试题库在线考试题库-历年真题模拟试题及答案-考博英语在线试题测试中心-希赛网

题库

首页 > 题库 > 中国人民大学

Write an essay of about 200 words on the topic : “China Is not Ready for E-education”(E-education : a type of education conducted in the environment of the Internet with the guidance of modern educational theories). Write your essay on your Answer Sheet II.

Write a letter of invitation of about 100 words to your close friend Tom, asking him to come and stay for a week-end with your family at your riverside cottage :(a)you have not seen him for a long time; (b)the country air will do him good;(c)he can catch a train after work on Friday; (d)you ask him to let you know the time of his arrival; (e)you will meet him at the station.

美国财政部长亨利•保尔森昨天以上海为终点结束了他对亚洲三国的访问。作为美国总统的首席经济政策顾问和最主要的经济事务发言人，保尔森昨天上午在上海期货交易所所发表的主题讲演被认为是布什政府对华经济政策的最新阐述。在昨天的讲演中，保尔森多次强调中国的经济增长不仅不具有威胁性，而且对全球经济的增长有好处。他表示，美国欢迎中国发展并成为全球经济中的一员。

It goes without saying, then, that language is also a political instrument, means, and proof of power. It is the most vivid and crucial key to identity: it reveals the private identity, and connects one with, or divorces one from, the larger public, or communal identity. There have been, and are, times, and places, when to speak a certain language could be dangerous, even fatal. Or, one may speak the same language, but in such a way that one’s antecedents are revealed, or (one hopes) hidden. This is true in France, and is absolutely true in England: The range (and reign) of accents on that damp little island make England coherent for the English and totally incomprehensible for everyone else. To open your mouth in England is (if I may use black English) to “put your business in the street”: You have confessed your parents, your youth, your school, your salary, your self-esteem, and, alas, your future.

Globalization is a phenomenon and a revolution. It is sweeping the world with increasing speed and changing the global landscape into something new and different. Yet, like all such trends, its meaning, development, and impact puzzle many. We talk about globalization and experience its effects, but few of us really understand the forces that are at work in the global political economy.When people use their cell phones, log onto the Internet, view events from around the world on live television, and experience varying cultures in their own backyards, they begin to believe that this process of globalization is a good thing that will bring a variety of new and sophisticated changes to people’s lives. Many aspects of this technological revolution bring fun, ease, and sophistication to people’s daily lives. Yet the anti-World Trade Organization (WTO) protests in Seattle, Washington in 1999 and Washington, D. C. in 2000 are graphic illustrations of the fact that not everyone believes that globalization is a good thing. Many Americans who have felt left out of the global economic boom, as well as Latin Americans, Africans, and Asians who feel that their job skills and abilities are being exploited by multinational corporations (MNCs) in a global division of labor, believe that this system does not meet their needs. Local cultures that believe that Wal-Mart and McDonald’s bringing cultural change and harm rather than inexpensive products and convenience criticize the process. In this way, globalization, like all revolutionary forces, polarizes people, alters the fabric of their lives, and creates rifts within and between people.Many in the West, along with the prominent and elite among MNCs, educators, and policymakers, seem to have embraced globalization. They argue that it helps to streamline economic systems, disciplines labor and management, brings forth new technologies and ideas, and fuels economic growth. They point to the relative prosperity of many Western countries and argue that this is proof of globalization’s positive effects. They see little of the problems the critics identify. In fact, those who recognize some structural problems in the system argue that despite these issues, globalization is like across the developing world, view globalization as an economic and cultural wave that tears at the fabric of centuries-old societies. They see jobs emerging disappearing in a matter of months, people moving across the landscape in record numbers, elites amassing huge fortunes while local cultures and traditions are swept away, and local youth being seduced by promises of American material wealth and distanced from their own cultural roots. These critics look past the allure of globalization and focus on the disquieting impact of rapid and system-wide change.The irony of such a far-ranging and rapid historical process such as globalization is that both proponents and critics may be right. The realities of globalization are both intriguing and alarming. As technology and the global infrastructure expand, ideas, methods, and services are developed and disseminated to greater and greater numbers of people. As a result, societies and values are altered, some for the better and others for the worse.1.The author complains that（） .2.The anti-world Trade Organization protests indicate that（） .3.Like all revolutionary forces, the process of globalization（） .4.Proponents of globalization sing its praises on the basis of（） .5.To critics, the worst thing that globalization has brought to us is（） .

