题目内容
According to the U. S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) , car crashes are the leading cause of death among children between 5 and 14 years of age. Says NHTSA: " (61) 50% of children who die in crashes are unrestrained. In addition, 4 out of 5 children are (62) restrained. " The NHTSA offers a number of safety (63) and cautions for those who are accompanied by children while driving. (64) laws vary from country to country and even from state to state, these guidelines may serve as food for (65) to many parents and guardians of children. The safest place for all children is in the back seat. Infants should be placed in a rear-facing child safety seat in the baekseat of the car. A child (66) a year old and weighing at least 20 pounds may be placed in a forward-facing seat. At 40 pounds, the child can use a "booster seat(儿童案例椅) ", (67) is secured by one of the car’s lap and shoulder belts. At approximately 80 pounds and a (68) of about four feet nine inches, the child may begin using an adult safety strap. Children should not sit in the front passenger seat (69) they are at least 13 years of age. Front- passenger air bags can cause serious (70) to younger children and babies. When a booster seat is used, a lap belt alone will not provide (71) protection if the booster seat does not have a (72) . Do not think that a shoulder belt alone will protect a small child; in the (73) of a crash, the belt may (74) the neck of the child, causing serious injury or even death. Follow instructions closely when (75) and using child seats. According to NHTSA, "even the ’safest’ seat may not protect your child if it isn’t used correctly. \
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
While the college campus may be the perfect forum in which to exhibit your taste for the latest in fashion style, the interview is not the place to do so. With very few unusual exceptions, sandals and sweatshirts are out. Oxfords and business suits are still in. Even though many companies have relaxed the internal company dress code, interviews still follow the conservative standard. Don’t buck the trend. Unfortunately, most college grads are underprepared with proper interview dress. They feel they can " get by" with what is already in their wardrobe. Usually not. Remember that stylish is not conservative. You should be doing the talking, not your clothes. This is not to say that you need to go out and buy a whole new wardrobe. Go for quality over quantity. One or two well-chosen business suits will serve you all the way to the first day on the job and beyond. Then, when you are making some money, you can begin to round out your wardrobe. For now, no one will fault you for wearing the same sharp outfit each time you interview. If you are still not sure how to dress for the interview, call them and ask! But this is one time when you do not want to call the Hiring Manager—instead, ask to be put through to Human Resources. Sure, you run the risk of someone in HR thinking you are a social idiot, but that’s a lot better than having the Hiring Manager distracted by inappropriate interview dress. While many work environments have shifted to business casual as the work standard, business suits are still the interview standard. When in doubt, it is almost always better to err on the side of conservatism. One final note on interview dress: while it goes without saying that your interview elothes should be neat and clean, very few interviewees give the same time and attention to their shoes. Shoes Yes, shoes. I am aware of at least one Corporate Recruiter who forms first impressions based solely on shoes. He subjectively judges that those who pay attention to details like their shoes are also likely to be diligent in their work life. And it is not just that person’s opinion. So it is not enough to be elean, pressed, and ironed. Make sure your shoes are conservative, clean, and polished. The passage is mainly written to ______.
