单选题
单选题
Text 1
The European Union’s Bareelona summit, which ended on March 16th, was played out against the usual backdrop of noisy "anti-globalisation" demonstrations and massive security. If nothing else, the demonstrations illustrated that economic liberalization in Europe-the meeting’s main topic--presents genuine political difficulties. Influential sections of public opinion continue to oppose anything that they imagine threatens "social Europe", the ideal of a cradle-to-grave welfare state.
In this climate of public opinion, it is not surprising that the outcome in Barcelona was modest. The totemic issue was opening up Europe’s energy markets. The French government has fought hard to preserve a protected market at home for its state-owned national champion, Electricite de France (EDF). At Barcelona it made a well flagged tactical re treat. The summiteers concluded that from 2004 industrial users across Europe would be able to choose from competing energy suppliers, which should account for "at least" 60% of the market.
Since Europe’s energy market is worth 350 billion ( $ 309 billion) a year and affects just about every business, this is a breakthrough. But even the energy deal has disappointing aspects. Confining competition to business users makes it harder to show that economic liberalization is the friend rather than the foe of the ordinary person. It also allows EDF to keep its monopoly in the most profitable chunk of the French market.
In other areas, especially to do with Europe’s tough labor markets, the EU is actually going backwards. The summiteers declared that "disincentives against taking up jobs" should be removed; 20m jobs should be created within the EU by 2010. But only three days after a Barcelona jamboree, the European Commission endorsed a new law that would give all temporary-agency workers the same rights as full-timers within six weeks of getting their feet under the desk. six out of 20 commissioners did, unusually, vote against the measure--a blatant piece of re-regulation--but the social affairs commissioner, Anna Diamantopoulou, was unrepentant, indeed triumphant. A dissatisfied liberaliser in the commission called the directive "an absolute disaster".
The summit’s other achievements are still more fragile. Europe’s leaders promised to increase spending on "research and development" from its current figure of 1.9% of GDP a year to 3%. But how will European politicians compel businesses to invest more in research Nobody seems to know. And the one big research project agreed on at Barcelona, the Galileo satellite-positioning system, which is supposed to cost 3.2 billion of public money, is of dubious commercial value, since the Europeans already enjoy free access to the Americans’ GPA system. Edward Bannerman, head of economics at the Centre for European Reform, a Blairite think-tank, calls Galileo "the common agricultural policy in space".
A:popular and sensible. B:dubious but profitable. C:slow and contradictory. D:fragile but promising.
Some time between digesting Christmas dinner and putting your head back down to work, spare a thought or two for the cranberry. It is, of course, a (1) of Christmas: merry bright red, bittersweetly delicious with turkey and the very devil to get out of the tablecloth (2) spilled. But the cranberry is also a symbol of the modern food industry-and in the tale of its (3) from colonial curiosity to business-school case study (4) a deeper understanding of the opportunities and (5) of modern eating.
The fastest growing part of today’s cranberry market is for cranberries that do not taste like cranberries. Ocean Spray’s "flavoured fruit pieces" (FFPS, to the trade) taste like orange, cherry, raspberry or any (6) of other fruits. They are in fact cranberries. Why make a cranberry taste like an orange Mostly because it is a (7) little fruit: FFPS have a shelf-life of two years. Better (8) , they keep a chewy texture (9) baked, unlike the fruits whose flavours they mimic, which turn to (10) .
The dynamic that has brought the cranberry to this point is (11) to the dynamic behind most mass-produced goods. Growing (12) provided the (13) to create cheaper and more reliable supply. Cheaper and more reliable supply, (14) , created incentives to find new markets, which increased demand. Thus was the (15) kept churning.
The cranberry is one of only three fruits native (16) North America, growing wild from Maine to North Carolina. (The others are the Concord grape and the blueberry). The American Indians had several names for cranberries, many (17) the words for "bitter" or, more (18) , "noisy". They ate the berries mostly (19) pemmican, but also used them for dye and medicine. And they introduced them to the white settlers--at the first Thanksgiving dinner in 1621, it is said. The settlers promptly renamed this delicacy the "crane berry", (20) the pointy pink blossoms of tile cranberry look a bit like the head of the Sandhill crane.
