单选集填空
单选集填空
Training is intended primarily for the service of society; education is primarily for the individual. Society needs doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers to perform specific tasks necessary to its operation, just as it needs carpenters and plumbers and stenographers (速记员).
41) ______ And these needs, our training centers -- the professional and trade schools, fill. But although education is for the improvement of the individual, it also serves society by providing a leavening of men of understanding, of perception, and wisdom.
42) ______ They serve society by examining its function, appraising its needs, and criticizing its direction. They may be earning their livings by practicing one of the professions, or in pursuing a trade, or by engaging in business enterprise. They may be rich or poor. They may occupy positions of power and prestige, or they may be engaged in some humble employment. Without them, however, society either disintegrates or else becomes an anthill.
43)_______ . In the one, the recruit is training to become a professional baseball player who will make a living and serve society by playing baseball; in the other, he is training only to improve his own body and musculature. The training at the baseball camp is all relevant. The recruit may spend hours practicing how to slide into second base, not because it is a particularly useful form of calisthenics (柔软体操) but because it is relevant to the game. The exercise would stop if the rules were changed so that sliding to a base was made illegal. Similarly, the candidate for the pitching staff spends a lot of time throwing a baseball, not because it will improve his physique -- it may have quite the opposite effect, but because pitching is to be his principal function on the team. At the gym, exercises have no such relevance.
44)______
45)______ What is taught at law school is the present law of the land, not the Napoleonic Code or even the archaic laws that have been scratched from the statute books. And at medical school, too, it is modern medical practice that is taught, which is relevant to conditions today. And the plumber (水管工人) and the carpenter and the electrician and the mason (泥瓦匠) learn only what is relevant to the practice of their respective trades in this day with the tools and materials that are presently available and that conform to the building code.
A. Education refers to the knowledge or skill obtained or developed by a learning process.
B. They are our intellectual leaders, the critics of our culture, the defenders of our free traditions, the instigators of our progress.
C. The intention is to strengthen the body in general, and when the members sit down on the floor with their legs outstretched and practice touching their fingers to their toes, it is not because they hope to become galley slaves, perhaps the only occupation where that particular exercise would be relevant.
D. The difference between the two types of study is like the difference between the discipline and exercise in a professional baseball training camp and that of a gym.
E. Training supplies the immediate and specific needs of society so that the work of the world may continue.
F. In general, relevancy is a facet of training rather than of education.
G. Training is to make proficient with specialized instruction and practice.
Text 4
People, like most animals, are naturally lazy. So the ascent of mankind is something of a mystery. Humans who make their livings hunting and gathering in the traditional way do not have to put much effort into it. Farmers who rely on rain to water their crops work significantly harder, and lead unhealthier lives. But the real back-breaking is that carried out by farmers who use irrigation. Yet it was the invention of irrigation, at first sight so harmful to its practitioners that actually produced a sufficient surplus to feed the priests, scholars, artists and so on whose activities are collectively thought of as "civilization".
In the past 10,000 years, the world’s climate has become temporarily colder and drier on several occasions. The first of these, known as the Younger Dryas, after a tundra-loving plant that thrived during it, occurred at the same time as the beginning of agriculture in northern Mesopotamia. It is widely believed that this was not a coincidence. The drying and cooling of the Younger Dryas adversely affected the food supply of hunter-gatherers. That would have created an incentive for agriculture to spread once some bright spark invented it.
Why farmers then moved on to irrigation is, however, far from clear. But Harvey Weiss, of Yale University, thinks he knows. Dr. Weiss observes that the development of irrigation coincides with a second cool, dry !0eriod, some 8,200 years ago. His analysis of rainfall patterns in the area suggests that rainfall in agriculture’s upper-Mesopotamian heartland would, at this time, have fallen below the level needed to sustain farming reliably. Farmers would thus have been forced out of the area in search of other opportunities.
Once again, an innovative spark was required. But it clearly occurred to some of these displaced farmers that the slow-moving waters of the lower Tigris and Euphrates, near sea level, could be diverted using canals and used to water crops. And the rest, as the elieh6 has it, is history.
So climate change helped to intensify agriculture, and thus start civilization. But an equally intriguing idea is that the spread of agriculture caused climate change. In this case, the presumed criminal is forest clearance. Most of the land cultivated by early farmers in the Middle East would have been forested. When the trees that grew there were cleared, the carbon they contained ended up in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Moreover, one form of farming—the cultivation of rice in waterlogged fields—generates methane, in large quantities. William Ruddiman, of the University of Virginia, explained that, in combination, these two phenomena had warmed the atmosphere prior to the start of the industrial era. As environmentalists are wont to observe, mankind is part of nature. These studies show just how intimate the relationship is.
A:To develop the irrigation system. B:To promote organic agriculture. C:To revert to hunting and gathering. D:To turn farmland back into forest.
