首页 > 题库 > 天津师范大学
选择学校
A B C D F G H J K L M N Q S T W X Y Z

The translator must have an excellent, up-to-date knowledge of his source languages, full facility in the handling of his target language, which will be his mother tongue or language of habitual(1)and a knowledge and understanding of the latest subject-matter in his field of specialization.This is, as it were, his professional equipment, (2)this, it is desirable that he should have an inquiring mind, wide interests, a good memory and the ability to grasp quickly the basic principles of new developments. He should be willing to work(3)his own, often at high speeds, but should be humble enough to consult other(4)his own knowledge not always prove adequate to the task in hand. He should be able to type fairly quickly and accurately and, if he is working mainly for publication, should have more than a nodding(5)with printing techniques and proof-reading. If he is working basically as an information translator, let us say, for an industrial firm, he should have the flexibility of mind to enable him to(6)rapidly from one source language to another, as well as from one subject-matter to another, since this ability is frequently(7)of him in such work.Bearing in mind the nature of the translator’s work, i.e, the processing of the written word, it is, strictly speaking(8)that he should be able to speak the language he is dealing with. If he does speak them, it is an advantage(9)a hindrance, but this skill is in many ways a luxury that he can(10)with. It is, however, desirable that he should have an approximate idea about the pronunciation of his source languages even if this is restricted to knowing how proper names and place names are pronounced.

查看试题

Crippling health care bills, long emergency-room waits and the inability to find a primary care physician just scratch the surface of the problems that patients face daily.Primary care should be the backbone of any health care system. Countries with appropriate primary care resources score highly when it comes to health outcomes and cost. The U.S. takes the opposite approach by emphasizing the specialist rather than the primary care physician.A recent study analyzed the providers who treat Medicare beneficiaries. The startling finding was that the average Medicare patient saw a total of seven doctors ---two primary care physicians and five specialists---in a given year. Contrary to popular belief, the more physicians taking care of you don’t guarantee better care. Actually, increasing fragmentation of care results in a corresponding rise in cost and medical errors.How did we let primary care slip so far? The key is how doctors are paid. Most physicians are paid whenever they perform a medical service. The more a physician does. Regardless of quality or outcome, the better he’s reimbursed. Moreover, the amount a physician receives leans heavily toward medical or surgical procedures. A specialists who performs a procedure in a 30-minute visit can be paid three times more than a primary care physician using that same 30 minutes to discuss a patient’s disease. Combine this fact with annual government threats to indiscriminately cut reimbursements,physicians are faces with no choice but to increase quantity to boost income.Primary care physicians who refuse to compromise quality are either driven out of business or to cash-only practices, further contributing to the decline of primary care.Medical students are not blind to this scenario. They see how heavily the reimbursement deck is stacked against primary care. The recent numbers show that since 1997, newly graduated U.S medical students who choose primary care as a career have declined by 50%. This trend results in emergency rooms being overwhelmed with patients without regular doctors.How do we fix this problem?It starts with reforming the physician reimbursement system. Remove the pressure for primary care physicians to squeeze in more patients per hour, and reward them for optimally managing their diseases and practicing evidence-based medicine. Make primary care more attractive to medical students by forgiving student loans for those who choose primary care as a career and reconciling the marked difference between specialist and primary care physician salaries.We’re at a point where primary care is needed more than ever. Within a few years, the first wave of the 76 million Baby Boomers will become eligible for Medicare. Patients older than 85, who need chronic care most, will rise by 50% this decade.Who will be there to treat them?1.The author’s chief concern about the current U.S health care system is(  ).  2.We learn from the passage that people tend to believe that(  ).3.Faced with the government threats to cut reimbursements indiscriminately primary care physicians have to (  ).  4.Why do many new medical graduates refuse to choose primary care as their career?5.What suggestion does the author give in order to provide better health care?

查看试题

There is nothing like the suggestion of a cancer risk to scare a parent, especially one of the over-educated, eco-conscious types. So you can imagine the reaction when a recent USA Today investigation of air quality around the canon’s schools singled out those in the smugly green village of Berkeley, Calif, as being among the worst in the country. The city’s public high school, as well as a number of daycare center, preschools, elementary and middle schools, fell in the lowest 10%. Industrial pollution in our town had supposedly turned students into living science experiment breathing in a laboratory’s worth of heavy metals like manganese, chromium and nickel each day. This is in a city that requires school cafeterias to serve organic meals. Great, I thought, organic lunch, toxic campus.Since December, when the report came out, the mayor, neighborhood activists and various parent-teacher associations have engaged in a fierce battle over its validity, over the guilt of the steed-casting factory on the western edge of town, over union jobs versus children’s health and over what, if anything, ought to be done. With all sides presenting their own experts armed with conflicting scientific studies, whom should parents believe? Is there truly a threat here? We asks one another as we dropped off our kids, and if so, how great it is? And how does it compare with the other, seemingly perpetual health scares we confront, like panic over lead in synthetic athletic fields? Rather than just another weird episode in the town that brought you protesting environmentalists, this latest drama is a trial for how today’s parents perceive risk, how we try to keep our kids safe---whether it’s possible to keep them safe---in what feels like an increasingly threatening world. It raises the question of what, in our time, “safe” could even mean.“There’s no way around the uncertainty”,says Kimberly Thompson, president of Kid Risk, a nonprofit group that studies children’s health. “That means your choices can matter, but it also means you aren’t going to know if they do.” A 2004 report in the journal Pediatrics explained that nervous parents have more to fear from fire, car accidents and drowning than from toxic chemical exposure. To which I say: Well, obviously. But such concrete hazards are beside the point. It's the dangers parents can’t---and may never-quantify that occur all of sudden. That’s why I’ve rid my cupboard of microwave food packed in bags coated with a potential cancer-causing substance, but although I’ve lived blocks from a major fault line for more than 12 years, I still haven’t bolted our bookcases to the living room wall.1.What does a recent investigation by USA Today reveal?2.What response did UAS Today’s report draw?3.How did parents feel in the face of the experts' studies?4.What is the view of the 2004 report in the journal Pediatrics'?5.Of the dangers in everyday life, the author thinks that people have most to fear from(  ).