A:delicious B:dubious C:durable D:deliberate
Text 2
The European Union’s Barcelona summit, which ended on March 16th, was played out against the usual backdrop of noisy "anti-globalisation" demonstrations and massive security. If nothing else, the demonstrations illustrated that economic liberalization in Europe -- the meeting’s main topic -- presents genuine political difficulties. Influential sections of public opinion continue to oppose anything that they imagine threatens "social Europe", the ideal of a cradle-to-grave welfare state.
In this climate of public opinion, it is not surprising that the outcome in Barcelona was modest. The totemic issue was opening up Europe’s energy markets. The French government has fought hard to preserve a protected market at home {or its state-owned national champion, Electricite de France (EDF). At Barcelona it made a well-flagged tactical retreat. The summiteers concluded that from 2004 industrial users across Europe would be able to choose from competing energy suppliers, which should account for "at least" 600% of the market.
Since Europe’s energy market is worth 350 billion ( $ 309 Billion) a year and affects just about every business, this is a breakthrough. But even the energy deal has disappointing aspects. Confining competition to business users makes it harder to show that economic liberalization is the friend rather than the foe of the ordinary person. It also allows EDF to keep its monopoly in the most profitable chunk of the French market.
In other areas, especially to do with Europe’s tough labor markets, the EU is actually going backwards. The summiteers declared that "disincentives against taking up jobs" should be removed; 20m jobs should be created within the EU by 2010. But only three days after a Barcelona jamboree, the European Commission endorsed a new law that would give all temporary-agency workers the same rights as full-timers within six weeks of getting their feet under the desk. Six out of 20 commissioners did, unusually, vote against the measure -- a blatant piece of re-regulation -- but the social affairs commissioner, Anna Diamantopoulou, was unrepentant, indeed triumphant. A dissatsified liberaliser in the commission called the directive "an absolute disaster".
The summit’s other achievements are still more fragile. Europe’s leaders promised to increase spending on "research and development" from its current figure of 1.9% of GDP a year to 3%. But how will European politicians compel businesses to invest more in research Nobody seems to know. And the one big research project agreed on at Barcelona, the Galileo satellite-positioning system, which is supposed to cost 3.2 billion of public money, is of dubious commercial value, since the Europeans already enjoy free access to the Americans’ GPA system. Edward Bannerman, head of economics at the Centre for European Reform, a Blairite think-tank, calls Galileo "the common agricultural policy in space."
A:popular and sensible. B:dubious but profitable. C:slow and contradictory. D:fragile but promising.
Some time between digesting Christmas dinner and putting your head back down to work, spare a thought or two for the cranberry. It is, of course, a (1) of Christmas: merry bright red, bittersweetly delicious with turkey and the very devil to get out of the tablecloth (2) spilled. But the cranberry is also a symbol of the modern food industry and in the tale of its (3) from colonial curiosity to business - school case study (4) a deeper understanding of the opportunities and (5) of modern eating.
The fastest growing part of today’ s cranberry market is for cranberries that do not taste like cranberries. Ocean Spray’ s "flavoured fruit pieces" ( FFPS, to the trade) taste like orange, cherry, raspberry or any (6) of other fruits. They are in fact cranberries. Why make a cranberry taste like an orange Mostly because it is a (7) little fruit: FF PS have a shelf-life of two years. Better (8) , they keep a chewy texture (9) baked, unlike the fruits whose flavours they mimic, which turn to (10) .
The dynamic that has brought the cranberry to this point is (11) to the dynamic behind most mass-produced goods. Growing (12) provided the (13) to create cheaper and more reliable supply. Cheaper and more reliable supply, (14) , created incentives to find new markets, which increased demand. Thus was the (15) kept churning.