Text 4
People, like most animals, are naturally lazy. So the ascent of mankind is something of a mystery. Humans who make their livings hunting and gathering in the traditional way do not have to put much effort into it. Farmers who rely on rain to water their crops work significantly harder, and lead unhealthier lives. But the real back-breaking is that carried out by farmers who use irrigation. Yet it was the invention of irrigation, at first sight so harmful to its practitioners that actually produced a sufficient surplus to feed the priests, scholars, artists and so on whose activities are collectively thought of as "civilization".
In the past 10,000 years, the world’s climate has become temporarily colder and drier on several occasions. The first of these, known as the Younger Dryas, after a tundra-loving plant that thrived during it, occurred at the same time as the beginning of agriculture in northern Mesopotamia. It is widely believed that this was not a coincidence. The drying and cooling of the Younger Dryas adversely affected the food supply of hunter-gatherers. That would have created an incentive for agriculture to spread once some bright spark invented it.
Why farmers then moved on to irrigation is, however, far from clear. But Harvey Weiss, of Yale University, thinks he knows. Dr. Weiss observes that the development of irrigation coincides with a second cool, dry !0eriod, some 8,200 years ago. His analysis of rainfall patterns in the area suggests that rainfall in agriculture’s upper-Mesopotamian heartland would, at this time, have fallen below the level needed to sustain farming reliably. Farmers would thus have been forced out of the area in search of other opportunities.
Once again, an innovative spark was required. But it clearly occurred to some of these displaced farmers that the slow-moving waters of the lower Tigris and Euphrates, near sea level, could be diverted using canals and used to water crops. And the rest, as the elieh6 has it, is history.
So climate change helped to intensify agriculture, and thus start civilization. But an equally intriguing idea is that the spread of agriculture caused climate change. In this case, the presumed criminal is forest clearance. Most of the land cultivated by early farmers in the Middle East would have been forested. When the trees that grew there were cleared, the carbon they contained ended up in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Moreover, one form of farming—the cultivation of rice in waterlogged fields—generates methane, in large quantities. William Ruddiman, of the University of Virginia, explained that, in combination, these two phenomena had warmed the atmosphere prior to the start of the industrial era. As environmentalists are wont to observe, mankind is part of nature. These studies show just how intimate the relationship is.
A:alleviate farmers' workload. B:increase agricultural production. C:make planting much easier. D:get rid of human laziness.
People, like most animals, are naturally lazy. So the ascent of mankind is something of a mystery. Humans who make their livings hunting and gathering in the traditional way do not have to put much effort into it. Farmers who rely on rain to water their crops work significantly harder, and lead unhealthier lives. But the real back-breaking is that carried out by farmers who use irrigation. Yet it was the invention of irrigation, at first sight so harmful to its practitioners that actually produced a sufficient surplus to feed the priests, scholars, artists and so on whose activities are collectively thought of as "civilization".
In the past 10,000 years, the world’s climate has become temporarily colder and drier on several occasions. The first of these, known as the Younger Dryas, after a tundra-loving plant that thrived during it, occurred at the same time as the beginning of agriculture in northern Mesopotamia. It is widely believed that this was not a coincidence. The drying and cooling of the Younger Dryas adversely affected the food supply of hunter-gatherers. That would have created an incentive for agriculture to spread once some bright spark invented it.
Why farmers then moved on to irrigation is, however, far from clear. But Harvey Weiss, of Yale University, thinks he knows. Dr. Weiss observes that the development of irrigation coincides with a second cool, dry period, some 8,200 years ago. His analysis of rainfall patterns in the area suggests that rainfall in agriculture’s upper-Mesopotamian heartland would, at this time, have fallen below the level needed to sustain farming reliably. Farmers would thus have been forced out of the area in search of other opportunities.
Once again, an innovative spark was required. But it clearly occurred to some of these displaced farmers that the slow-moving waters of the lower Tigris and Euphrates, near sea level, could be diverted using canals and used to water crops. And the rest, as the cliche has it, is history.
So climate change helped to intensify agriculture, and thus start civilization. But an equally intriguing idea is that the spread of agriculture caused climate change. In this case, the presumed criminal is forest clearance. Most of the land cultivated by early farmers in the Middle East would have been forested. When the trees that grew there were cleared, the carbon they contained ended up in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Moreover, one form of farming—the cultivation of rice in waterlogged fields—generates methane, in large quantities. William Ruddiman, of the University of Virginia, explained that, in combination, these two phenomena had warmed the atmosphere prior to the start of the industrial era. As environmentalists are wont to observe, mankind is part of nature. These studies show just how intimate the relationship is.
A:changed the growing season. B:spurred the use of canals. C:forced the farmers to desert agriculture. D:led to declining populations.
People, like most animals, are naturally lazy. So the ascent of mankind is something of a mystery. Humans who make their livings hunting and gathering in the traditional way do not have to put much effort into it. Farmers who rely on rain to water their crops work significantly harder, and lead unhealthier lives. But the real back-breaking is that carried out by farmers who use irrigation. Yet it was the invention of irrigation, at first sight so harmful to its practitioners that actually produced a sufficient surplus to feed the priests, scholars, artists and so on whose activities are collectively thought of as "civilization".
