Passage 5
"Fingers were made before forks" when a person gives up good manners, puts aside knife and fork, and dives into his food, someone is likely to repeat that saying.
The fork was an ancient agricultural tool, but for centuries no one thought of eating with it. Not until the eleventh century, when a young lady from Constantinpole brought her fork to Italy, did the custom reach Europe.
By the fifteenth century the use of the fork was widespread in Italy. The English explanation was that Italians were averse to rating food touched with fingers, "Seeing all men’s fingers are not alike clean." English travelers kept their friends in stitches while describing this ridiculous Italian custom.
Anyone who used a fork to eat with was laughed at in England for the next hundred years. Men who used forks were thought to be sissies, and women who used them were called show - offs and overnice. Not until the late 1600’s did using a fork become a common custom.
To English travelers in Italy, the use of forks seemed （）
A:clever B:necessary C:good manner D:ridiculous
Passage 5 "Fingers were made before forks" when a person gives up good manners, puts aside knife and fork, and dives into his food, someone is likely to repeat that saying. The fork was an ancient agricultural tool, but for centuries no one thought of eating with it. Not until the eleventh century, when a young lady from Constantinpole brought her fork to Italy, did the custom reach Europe. By the fifteenth century the use of the fork was widespread in Italy. The English explanation was that Italians were averse to rating food touched with fingers, "Seeing all men’s fingers are not alike clean." English travelers kept their friends in stitches while describing this ridiculous Italian custom. Anyone who used a fork to eat with was laughed at in England for the next hundred years. Men who used forks were thought to be sissies, and women who used them were called show - offs and overnice. Not until the late 1600’s did using a fork become a common custom.
To English travelers in Italy, the use of forks seemed（ ）
A:clever B:necessary C:good manner D:ridiculous
It is ridiculous to dispute about such things.
A:foolish B:shocking C:frightening D:amusing
It is {{U}}ridiculous{{/U}} to dispute about such things.
A:foolish B:shocking C:frightening D:amusing
It is ridiculous to dispute about such things（ ）.
A:frightening B:shocking C:foolish D:amusing
It is {{U}}ridiculous{{/U}} to dispute about such things.
A:foolish B:shocking C:frightening D:amusing
{{B}}第三篇{{/B}}
{{B}}? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Humour{{/B}}
?
?Humour, which ought to give rise to only the most light-hearted and gay
feelings, can of- ten stir up vehemence and animosity. Evidently it is dearer to
us than we realize. Men will take almost any kind of criticism except the
observation that they have no sense of humour. A man will admit to being a
coward or a liar or a thief or a poor mechanic or a bad swimmer, but tell him he
has a dreadful sense of humour and you might as well have slandered his mother.
Even if he is civilized enough to pretend to make light of your statement, he
will still secretly believe that he has not only a good sense of humour but are
superior to most. He has, in other words, a completely blind spot on the
subject. This is all the more surprising when you consider that not one man in
ten million can give you any kind of intelligent answer as to what humour is or
why he laughs.
? ?One day when I was about twelve years old, it
occurred to me to wonder about the phenomenon of laughter. At first I thought it
is easy enough to see what I laugh at and why I am amused, but why at such times
do I open my mouth and exhale in jerking gasps and wrinkle up my eyes and throw
back my head and halloo like an animal? Why do I not instead rap four times on
the top of my head or whistle or whirl about?
? ?That was over
twenty years ago and I am still wondering, except that I now no longer even take
my first assumption for granted, I no longer clearly understand why I laugh at
what amuses me nor why things are amusing. I have illustrious company in my
confusion, of course. Many of the great minds, of history have brought their
power of concentration to bear on the mystery of humour, and, to date, their
conclusions are so contradictory and ephemeral that they cannot possibly be
classified as scientific.
? ?Many definitions of the comic are
incomplete and many are simply rewording of things we already know. Aristotle,
for example, defined the ridiculous as that which is incongruous but represents
neither danger nor pain. But that seems to me to be a most inadequate sort of
observation, for of at this minute I insert here the word rutabagas, I have
introduced something in congruous, something not funny. ?Of course, it must
be admitted that Aristotle did not claim that every painless in congruity is
ridiculous but as soon as we have gone as far as this admission, we begin to see
that we have come to grips with a ghost when we think have it pinned, it
suddenly appears behind us, mocking us.
? ?An all-embracing
definition of humour has been attempted by many philosophers, but no definition,
no formula had ever been devised that is entirely satisfactory. Aristotle’s
definition has come to be known loosely as the "disappointment" theory, or the
"frustrated expectation", but he also, discussed another theory borrowed in part
from Plato which states that the pleasure we derive in laughing is an enjoyment
of the misfortune of others, due to a momentary feeling of superiority or
gratified vanity in appreciation of the fact that we ourselves are not in the
observed predicament. |
The word "rutabagas" is inserted in Para. 4 to ______.
A:support the writer’s opinion on Aristotle’s explanation of humour B:show his agreement with Aristotle’s definition C:explain Aristotle’s definition of the ridiculous D:prove that the ridiculous is that which is incongruous but represents neither danger nor pain
简单单选