The cranberry is one of only three fruits native (16) North America, growing wild from Maine to North Carolina. (The others are the Concord grape and the blueberry. ) The American Indians had several names for cranberries, many (17) the words for "bitter" or, more (18) , "noisy". They ate the berries mostly (19) pemmican, but also used them for dye and medicine. And they introduced them to the white settlers--at the first Thanksgiving dinner in 1621, it is said. The settlers promptly renamed this delicacy the "crane berry", (20) the pointy pink blossoms of the cranberry look a bit like the head of the Sandhill crane.
A:delicious B:dubious C:durable D:deliberate
Text 2 The European Union’s Barcelona summit, which ended on March 16th, was played out against the usual backdrop of noisy "anti-globalisation" demonstrations and massive security. If nothing else, the demonstrations illustrated that economic liberalization in Europe -- the meeting’s main topic -- presents genuine political difficulties. Influential sections of public opinion continue to oppose anything that they imagine threatens "social Europe", the ideal of a cradle-to-grave welfare state. In this climate of public opinion, it is not surprising that the outcome in Barcelona was modest. The totemic issue was opening up Europe’s energy markets. The French government has fought hard to preserve a protected market at home {or its state-owned national champion, Electricite de France (EDF). At Barcelona it made a well-flagged tactical retreat. The summiteers concluded that from 2004 industrial users across Europe would be able to choose from competing energy suppliers, which should account for "at least" 600% of the market. Since Europe’s energy market is worth 350 billion ( $ 309 Billion) a year and affects just about every business, this is a breakthrough. But even the energy deal has disappointing aspects. Confining competition to business users makes it harder to show that economic liberalization is the friend rather than the foe of the ordinary person. It also allows EDF to keep its monopoly in the most profitable chunk of the French market. In other areas, especially to do with Europe’s tough labor markets, the EU is actually going backwards. The summiteers declared that "disincentives against taking up jobs" should be removed; 20m jobs should be created within the EU by 2010. But only three days after a Barcelona jamboree, the European Commission endorsed a new law that would give all temporary-agency workers the same rights as full-timers within six weeks of getting their feet under the desk. Six out of 20 commissioners did, unusually, vote against the measure -- a blatant piece of re-regulation -- but the social affairs commissioner, Anna Diamantopoulou, was unrepentant, indeed triumphant. A dissatsified liberaliser in the commission called the directive "an absolute disaster". The summit’s other achievements are still more fragile. Europe’s leaders promised to increase spending on "research and development" from its current figure of 1.9% of GDP a year to 3%. But how will European politicians compel businesses to invest more in research Nobody seems to know. And the one big research project agreed on at Barcelona, the Galileo satellite-positioning system, which is supposed to cost 3.2 billion of public money, is of dubious commercial value, since the Europeans already enjoy free access to the Americans’ GPA system. Edward Bannerman, head of economics at the Centre for European Reform, a Blairite think-tank, calls Galileo "the common agricultural policy in space."
It can be inferred from the text that Europe's quest for more liberal economies may be（）A:popular and sensible. B:dubious but profitable. C:slow and contradictory. D:fragile but promising.
Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension Part A Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. Text 1 The European Union’s Bareelona summit, which ended on March 16th, was played out against the usual backdrop of noisy "anti-globalisation" demonstrations and massive security. If nothing else, the demonstrations illustrated that economic liberalization in Europe-the meeting’s main topic--presents genuine political difficulties. Influential sections of public opinion continue to oppose anything that they imagine threatens "social Europe", the ideal of a cradle-to-grave welfare state. In this climate of public opinion, it is not surprising that the outcome in Barcelona was modest. The totemic issue was opening up Europe’s energy markets. The French government has fought hard to preserve a protected market at home for its state-owned national champion, Electricite de France (EDF). At Barcelona it made a well flagged tactical re treat. The summiteers concluded that from 2004 industrial users across Europe would be able to choose from competing energy suppliers, which should account for "at least" 60% of the market. Since Europe’s energy market is worth 350 billion ( $ 309 billion) a year and affects just about every business, this is a breakthrough. But even the energy deal has disappointing aspects. Confining competition to business users makes it harder to show that economic liberalization is the friend rather than the foe of the ordinary person. It also allows EDF to keep its monopoly in the most profitable chunk of the French market. In other areas, especially to do with Europe’s tough labor markets, the EU is actually going backwards. The summiteers declared that "disincentives against taking up jobs" should be removed; 20m jobs should be created within the EU by 2010. But only three days after a Barcelona jamboree, the European Commission endorsed a new law that would give all temporary-agency workers the same rights as full-timers within six weeks of getting their feet under the desk. six out of 20 commissioners did, unusually, vote against the measure--a blatant piece of re-regulation--but the social affairs commissioner, Anna Diamantopoulou, was unrepentant, indeed triumphant. A dissatisfied liberaliser in the commission called the directive "an absolute disaster". The summit’s other achievements are still more fragile. Europe’s leaders promised to increase spending on "research and development" from its current figure of 1.9% of GDP a year to 3%. But how will European politicians compel businesses to invest more in research Nobody seems to know. And the one big research project agreed on at Barcelona, the Galileo satellite-positioning system, which is supposed to cost 3.2 billion of public money, is of dubious commercial value, since the Europeans already enjoy free access to the Americans’ GPA system. Edward Bannerman, head of economics at the Centre for European Reform, a Blairite think-tank, calls Galileo "the common agricultural policy in space".
It can be inferred from the text that Europe's quest for more liberal economies may be （）A:popular and sensible. B:dubious but profitable. C:slow and contradictory. D:fragile but promising.
Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension Part A Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. Text 1 The standardized educational or psychological tests, that are widely used to aid in selecting, assigning, or promoting students, employees, and military personnel have been the target of recent attacks in books, magazines, the daily press, and even in Congress. The target is wrong, for in attacking the tests; critics divert attention from the fault that lies with ill-informed or incompetent users. The tests themselves are merely tools, with characteristics that can be measured with reasonable precision under specified conditions. Whether the results will be valuable, meaningless, or even misleading depends partly upon the tool itself but largely upon the user. All informed predictions of future performance are based upon some knowledge of relevant past performance. How Well the predictions will be validated by later performance depends upon the amount, reliability, and appropriateness of the information used and on the skill and Wisdom with which it is interpreted. Anyone who keeps careful score knows that the information available is always incomplete and that the predictions are always subject to error. Standardized tests should be considered in this context. They provide a quick, objective method of getting some kinds of information about what a person has learned, the skills he has developed, or the kind of person he is. The information so obtained has, qualitatively, the same advantages and shortcomings as other kinds of information. Whether to use tests, other kinds of information, or both in a particular situation depends, therefore, upon the empirical. evidence concerning comparative validity, and upon such factors as cost and availability. In general, the tests work most effectively when the traits or qualities to be measured can be most precisely defined (for example, ability to do well in a particular course of training program) and least effectively when what is to be measured or predicted cannot be well defined (for example, personality or creativity). Properly used, they provide a rapid means of getting comparable information about many people. Sometimes they identify students whose high potential has not been previously recognized, but there are many things they do not do. For example, they don’t compensate for gross social inequality, and thus don’t tell how able an underprivileged younger might have been had he grown up under more favorable circumstances.
According to the text, the author's attitude toward the value of standardized tests seems to be（）A:critical. B:dubious. C:objective. D:ambiguous.
?
?下面有3篇短文，每篇短文后有5道题，每题后面有4个选项。请仔细阅读短文，并根据短文回答其后面的问题，从4个选项中选择1个最佳答案。
{{B}}第一篇{{/B}}
A:Dubious teaching method. B:Encouraging the poor students. C:Praising the excellent students. D:Improving the evaluation for the students.
您可能感兴趣的题目
