to see beyond our immediate needs.45. ______.In the long run that’s what education really ought to be about. And I think it can be. That’s the way it should be. Oscar Wilde had it right when he said that we ought to give our ability to our work but our genius to our lives. Let’s hope our educators answer the students cries for career education, but at the same time, let’s ensure that the students are prepared for the day when they realize their folly. There’s a lot more to life than a job.[A] Academic emphasis on competition, rationality and externals acknowledges only one kind of knowing. It makes students devalue their inner selves or larger social purposes.[B] Not surprising in these hard times, the student’s major objective" is to be financially well off." Less important than ever is developing a meaningful philosophy of life.[C] Education must meet the needs of the human spirit. It must assist students to develop a satisfactory personal philosophy and sense of values; to cultivate tastes for literature, music and the arts; to grow in ability to analyze problems and arrive at thoughtful conclusions.[D] That’s no surprise either. A friend of mine (a sales representative for a chemical company)was making twice the salary of her college instructors during her first year on the job. And that was four years ago; She must be earning much more now.[E] Most people, somewhere between the ages of 30 and 50, finally arrive at the inevitable conclusion that they could do more than serving a corporation, a government agency, or whatever.[F] But the most important argument for a broad education is that in studying the accumulated wisdom of the ages, we improve our moral sense.[G] While it’s true that we all need a career, preferably a profitable one, it is equally true that our civilization has accumulated an incredible amount of knowledge -- be it scientific or artistic. 43
Text 3 It’s easy to get the sense these days that you’ve stumbled into a party with some powerful drug that dramatically alters identity. The faces are familiar, but the words coming out of them aren’t. Something has happened to a lot of people you used to think you knew. They’ve changed into something like their own opposite. There’s Bill Gates, who these days is spending less time earning money than giving it away--and pulling other billionaires into the deep end of global philanthropy(慈善事业) with him. There’s historian Francis Fukuyama, leading a whole gang of disaffected fellow travelers away from neoconservatism. To flip-flopis human. It can still sometimes be a political liability, evidence of a flaky disposition or rank opportunism. But there are circumstances in which not to reverse course seems almost pathological(病态的). He’s a model of consistency, Stephen Colbert said last year of George W. Bush:" He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday -- no matter what happened on Tuesday." Over the past three years, I found people who had pulled a big U-turn in their lives. Often the insight came in a forehead-smiting moment in the middle of the night: I’ve got it all wrong. It looked at first like a sprinkling of outliers beyond the curve of normal human experience. But when you stepped back, a pattern emerged. What these personal turns had in common was the apprehension that we’re all connected. Everything leans on something, is both dependent and depended on. "The difference between you and me," a visiting Chinese student told University of Michigan psychologist Richard Nisbett not long ago," is that I think the world is a circle, and you think it’s a line." The remark prompted the professor to write a book, The Geography of Thought, about the differences between the Western and the Asian mind. To Western thinking, the world is linear; you can chop it up and analyze it, and we can all work on our little part of the project independently until it’s solved. The classically Eastern mind, according to Nisbett, sees things differently: the world isn’t a length of rope but a vast, closed chain, incomprehensibly complex and ever changing. When you look at life from this second perspective, some unlikely connections reveal themselves. I realized this was what almost all the U-turns had in common: people had swung around to face East. They had stopped thinking in a line and started thinking in a circle. Morality was looking less like a set of rules and more like a story, one in which they were part of an ensemble cast, no longer the star. In the author’s opinion, the major cause of many people to make U-turns is that ______.