In the past 10,000 years, the world’s climate has become temporarily colder and drier on several occasions. The first of these, known as the Younger Dryas, after a tundra-loving plant that thrived during it, occurred at the same time as the beginning of agriculture in northern Mesopotamia. It is widely believed that this was not a coincidence. The drying and cooling of the Younger Dryas adversely affected the food supply of hunter-gatherers. That would have created an incentive for agriculture to spread once some bright spark invented it.
Why farmers then moved on to irrigation is, however, far from clear. But Harvey Weiss, of Yale University, thinks he knows. Dr. Weiss observes that the development of irrigation coincides with a second cool, dry period, some 8,200 years ago. His analysis of rainfall patterns in the area suggests that rainfall in agriculture’s upper-Mesopotamian heartland would, at this time, have fallen below the level needed to sustain farming reliably. Farmers would thus have been forced out of the area in search of other opportunities.
Once again, an innovative spark was required. But it clearly occurred to some of these displaced farmers that the slow-moving waters of the lower Tigris and Euphrates, near sea level, could be diverted using canals and used to water crops. And the rest, as the cliche has it, is history.
So climate change helped to intensify agriculture, and thus start civilization. But an equally intriguing idea is that the spread of agriculture caused climate change. In this case, the presumed criminal is forest clearance. Most of the land cultivated by early farmers in the Middle East would have been forested. When the trees that grew there were cleared, the carbon they contained ended up in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Moreover, one form of farming—the cultivation of rice in waterlogged fields—generates methane, in large quantities. William Ruddiman, of the University of Virginia, explained that, in combination, these two phenomena had warmed the atmosphere prior to the start of the industrial era. As environmentalists are wont to observe, mankind is part of nature. These studies show just how intimate the relationship is.
A:alleviate farmers’ workload B:increase agricultural production C:make planting much easier D:get rid of human laziness
Language When most of us think about language, we think first about words. Thus, the hardest part of learning a foreign language may seem to be memorizing 【51】 vocabulary; when we observe a child first acquiring speech, we talk of his progress 【52】 a matter of learning new words. We are also 【53】 to feel that the adult speaker with the largest vocabulary has the best 【54】 of English. To think 【55】 a language as just a stock of words is 【56】 , quite wrong. Words alone do not 【57】 a language; a grammar is 【58】 to combine them in some intelligible way. Moreover, words are relatively easy to learn, and indeed all of us go 【59】 learning them all our 【60】 . They are also the 【61】 stable part of language. Words come into 【62】 , change their pronunciations and meanings, and disappear completely all with comparative ease. Yet it is true that the 【63】 is focus of language. It is in words 【64】 sounds and meanings interlock to allow us to 【65】 with one another, and it is words that we arrange together to make sentences, conversations and discourse of all kinds. Thus we have a paradox in that the most short-lived part of language is also the centre where meaning, pronunciation, and grammar come together.
A:times B:lives C:occasions D:livings
Language When most of us think about language, we think first about words. Thus, the hardest part of learning a foreign language may seem to be memorizing 【51】 vocabulary; when we observe a child first acquiring speech, we talk of his progress 【52】 a matter of learning new words. We are also 【53】 to feel that the adult speaker with the largest vocabulary has the best 【54】 of English. To think 【55】 a language as just a stock of words is 【56】 , quite wrong. Words alone do not 【57】 a language; a grammar is 【58】 to combine them in some intelligible way. Moreover, words are relatively easy to learn, and indeed all of us go 【59】 learning them all our 【60】 . They are also the 【61】 stable part of language. Words come into 【62】 , change their pronunciations and meanings, and disappear completely all with comparative ease. Yet it is true that the 【63】 is focus of language. It is in words 【64】 sounds and meanings interlock to allow us to 【65】 with one another, and it is words that we arrange together to make sentences, conversations and discourse of all kinds. Thus we have a paradox in that the most short-lived part of language is also the centre where meaning, pronunciation, and grammar come together.
A:times B:lives C:occasions D:livings
Language When most of us think about language, we think first about words. Thus, the hardest part of learning a foreign language may seem to be memorizing 【51】 vocabulary; when we observe a child first acquiring speech, we talk of his progress 【52】 a matter of learning new words. We are also 【53】 to feel that the adult speaker with the largest vocabulary has the best 【54】 of English. To think 【55】 a language as just a stock of words is 【56】 , quite wrong. Words alone do not 【57】 a language; a grammar is 【58】 to combine them in some intelligible way. Moreover, words are relatively easy to learn, and indeed all of us go 【59】 learning them all our 【60】 . They are also the 【61】 stable part of language. Words come into 【62】 , change their pronunciations and meanings, and disappear completely all with comparative ease. Yet it is true that the 【63】 is focus of language. It is in words 【64】 sounds and meanings interlock to allow us to 【65】 with one another, and it is words that we arrange together to make sentences, conversations and discourse of all kinds. Thus we have a paradox in that the most short-lived part of language is also the centre where meaning, pronunciation, and grammar come together.
A:times B:lives C:occasions D:livings
您可能感兴趣的题目