查看试题

I am one of the many city people who are always saying that given the choice we would prefer to live in the country away from the dirt and noise of a large city. I have managed to convince myself that if it weren't for my job I would immediately head out for the open spaces and go back to nature in some sleepy village buried in the county. But how realistic is the dream?Cities can be frightening places. The majority of the population lives in massive tower blocks, noisy, dirty and impersonal. The sense of belonging to a community tends to disappear when you live fifteen floors up. All you can see from your window is sky, or other blocks of flats. Children become aggressive and nervous-cooped up at home all day, with nowhere to play; their mothers feel isolated from the rest of the world. Strangely enough, whereas in the past the inhabitants of one street all knew each other, nowadays people on the same floor in tower blocks don't even say hello to each other.Country life, on the other hand, differs from this kind of isolated existence in that a sense of community generally binds the inhabitants of small villages together. People have the advantage of knowing that there is always someone to turn to when they need help. But country life has disadvantages too. While it is true that you may be among friends in a village, it is also true that you are cut off from the exciting and in important events that take place in cities, there's little possibility of going to a new show or the latest movie. Shopping becomes a major problem, and for anything slightly out of the ordinary you have to go on an expedition to the nearest large town. The city-dweller who leaves for the country is often oppressed by a sense of unbearable stillness and quiet.What, then, is the answer? The country has the advantage of peace and quiet, but suffers from the disadvantage of being cut off, the city breeds a feeling of isolation and constant noise batters the senses. But one of its main advantages is that you are at the center of things, and that life doesn't come to an end at half-past nine at night. Some people have found (or rather bought) a compromise between the two: they have expressed their preference for the "quiet life" by leaving the suburbs and moving to villages within commuting distance of large cities. They generally have about as much sensitivity as the plastic flowers they leave behind-they are polluted with strange ideas about change and improvement which they force on to the unwilling original inhabitants of the villages.What then of my dreams of leaning on a cottage gate and murmuring "morning" to the locals as they pass by. I’m keen on the idea, but you see there's my cat, Toby. I'm not at all sure that he would take to all that fresh air and exercise in the long grass. I mean, can you see him mixing with all those hearty males down the farm? No, he would rather have the electric imitation-coal fire any evening.1.We get the impression from the first paragraph that the author (  ).  2.In the author’s opinion, the following may cause city people to be unhappy EXCEPT(  ).3.The passage implies that it is easy to buy to the following things in the country EXCEPT (  ).  4.According to the passage, which of the following adjectives best describes those people who work in large cities and live in villages (  ).  5.Do you think the author will move to the country?(  ).

查看试题

How we look and how we appear to others probably worries us more when we are in our teens or early twenties than at any other time in our life. Few of us are content to accept ourselves as we are, and few are brave enough to ignore the trends of fashion.Most fashion magazines or TV advertisements try to persuade us that we should dress in a certain way or behave in a certain manner. If we do, they tell us, we will be able to meet new people with confidence and deal with every situation confidently and without embarrassment. Changing fashion, of course, does not apply just to dress. A barber today does not cut a boy's hair in the same way as lie used to, and girls do not make up in the same way as their mothers and grandmothers did. The advertisers show us the latest fashionable styles and we are constantly under pressure to follow the fashion in case our friend think we are odd or dull.What cause fashions to change? Sometimes convenience or practical necessity or just the fancy of an influential person can establish a fashion. Take hats, for example. In cold climates, early buildings were cold inside, so people wore hats indoors as well as outside. In recent times, the late President Kennedy caused a depression in the American hat industry by not wearing hats: more American men followed his example.There is also cyclical pattern in fashion. In the 1920s in Europe and America, short skirts became fashionable. After World War Two, they dropped to ankle length. Then they got shorter and shorter the miniskirt was in fashion. After a few more years, skirts became longer again.Today, society is much freer and easier than it used to be. It is no longer necessary to dress like everyone else. Within reason, you can dress as you like or do our hair the way you like or do your hair the way you like instead of the way you should because it is the fashion. The popularity of jeans and the “untidy" look seems to be a reaction against the increasingly expensive fashion of the top fashion houses.At the same time, appearance is still important in certain circumstances, and then we must choose our clothes carefully. It would be foolish to go to an interview for a job in a law firm wearing jeans and a sweater and it would be discourteous to visit some distinguished scholar looking as if we were going to the beach or a night club. However, you need never feel depressed if you don't look like the latest fashion photo. Look around, you and you'll see that no else does either!1.The author thinks that people are (  ).2.Fashion magazines and TV advertisements seem to link fashion to (  ).  3.Causes of fashions are (  ).  4.Present-day society is much freer and easier because it emphasizes (  ).  5.Which is the main idea of the last paragraph?

查看试题

暂未登录

成为学员

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

本模块为学员专用
学员专享优势
老师批改作业 做题助教答疑
学员专用题库 高频考点梳理
成为学员