根据对话内容，从对话后的选项中选出能填入空白处的最佳选项，并在答题卡上将该项涂黑。选项中有两项多余选项。（共5小题；每小题2分，共10分）
A: I need to lose some weight. My clothes don’t fit anymore. ____
B: Well, instead of watching TV all day, you could do more exercise.
A:______ _______
B: Like cycling, or you could work out at the gym.
A: I don’t have time. _______
B: OK, then you could change your diet. ________
A: You mean no more hamburgers! Oh no!
B: OK.__ ___
Human remains of ancient settlements will be reburied and lost to science under a law that threatens research into the history of humans in Britain, a group of leading archaeologists(考古学家) says. In a letter addressed to the justice secretary, Ken Clarke, 40 archaeologists write of their “deep and widespread concern” about the issue. It centers on the law introduced by the Ministry of Justice in 2008 which requires all human remains unearthed in England and Wales to be reburied within two years, regardless of their age. The decision means scientists have too little time to study bones and other human remains of national and cultural significance.
“Your current requirement that all archaeologically unearthed human remains should be reburied, whether after a standard period of two years or further special extension, is contrary to basic principles of archaeological and scientific research and of museum practice,” they write.
The law applies to any pieces of bone uncovered at around 400 dig sites, including the remains of 60 or so bodies found at Stonehenge in 2008 that date back to 3,000 BC. Archaeologists have been granted a temporary extension to give them more time, but eventually the bones will have to be returned to the ground.
The arrangements may result in the waste of future discoveries at sites such as Happisburgh in Norfolk, where digging is continuing after the discovery of stone tools made by early humans 950,000 years ago. If human remains were found at Happisburgh, they would be the oldest in northern Europe and the first indication of what this species was. Under the current practice of the law those remains would have to be reburied and effectively destroyed.
Before 2008, guidelines allowed for the proper preservation and study of bones of sufficient age and historical interest, while the Burial Act 1857 applied to more recent remains. The Ministry of Justice assured archaeologists two years ago that the law was temporary, but has so far failed to revise it.
Mike Parker Pearson, an archaeologist at Sheffield University, said: “Archaeologists have been extremely patient because we were led to believe the ministry was sorting out this problem, but we feel that we cannot wait any longer.”
The ministry has no guidelines on where or how remains should be reburied, or on what records should be kept.According to the passage, scientists are unhappy with the law mainly because _______.
| A．it is only a temporary measure on the human remains |
| B．it is unreasonable and thus destructive to scientific research |
| C．it was introduced by the government without their knowledge |
| D．it is vague about where and how to rebury human remains |
Which of the following statements is true according to the passage?
| A．Temporary extension of two years will guarantee scientists enough time. |
| B．Human remains of the oldest species were dug out at Happisburgh. |
| C．Human remains will have to be reburied despite the extension of time. |
| D．Scientists have been warned that the law can hardly be changed. |
What can be inferred about the British law governing human remains?
| A．The Ministry of Justice did not intend it to protect human remains. |
| B．The Burial Act 1857 only applied to remains uncovered before 1857. |
| C．The law on human remains hasn’t changed in recent decades. |
| D．The Ministry of Justice has not done enough about the law. |
Which of the following might be the best title of the passage?
| A．New discoveries should be reburied, the government demands. |
| B．Research time should be extended, scientists require. |
| C．Law on human remains needs thorough discussion, authorities say. |
| D．Law could bury ancient secrets for ever, archaeologists warn. |
Celebrity(名人) has become one of the most important representatives of popular culture. Fans used to be crazy about a specific film, but now the public tends to base its consumption(消费) on the interest of celebrity attached to any given product. Besides, fashion magazines have almost abandoned the practice of putting models on the cover because they don’t sell nearly as well as famous faces. As a result, celebrities have realized their unbelievably powerful market potential, moving from advertising for others’ products to developing their own.
Celebrity clothing lines aren’t a completely new phenomenon, but in the past they were typically aimed at the ordinary consumers, and limited to a few TV actresses. Today they’re started by first-class stars whose products enjoy equal fame with some world top brands. The most successful start-ups have been those by celebrities with specific personal style. As celebrities become more and more experienced at the market, they expand their production scale rapidly, covering almost all the products of daily life.