Text 2 The moon appears to warp the minds of some men. Despite putting men on the moon in 1969 America seems determined on re-enacting the space race, this time pitting its efforts against those of the Chinese. Now a Russian company claims it could develop a system to exploit the moon’s natural resources and potentially relocate harmful industries there. This is lunacy. Russia certainly has great prowess in space. In its former guise as the centre of power in the Soviet Union it launched the first man-made satellite in 1957. In a spectacular follow up, Yuri Gagarin became the first person in space in 1961. Another triumph came in 1968 when the Russians sent a spaceship to orbit the moon with turtles aboard, returning it and its living cargo safely to Earth. An unmanned Russian spacecraft also landed on the moon ahead of the first manned landing by the Americans. Even after Neil Armstrong took his one small step, Russia has proved its superiority in keeping people in space stations orbiting the Earth. The Russian Soyuz rocket is a mainstay of satellite launches and would be used to rescue astronauts should any accident befall the International Space Station. Head of the spacecraft manufacturer that helped achieve these Russian successes, this week boasted that his rockets could be used to industrialise the moon. So why were his remarks greeted with such scepticism One reason for the cynicism is that the idea is absurd. A United Nations treaty passed in 1967 bans potentially harmful interference with the Earth’s original satellite and requires international consultation before proceeding with any activity that could disrupt the peaceful exploration of space, including the moon. A second problem is that landing on the moon has proved beyond the budget of any state other than America and of any private company to date. In fact one of the best hopes for investment comes from space tourism. On Saturday April 7th, the fifth such holidaymaker entered space aboard a Russian Soyuz rocket. Charles Simonyi, an American software developer, paid $25m for his ten-day stay at the International Space Station. The next holiday destination is the moon. The tour operator that organised the first five packages is offering two tickets to orbit the moon for $100m each. Launch would be aboard a Soyuz spacecraft. But the Soyuz system was designed in the 1960s and has been on the verge of retirement for many years. Unfortunately the Russian authorities have postponed indefinitely the development of a successor. Thus the claim of the industrialisation of the moon is unlikely to succeed. According to the text, which is the most probable result of the development of space tourism
Text 2 The moon appears to warp the minds of some men. Despite putting men on the moon in 1969 America seems determined on re-enacting the space race, this time pitting its efforts against those of the Chinese. Now a Russian company claims it could develop a system to exploit the moon’s natural resources and potentially relocate harmful industries there. This is lunacy. Russia certainly has great prowess in space. In its former guise as the centre of power in the Soviet Union it launched the first man-made satellite in 1957. In a spectacular follow up, Yuri Gagarin became the first person in space in 1961. Another triumph came in 1968 when the Russians sent a spaceship to orbit the moon with turtles aboard, returning it and its living cargo safely to Earth. An unmanned Russian spacecraft also landed on the moon ahead of the first manned landing by the Americans. Even after Neil Armstrong took his one small step, Russia has proved its superiority in keeping people in space stations orbiting the Earth. The Russian Soyuz rocket is a mainstay of satellite launches and would be used to rescue astronauts should any accident befall the International Space Station. Head of the spacecraft manufacturer that helped achieve these Russian successes, this week boasted that his rockets could be used to industrialise the moon. So why were his remarks greeted with such scepticism One reason for the cynicism is that the idea is absurd. A United Nations treaty passed in 1967 bans potentially harmful interference with the Earth’s original satellite and requires international consultation before proceeding with any activity that could disrupt the peaceful exploration of space, including the moon. A second problem is that landing on the moon has proved beyond the budget of any state other than America and of any private company to date. In fact one of the best hopes for investment comes from space tourism. On Saturday April 7th, the fifth such holidaymaker entered space aboard a Russian Soyuz rocket. Charles Simonyi, an American software developer, paid $25m for his ten-day stay at the International Space Station. The next holiday destination is the moon. The tour operator that organised the first five packages is offering two tickets to orbit the moon for $100m each. Launch would be aboard a Soyuz spacecraft. But the Soyuz system was designed in the 1960s and has been on the verge of retirement for many years. Unfortunately the Russian authorities have postponed indefinitely the development of a successor. Thus the claim of the industrialisation of the moon is unlikely to succeed. Why was the claim of the Russian company widely criticized
微信支付 
支付宝支付