According to a recent publication of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, at the present rate of progress, it will take forty-three years to end job discrimination—hardly a reasonable timetable.If our goal is educational and economic equity and parity, it is then we need affirmative action to catch up. We are behind as a result of discrimination and denial of opportunity. There is one white attorney for every 680 whites, but only one black attorney for every 4,000 blacks; one white physician for every 659 whites, but only one black physician for every 5, 000 blacks; and one white dentist for every 1, 900 whites, but only one black dentist for every 8, 400 blacks. Less than 1 percent of all engineers or of all practicing chemists is black. Cruel and uncompassionate injustice created gaps like these. We need creative justice and compassion to help us close them.Actually, in the U. S. context, “reverse discrimination” is illogical and a contradiction in terms. Never in the history of mankind has a majority, with power, engaged in programs and written laws that discriminate against itself. The only thing whites are giving up because of affirmative action is unfair advantage something that was unnecessary in the first place.Blacks are not making progress at the expense of whites, as news accounts make it seem. There are 49 percent more whites in medical school today and 64 percent more whites in law school than there were when affirmative action programs began some eight years ago.In a recent column, William Raspberry raised an interesting question. Commenting on the Bakke case, he asked, “What if, instead of setting aside 16 of 100 slots, we added 16 slots to the 100?” That, he suggested, would not interfere with what whites already have. He then went on to point out that this, in fact, is exactly what has happened in law and medical schools. In 1968, the year before affirmative action programs began to get under way, 9,571 whites and 282 members of minority groups entered U. S. medical schools. In 1976, the figures were 14,213 and 1,400 respectively. Thus, under affirmative action, the number of “white places” actually rose by 49 percent; white access to medical training was not diminished, but substantially increased. The trend was even more marked in law schools. In 1969, the first year for which reliable figures are available, 2,933 minority-group members were enrolled; in 1976, the number was up to 8,484. But during the same period, law school enrollment for whites rose from 65,453 to 107,064 an increase of 64 percent. In short, it is a myth that blacks are making progress at white expense.Allan Bakke did not really challenge preferential treatment in general, for he made no challenge to the preferential treatment accorded to the children of the rich, the alumni and the faculty or to athletes or the very talented only to minorities.1.The author is for affirmative action（） .2.It requires（） to close the gaps between the whites and the blacks in the U. S.3.Blacks are not making progress at the expense of whites, according to the author, because（） .4.William Raspberry, while commenting on the Bakke case, suggests（） .5.What Allan Bakke challenged was（） .

Some of my classmates in the same dorm established a chatting group on the Net when broadband was available on campus. Then everyone faced their own laptops and talked to each other by sending messages in the chatting group in the same room. Their dorm was silent the whole night. The only sound came from tapping the keyboard. Before they went to bed that night, all of them sighed and said, “that’s ridiculous.”Information Technology brings about revolutionary changes to human communication. The Internet makes theworld global village; that is to say, we can get in touch with each other swiftly regardless of one’s location. However, does the convenience in communication mean that we are actually getting closer? I don’t think so. As the anecdote above shows, access to broadband made my fellow classmates fall in silence. The Cambridge International Dictionary defines “communication” as “various methods of sending information between people and places.” while it defines “communicate” as “to be able to understand each other and have a satisfactory relationship.” Therefore. The booming of IT in modern society is only the booming of communication. Exchanging ideas and mutual understanding between people do not base on such booming. On the contrary, due to the revolutionary changes, we’re getting farther from each other to some extent.Mutual understanding is based on expression. However, expression doesn’t necessarily lead to soul touching communication and understanding. When we waffle with a mere acquaintance ,we normally conceal our true feelings. Thus, we don’t establish communication with him, because we do not need him to understand us. The era of cyberspace further demonstrates such separation of form and content.The Internet gives us nearly absolute freedom to speak and express ourselves. With the prosperity of blog, there are, according to recent statistics, about 400,000 bloggers in China today. Bloggers express themselves on the Net at their will, while others read their blog and give comments once for a while. It seems that blog can make us touch upon the bloggers’ inside world, and make us know them better. However, things are not always that perfect.Many netizens are abusing their right of free expression. Once you open the Explorer and browse a website, trash information about sex and violence hits our eyes. People scold and flirt in the chat room and Bulletin Board System (BBS). When blog comes into being, netizens even transfer such vulgarity into their personal spaces, and show it to the public.In the era of the Information Technology boom, the farthest distance on earth is no longer the polar distance. The negative impacts brought about by cyberspace have imposed an unfilled gulf between souls. Since we cannot communicate to each other like before, the distance between people’s hearts has become the farthest distance on earth.1.The most ridiculous part of the anecdote is that（） .2.According to the author, Information Technology（） .3.The author believes that the booming of IT in modern society（） .4.The prosperity of blog does not help us to touch each other because（） .5.The author believes that in the era of the Information Technology boom the distance between people’s hearts has become the farthest distance on earth because（） .