However, for every success story, there’s a related warning tale of a celebrity who overvalued his consumer appeal. No matter how famous the product’s origin is, if it fails to impress consumers with its own qualities, it begins to resemble an exercise in self-promotional marketing. And once the initial(最初的) attention dies down, consumer interest might fade, loyalty(忠诚) returning to tried-and-true labels.
Today, celebrities face even more severe embarrassment. The pop-cultural circle might be bigger than ever, but its rate of turnover has speeded up as well. Each misstep threatens to reduce a celebrity’s shelf life, and the same newspaper or magazine that once brought him fame has no problem picking him to pieces when the opportunity appears. Still, the ego’s(自我的) potential for expansion is limitless. Having already achieved great wealth and public recognition, many celebrities see fashion as the next frontier to be conquered. As the saying goes, success and failure always go hand in hand. Their success as designers might last only a short time, but fashion—like celebrity—has always been temporary.Fashion magazines today .
| A．seldom put models on the cover |
| B．no longer put models on the cover |
| C．need not worry about celebrities’ market potential |
| D．judge the market potential of every celebrity correctly |
A change in the consumer market can be found today that .
| A．price rather than brand name is more concerned |
| B．producers prefer models to celebrities for advertisements |
| C．producers prefer TV actresses to film stars for advertisements |
| D．quality rather than the outside of products is more concerned |
The underlined sentence in Paragraph 4 indicates that any wrong step will possibly .
| A．decrease the popularity of a celebrity and the sales of his products |
| B．damage the image of a celebrity in the eyes of the general public |
| C．cut short the artistic career of a celebrity in show business |
| D．influence the price of a celebrity’s products |
The passage is mainly about .
| A．celebrity and personal style |
| B．celebrity and market potential |
| C．celebrity and fashion design |
| D．celebrity and clothing industry |
A new study has found no evidence that sunscreen, commonly used to reduce the risk of skin cancer, actually increases the risk.
Researchers from the University of Iowa based their findings on a review of 18 earlier studies that looked at the association between sunscreen use and melanoma(黑素瘤). They said that they found flaws in studies that had reported associations between sunscreen use and higher risk of melanoma.
Most health experts believe that by protecting the skin from the harmful effects of the sun, sunscreen helps prevent skin cancer, which is increasing in incidence(发生率)faster than any other cancer in the United States.
But questions have been raised about sunscreen and whether it may have the opposite effect, perhaps by allowing people to remain exposed to the sun longer without burning.
The researchers said that among the problems with some earlier studies is that they often failed to take into account that those people most at risk for skin cancer—people with fair skin and freckles(雀斑), for example—are more likely to use sunscreen. As a result, it may appear that sunscreen users get cancer more often.
The studies, which generally relied on volunteers to recall their sunscreen use, were also unable to prove how well the products had been applied, said the new study.The underlined word “flaws” in the 2nd paragraph most probably means .
| A．evidences | B．facts | C．faults | D．failures |
People with fair skin and freckles .
| A．seldom use sunscreen |
| B．are more in danger of skin cancer |
| C．can be free from the harm of the sun |
| D．often expose themselves to the sun |
We can learn from the passage that .
| A．sunscreen users get skin cancer more often |
| B．the volunteers have proved the effect of sunscreen |
| C．the new study was based on the experiences of volunteers |
| D．the number of skin cancer patients is increasing in America |
Which of the following can be the best title for this passage?
| A．Sunscreen to Prevent Skin Cancer |
| B．Sunscreen to Increase Skin Cancer |
| C．Skin Cancer Caused by Sunscreen |
| D．Skin Cancer Caused by Freckles |
For many parents, raising a teenager is like fighting a long war, but years go by without any clear winner. Like a border conflict between neighboring countries, the parent-teen war is about boundaries: Where is the line between what I control and what you do?
Both sides want peace, but neither feels it has any power to stop the conflict. In part, this is because neither is willing to admit any responsibility for starting it. From the parents’ point of view, the only cause of their fight is their adolescents’ complete unreasonableness. And of course, the teens see it in exactly the same way, except oppositely. Both feel trapped.