It was a merry Christmas for Sharper Image and Neiman Marcus, which reported big sales increases over last year’s holiday season. It was considerably less cheery at Wal-Mart and other lowpriced chains. We don’t know the final sales figures yet, but it’s clear that high-end stores did very well, while stores catering to middle- and low-income families achieved only modest gains. Based on these reports, you may be tempted to speculate that the economic recovery is an exclusive party, and most people weren’t invited. You’d be right. Commerce Department figures reveal a startling disconnect between overall economic growth and the incomes of a great majority of Americans. In the third quarter, real G. D. P. rose at an annual rate of 8.2%. But wage and salary income, adjusted for inflation, rose at an annual rate of only 0.8%. Why aren’t workers sharing in the so-called boom Start with jobs. Employment began rising in August, but the pace of job growth remains modest, averaging less than 90 000 per month. But if the number of jobs isn’t rising much, aren’t workers at least earning more You may have thought so. After all, companies have been able to increase output without hiring more workers, thanks to the rapidly rising output per worker. Historically, higher productivity has translated into rising wages. But not this time: thanks to a weak labor market, employers have felt no pressure to share productivity gains. Calculations by the Economic Policy Institute show real wages for most workers flat or falling even as the economy expands. So who’s benefiting from the economy’s expansion The direct gains are going largely to corporate profits. Indirectly, that means that gains are going to the big stockholders, who are the ultimate owners of corporate profits. For most Americans, current economic growth is something interesting, that is, however, happening to other people. This may change if serious job creation ever kicks in, but it hasn’t so far. The big question is whether a recovery that does so little for most Americans can really be sustained. Can an economy thrive on sales of luxury goods alone We may soon find out. Which of the following best describes the author’s understanding of the economic recovery
Musicians are fascinated with the possibility that music may be found in nature; it makes our own desire for art seem all the more essential. Over the past few years no less a bold musical explorer than Peter Gabriel has been getting involved. At the Research Center in Atlanta, Georgia, he has been making music together with Kanzi, one of the bonobo apes (倭黑猩猩) involved in the long-term language acquisition studies of Sue and Duane Savage-Rumbaugh. I have seen the video of Kanzi picking notes out on a piano-like keyboard, with Gabriel and members of his band playing inside the observation booth in the lab. (They did it this way because Kanzi had bitten one of his trainers a few days previously—interspecies communication is not without its dangers. ) The scene is beautiful, the ape trying out the new machine and looking thoughtfully pleased with what comes out. He appears to be listening, playing the right notes. It is tentative but moving, the animal groping for something from the human world but remaining isolated from the rest of the band. It is a touching encounter, and a bold move for a musician whose tune Shock the Monkey many years ago openly condemned the horrors of less sensitive animal experiments than this. What is the scientific value of such a jam session The business of the Research Center is the forging of greater communication between human and animal. Why not try the fertile and mysterious ground of music in addition to the more testable arena of simple language The advantage of hearing music in nature and trying to reach out to nature through music is that, though we don’t fully understand it, we can easily have access to it. We don’t need to explain its workings to be touched by it. Two musicians who don’t speak the same language can play together, and we can appreciate the music from human cultures far from our own. Music needs no explanation, but it clearly expresses something deep and important, something humans cannot live without. Finding music in the sounds of birds, whales and other animals makes the farther frontiers of nature seem that much closer to us. The best title for the passage could be ______.
It’s not just your imagination. In cities from coast to coast, the use of Spanish is booming, and is proliferating in ways no other language has before in the U.S. history--other than English of course. It’s this sort of environment that is a cause for concern for many. Mauro Mujica heads a group called "U. S. English," which lobbies for official English laws across the country. He’s concerned that with so many Spanish speakers entering the country, the U.S. will become a nation split by language, much like Canada. "Now we’re beginning to divide ourselves, to split along linguistic lines. We’re beginning to see pockets of people who speak other languages and no English whatsoever. " His fear is hardly universal. Gregory Rodriguez is a fellow with the New America Foundation, a non-partisan think-tank based in Washington, D.C. He calls Mujica’s arguments "ridiculous. " "This process of immigrant enclaves (少数民族聚集地) and linguistic enclaves is an age-old American process. We’ve all heard the quotes from Benjamin Franklin about his concerns that German- Americans would never assimilate. These concerns are as old as the American republic. " Rodriguez argues that the current boom in the use of Spanish is due ahnost entirely to new immigrants, and that their children will, at least for the most part, learn English. He points to 1990 census data, which indicates that by the third generation, two-thirds of all Hispanic children speak English exclusively. Whether that number is going up or down will be difficult to determine since the Census Bureau didn’t track that information in its most recent census. But there may be at least one piece of anecdotal evidence. Spanish-language movie theaters once flourished in the Los Angeles area. There were dozens of these theaters just fifteen years ago. Today there are only seven. "There is a myth that somehow immigrants come to the most powerful nation in the world simply to resist its cultural embrace," says Rodriguez. "But it is a myth. " Immigrant enclaves are, of course, common throughout American History. German and Polish enclaves were common throughout the Midwest. The Italians flourished in New York. But those languages largely faded from use in the U.S. Few are predicting that will happen with Spanish. It’s here to stay, although we won’t know its ultimate impact for generations. It is implied in the passage that ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付