When television is good, nothing—not the theatre, not the magazines, or newspapers—nothing is better. But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there without a book, magazine, newspaper, or anything else to distract you and keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that you will observe a vast wasteland. You will see a procession of game shows, violence, audience participation shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, more violence, sadism, murder, Western bad men, Western good men, private eyes, gangster, still more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly, commercials that scream and offend. And most of all, boredom. True, you will see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, try it.Is there no room on television to teach, to inform, to uplift, to stretch, to enlarge the capacities of our children? Is there no room for programs to deepen the children’s understanding of children in other lands? Is there no room for a children’s news show explaining something about the world for them at their level of understanding? Is there no room for reading the great literature of the past, teaching them the great traditions of freedom? There are some fine children’s shows, but they are drowned out in the massive doses of cartoons, violence, and more violence. Must these be your trademarks? Search your conscience and see whether you cannot offer more to your young children whose future you guard so many hours each and every day.There are many people in this great country, and you must serve all of us. You will get no argument from me if you say that, given a choice between a Western and a symphony, more people will watch the Western. I like Westerns and private eyes, too. But a steady diet for the whole country is obviously not in the public interest. We all know that people would more often prefer to be entertained than stimulated or informed. But your obligations are not satisfied if you look only to popularity as a test of what to broadcast. You are not only in show business ; you are free to communicate ideas as well as to give relaxation. You must provide a wider range of choices, more diversity, more alternatives. It is not enough to cater to the nation’s whims—you must also serve the nation’s needs. The people own the air. They own it as much in prime evening time as they do at six o’clock in the morning. For every hour that the people give you—you owe them something. I intend to see that your debt is paid with service.1.What the author advises us to do is to（） .2.What seems to have offended the author most on television is（） .3.As far as children are concerned, the author’s chief complaint is that（） 4.According to the author, it is in the public interest to（） .5.It is the obligation of television business to（） .

In his typically American open style of communication, Mr. Hayes confronted Isabeta about not looking at him. Reluctantly, she explained why. As a newcomer from Mexico, she had been taught to avoid eye contact as a mark of respect to authority figures, teachers, employers, parents. Mr. Hayes did not know this. He then informed her that most Americans interpret lack of eye contact as disrespect and deviousness. Ultimately, he convinced Isabela to try and change her habit, which she slowly did.People from many Asian, Latin American, and Caribbean cultures also avoid eye contact as a sign of respect. Many African Americans, especially from the South, observe this custom, too. A master’s thesis by Samuel Avoian, a graduate student at Central Missouri State University, tells how misinterpreting eye-contact customs can have a negative impact when white football coaches recruit African American players for the teams.He reports that, when speaking, white communicators usually look away from the listener, only periodically glancing at them. They do the opposite when listening. They are expected to look at the speaker all the time.Many African Americans communicate in an opposite way. When speaking, they tend to constantly stare at the listener; when listening, they mostly look away. Therefore, if white sports recruiters are not informed about these significant differences, they can be misled about interest and attentiveness when interviewing prospective African American ball players.In multicultural America, issues of eye contact have brought about social conflicts of two different kinds in many urban centers, non-Korean customers became angry when Korean shopkeepers did not look at them directly. The customers translated the lack of eye contact as a sign of disrespect, a habit blamed for contributing to the open confrontation taking place between some Asians and African Americans in New York, Texas, and California. Many teachers too have provided stories about classroom conflicts based on their misunderstanding Asian and Latin American children lack of eye contact as being disrespectful.On the other hand, direct eye contact has now taken on a new meaning among the younger generation and across ethnic borders. Particularly in urban centers, when one teenager looks directly at another, this is considered a provocation, sometimes called mad-dogging, and can lead to physical conflict.Mad-dogging has become the source of many campus conflicts. In one high school, it resulted in a fight between Cambodian newcomers and African-American students. The Cambodians had been staring at the other students merely to learn how Americans behave, yet the others misinterpreted the Cambodians’ intentions and the fight began.Mad-dogging seems to be connected with the avoidance of eye contact as a sign of respect. Thus, in the urban contemporary youth scene, if one looks directly at another, this disrespects, or “disses,” that person. Much like the archaic phrase “I demand satisfaction,” which became the overture to a duel. Mad-dogging may become a prelude to a physical encounter.At the entrances to Universal Studio’s “City Walk” attraction in Los Angeles, they have posted Code of Conduct signs. The second rule warns against “physically over bally threatening any person, fighting, annoying others through noisy or boisterous activities or by unnecessary staring...”1.Many African Americans from the South（） .2.When listening to the others, white communicators tend to（） .3.Many customers in American cities are angry with Korean shopkeepers because（） .4.Mad-dogging refers to（） .5.The archaic phrase, “I demand satisfaction”（） .