In this article, I’ll describe three no-win situations that commonly arise between teens and parents and then suggest some ways out of the trap. The first no-win situation is quarrels over unimportant things. Examples include the color of the teen’s hair, the cleanliness of the bedroom, the preferred style of clothing, the child’s failure to eat a good breakfast before school or his tendency to sleep until noon on the weekends. Second, blaming. The goal of a blaming battle is to make the other admit that his bad attitude is the reason why everything goes wrong. Third, needing to be right. It doesn’t matter what the topic is—politics, the laws of physics, or the proper way to break an egg—the point of these arguments is to prove that you are right and the other person is wrong, for both wish to be considered an authority—someone who actually knows something—and therefore to command respect. Unfortunately, as long as parents and teens continue to assume that they know more than the other, they’ll continue to fight these battles forever and never make any real progress.Why does the author compare the parent-teen war to a border conflict?
| A．Both can continue for generations. |
| B．Both are about where to draw the line. |
| C．Neither has any clear winner. |
| D．Neither can be put to an end. |
What does the underlined part in Paragraph 2 mean?
| A．The teens blame their parents for starting the conflict. |
| B．The teens agree with their parents on the cause of the conflict. |
| C．The teens accuse their parents of misleading them. |
| D．The teens tend to have a full understanding of their parents. |
Parents and teens want to be right because they want to ______.
| A．give orders to the other |
| B．know more than the other |
| C．gain respect from the other |
| D．get the other to behave properly |
What will the author most probably discuss in the paragraph that follows?
| A．Causes for the parent –teen conflicts. |
| B．Examples of the parent –teen war. |
| C．Solutions for the parent –teen problems. |
| D．Future of the parent-teen relationship. |
Mattel Inc. is recalling 4.4 million Polly Pocket toys with magnets（磁铁）after some of them caused serious injuries to children who swallowed magnets that fell off.
Tiny magnets inside the toys may fall off without being noticed by parents and babysitters. The magnets can be swallowed or placed in children’s noses or ears. When more than one magnet is swallowed, the magnets can attract each other and cause intestine perforation（肠内穿孔）which can be deadly.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission（CPSC）received 170 reports of the small magnets coming out of these recalled toys. There were three reports of serious injuries to children who swallowed more than one magnet. All three suffered intestinal perforations that required operation. A 2-year-old child stayed in hospital for seven days and a 7-year-old child was hospitalized for 12 days. An 8-yeal-old child was also hospitalized.
The recalled Polly Pocket toys contain plastic dolls and accessories（附件）that have small magnets. The magnets measure one-eighth inch in diameter and are fixed in the hands and feet of some dolls, and even in the plastic clothing, hairpieces and other accessories to help the pieces stay on the doll or the doll’s house.
The model number is printed on the bottom of the largest pieces on some of the toys. Contact Mattel if you cannot find a model number on your product to determine if it is part of the recall. Polly Pocket magnetic toys currently sold in stores are not included in this recall. The model numbers included in the recall are: B2632, B3158, B3201, B7118, G8605, H1537, H1538 and H3211. The toys were on sales in department stores and toy stores from May 2006 through September 2009 for between $15 and $30.
Consumers should immediately take these recalled toys away from children and contact Mattel for the return of the toys. For more information contact Mattel at 888 597-6597 anytime or visit the company’s Web site.The main purpose of the passage is .
| A．to criticize Mattel Inc. for their bad products |
| B．to inform readers of Polly Pocket toys recall |
| C．to warn readers the danger of swallowing magnets |
| D．to suggest some ways to return Polly Pocket toys |
What did the writer use to show the danger of the problem toys?
a. figures b. quotes（引言） c. serious cases
d. description of possible injuries e. description of operation scenes
| A．abc | B．abd | C．acd | D．ace |
The word “recalling” in the first paragraph can be best explained as .
| A．taking back | B．destroying | C．giving up | D．examining |
All of the following points are covered in the story EXCEPT .
| A．the danger of small magnets |
| B．the ways of returning Polly Pocket toys |
| C．the methods of recognizing a recalled Polly Pocket toys |
| D．the apology made by Mattel Inc. |
粤公网安备 44130202000953号