The American idea that hard work was to be esteemed distinguishes us from Europeans who (1) their gentlemen of leisure. For us, hard work (2) idleness was the way (3) distinction.
Now, (4) , like many other traditional values, hard work is coming under (5) . In academic journals, conferences and classrooms, the idea of hard work is considered to be another of those notions that the dominant forces of our society (6) on the rest of Us. It (7) advances white-male interests (8) any woman or minority foolish enough to buy into the dominant value system will find out.
In a recent survey, high-school students in the United States and Japan were asked to (9) factors that (10) to success in the classroom. Of the Japanese, 72 percent listed hard work first (11) only 27 percent of Americans agreed.
Many factors contribute to the devaluing of hard work. Thinking that self-esteem is crucial, many parents and teachers (12) to point out the student’s failing, even laziness. To make matters (13) , Americans place an unusually high value on the idea of innate ability. And (14) inevitably deemphasizes the role that hard work plays in success. (15) if our students fail to see that hard work (16) , it is because we are telling them time and again, that it (17) . If we want young people to esteem hard work, it is UP to us to show them its worth, its strength and its significance in everyday life.
And while we are at it, we should make sure they know there are many ideas to which we can all (18) . The notion that these values cannot (19) class, race more than the idea of hard work. It can call into question (20) there can be an American creed—a public philosophy for us all.

A:ascribe B:attribute C:subscribe D:prescribe

It is generally recognized in the world that the second Gulf War in Iraq is a crucial test of high-speed web. For decades, Americans have anxiously (1) each war through a new communication (2) , from the early silent film of World War I to the 24-hour cable news (3) of the first Persian Gulf War.
Now, (4) bombs exploding in Baghdad, a sudden increase in wartime (5) for online news has become a central test of the (6) of high-speed Internet connections. It is also a good (7) both to attract users to online media (8) and to persuade them to pay for the material they find there, (9) the value of the Cable News Network persuaded millions to (10) to cable during the last war in Iraq.
(11) by a steady rise over the last 18 months in the number of people with high-speed Internet (12) , now at more than 70 million in the United States, the web sites of many of the major news organizations have (13) assembled a novel collage (拼贴) of (14) video, audio reports, photography collections, animated weaponry (15) , interactive maps and other new digital reportage.
These Internet services are (16) on the remarkable abundance of sounds and images (17) from video cameras (18) on Baghdad and journalists traveling with troops. And they have found a (19) audience of American office workers (20) their computers during the early combat.

A:subject B:contribute C:apply D:subscribe

Directions:
Read the following text. Choose the best word (s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D on ANSWER SHEET 1.

A:subject B:contribute C:apply D:subscribe

It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in the laboratory would submit the results of their research to a journal. A journal editor would then remove the authors’ names and affiliations from the paper and send it to their peers for review. Depending on the comments received, the editor would accept the paper for publication or decline it. Copyright rested with the journal publisher, and researchers seeking knowledge of the results would have to subscribe to the journal.
No longer. The Internet—and pressure from funding agencies, who are questioning why commercial publishers are making money from government-funded research by restricting access to it—is making access to scientific results a reality. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has just issued a report describing the far-reaching consequences of this. The report, by John Houghton of Victoria University in Australia and Graham Vickery of the OECD, makes heavy reading for publishers who have, so far, made handsome profits. But it goes further than that. It signals a change in what has, until now, been a key element of scientific endeavor.
The value of knowledge and the return on the public investment in research depends, in part, upon wide distribution and ready access. It is big business. In America, the core scientific publishing market is estimated at between $ 7 billion and $ 11 billion. The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers says that there are more than 2 000 publishers worldwide specializing in these subjects. They publish more than 1.2 million articles each year in some 16 000 journals.
This is now changing. According to the OECD report, some 75% of scholarly journals are now online. Entirely new business models are emerging; three main ones were identified by the report’s authors. There is the so-called big deal, where institutional subscribers pay for access to a collection of online journal titles through site-licensing agreements. There is open-access publishing, typically sup- ported by asking the author (or his employer) to pay for the paper to be published: Finally, there are open-access archives, where organizations such as universities or international laboratories support institutional repositories. Other models exist that are hybrids of these three, such as delayed open-access, where. journals allow only subscribers to read a paper for the first six months, before making it freely available to everyone who wishes to see it. All this could change the traditional form of the peer- review process, at least for the publication of papers.

A:cover the cost of its publication B:subscribe to the journal publishing it C:allow other online journals to use it freely D:complete the peer-review before submission

It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in the laboratory would submit the results of their research to a journal. A journal editor would then remove the authors’ names and affiliations from the paper and send it to their peers for review. Depending on the comments received, the editor would accept the paper for publication or decline it. Copyright rested with the journal publisher, and researchers seeking knowledge of the results would have to subscribe to the journal. No longer. The Internet—and pressure from funding agencies, who are questioning why commercial publishers are making money from government-funded research by restricting access to it—is making access to scientific results a reality. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has just issued a report describing the far-reaching consequences of this. The report, by John Houghton of Victoria University in Australia and Graham Vickery of the OECD, makes heavy reading for publishers who have, so far, made handsome profits. But it goes further than that. It signals a change in what has, until now, been a key element of scientific endeavor. The value of knowledge and the return on the public investment in research depends, in part, upon wide distribution and ready access. It is big business. In America, the core scientific publishing market is estimated at between $7 billion and $11 billion. The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers says that there are more than 2 000 publishers worldwide specializing in these subjects. They publish more than 1.2 million articles each year in some 16,000 journals. This is now changing. According to the OECD report, some 75% of scholarly journals are now online. Entirely new business models are emerging; three main ones were identified by the report’s authors. There is the so-called big deal, where institutional subscribers pay for access to a collection of online journal titles through site-licensing agreements. There is open-access publishing, typically supported by asking the author (or his employer) to pay for the paper to be published: Finally, there are open-access archives, where organizations such as universities or international laboratories support institutional repositories. Other models exist that are hybrids of these three, such as delayed open-access, where journals allow only subscribers to read a paper for the first six months, before making it freely available to everyone who wishes to see it. All this could change the traditional form of the peer-review process, at least for the publication of papers.With the open-access publishing model, the author of a paper is required to

A:cover the cost of its publication. B:subscribe to the journal publishing it. C:allow other online journals to use it freely. D:complete the peer-review before submission.

If a company is paying Jersey or Guernsey income tax, the Authorities will require the filing of amounts to {{U}}substantiate{{/U}} the assessable profit.

A:subscribe B:show C:display D:prove

I don't {{U}}subscribe{{/U}} to the idea that money brings happiness.

A:cheer B:contribute C:agree D:describe