British food has a good reputation, but English cooking has a bad one. It is difficult to explain the reason for this. Unfortunately, however, superb raw ingredients are often mined from the kitchen so that they come to the table without any of the natural flavor and goodness.This bad reputation discourages a lot of people from eating in an English restaurant. If they do go to one, they are usually full of prejudice against the food. It is a pity, because there are excellent cooks in England, excellent restaurants, and excellent home-cooking. How, then, has the bad reputation been built up?Perhaps one reason is that Britain’s Industrial Revolution occurred very early, in the middle of the nineteenth century. As a result; the quality of food changed too. This was because Britain stopped being a largely agricultural country. The population of the towns increased enormously between 1840 and 1870, and people could no longer grow their own food, or buy it flesh from a farm. Huge quantities of food had to be taken to the towns, and a lot of it lost its freshness on the way.This lack of freshness was disguised by “dressing up” the food. The rich middle classes ate 16ng elaborate meals which were cooked for them by French chefs. French became, and has remained, the official language of the dining room. Out-of-season delicacies were served in spite of their expense, for there were a large number of extremely wealthy people who wanted to establish themselves socially. The “look” of the food was more important than its taste.In the 1930s, the supply of servant began to decrease. People still tried to produce complicated dishes, however, but they economized on the preparation time. The Second World War made things even worse by making raw ingredients extremely scarce. As a result, there were many women who never had the opportunity to choose a piece of meat from a well-stocked butcher’s shop, but were content and grateful to accept anything that was offered to them.Food rationing continued in Britain until the early 1950s. It was only after this had stopped, and butter, eggs and cream became more plentiful, and it was possible to travel abroad again and taste other ways of preparing food, that the English difference to eating became replaced by a new enthusiasm for it.1.According to the author, it is difficult to explain（） .2.The negative effect of Britain’s Industrial Revolution on English cooking is that（） .3.As a result of the Industrial Revolution,（） .4.The Second World War worsened the problem because（） .5.A new enthusiasm for eating emerged in Britain（） .

During her two-week stay in Beijing, Elizabeth never（） a chrome (chance) to practice her Chinese.

He told a story about his sister who was in a sad（） when she was ill and had no money.

My grandmother has been going to a better dentist, so this（） problems she is having with her dentures.

After failing his mid-term exams, Jeremy was（） face his parents.

Not until the 1980s（） in Beijing start to find ways to preserve historic buildings from destruction.

It must guarantee freedom of expression, to the end that all（） to the flow of ideas shall be removed.

There is（） conflicting information on how much iron women need in their diet.

The（） emphasis on exams is by far the wont form of competition in schools.

Men often wait longer to get help for medical problems than women, and （）, women live about six years longer than men on an average.

The paint on the clown’s face（） that it scared the children he was trying to entertain.

暂未登录

学员用户尊享特权

老师批改作业做题助教答疑学员专用题库高频考点梳理

上一页 1 2 3 4 5 6 下一页