What distinguishes us one from another...

Americans no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter - culture as responsible for the decline of formal English. Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in education. Mr. McWhorter’’ s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the gradual disappearance of "whom", for example, to be natural and no more regrettable than the loss of the case - endings of Old English. But the cult of the authentic and the personal, "doing our own thing", has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly educated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English,talkings triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft. Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like, care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non -standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive--there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas. He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper. Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old -fashioned to most English- speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical education reforms--he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English "on paper plates instead of china". A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one. According to McWhorter, the decline of formal English

A．is inevitable in radical education reforms.
B． is but all too natural in language development
C．has caused the controversy over the counter- culture.
D．brought about changes in public attitudes in the 1960s.

单项选择题

It may seem an exaggeration to say that ambition is the linchpin of society, holding many of its different elements together, but it is not an exaggeration by much. Remove ambition and the essential elements of society seem to fly apart. Ambition, as opposed to mere fantasizing about desires, implies work and discipline to achieve goals, personal and social, of a kind society cannot survive without. Ambition is intimately connected with family, for men and women not only work partly for their families;husbands and wives are often ambitious for each other, but harbor some of their most eager ambitions for their children. Yet to have a family nowadays-with birth control readily available, and inflation a good economic argument against having children-is nearly an expression of ambition in itself. Ambition and futurity-a sense of building for tomorrow-are inescapable. Working, saving, planning-these, the daily aspects of ambition-have always been the distinguishing marks of a rising middle class. The attack against ambition is not incidentally an attack on the middle class and what it stands for. Like it or not, the middle class has done much of society’’s work in America;and it, the middle class, has from the beginning run on ambition. 　　It is not difficult to imagine a world stripped of ambition. It would probably be a kinder world:without demands and disappointments. People would have time for reflection. Such work as they did would not be for themselves but for the collectivity. Competition would never enter in. Conflict would be eliminated, tension become a thing of the past. The stress of creation would be at an end. The family would become superfluous as a social unit, with all its former power for bringing about neurosis drained away. Longevity would be increased, for fewer people would die of heart attack or stroke caused by confused endeavor. Anxiety would be extinct. Time would stretch on and on, with ambition long departed from the human heart. 　　We do not choose our parents, our historical epoch, the country of our birth or the immediate circumstances of our upbringing. We do not, most of us, choose to die;nor do we choose the time or conditions of our death. But within all this realm of choicelessness, we do choose how we shall live:courageously or in cowardice, honorably or dishonorably, with purpose or in drift. We decide what is important and what is trivial in life. We decide that what makes us significant is either what we do or what we refuse to do. But no matter how indifferent the universe may be to our choices and decisions, these choices and decisions are ours to make. We decide. We choose. And as we decide and choose, so are our lives formed. In the end, forming our own destiny is what ambition is about. The author holds ambition to be

A． the intuition of every social member.
B． the shared link between social units.
C． the vital part of the social machine.
D． the essential feature of social elements.

单项选择题

No company likes to be told it is contributing to the moral decline of a nation. "Is this what you intended to accomplish with your careers" Senator Robert Dole asked Time Warner executives last week. "You have sold your souls, but must you corrupt our nation and threaten our children as well" At Time Warner, however, such questions are simply the latest manifestation of the soul-searching that has involved the company ever since the company was born in 1990. It’’s a self-examination that has, at various times, involved issues of responsibility, creative freedom and the corporate bottom line. 　　At the core of this debate is chairman Gerald Levin,56,who took over for the late Steve Ross in 1992. On the financial front, Levin is under pressure to raise the stock price and reduce the company’’s mountainous debt, which will increase to $17.3 billion after two new cable deals close. He has promised to sell off some of the property and restructure the company, but investors are waiting impatiently. 　　The flap over rap is not making life any easier for him. Levin has consistently defended the company’’s rap music on the grounds of expression. In 1992, when Time Warner was under fire for releasing Ice-T’’s violent rap song Cop Killer, Levin described rap as a lawful expression of street culture, which deserves an outlet. "The test of any democratic society," he wrote in a Wall Street Journal column, "lies not in how well it can control expression but in whether it gives freedom of thought and expression the widest possible latitude, however disputable or irritating the results may sometimes be. We won’’t retreat in the face of any threats." 　　Levin would not comment on the debate last week, but there were signs that the chairman was backing off his hard-line stand, at least to some extent. During the discussion of rock singing verses at last month’’s stockholders’’ meeting, Levin asserted that" music is not the cause of society’’s ills" and even cited his son, a teacher in the Bronx, New York, who uses rap to communicate with students. But he talked as well about the" balanced struggle" between creative freedom and social responsibility, and he announced that the company would launch a drive to develop standards for distribution and labeling of potentially objectionable music. 　　The 15-member Time Warner board is generally supportive of Levin and his corporate strategy. But insiders say several of them have shown their concerns in this matter. "Some of us have known for many, many years that the freedoms under the First Amendment are not totally unlimited," says Luce."I think it is perhaps the case that some people associated with the company have only recently come to realize this." Senator Robert Dole criticized Time Warner for ___________.

A．its raising of the corporate stock price
B．its self-examination of soul
C．its neglect of social responsibility
D．its emphasis on creative freedom

单项选择题

For three decades we’’ve heard endlessly about the virtues of aerobic (increasing oxygen consumption) exercise. Medical authorities have praised running and jumping as the key to good health, and millions of Americans have taken to the treadmill(踏车) to reap the rewards. But the story is changing. Everyone from the American Heart Association to the surgeon general’’s office has recently embraced strength training as a complement to aerobics. And as weight lifting has gone mainstream, so has the once obscure practice known as "Super Slow" training. Enthusiasts claim that by pumping iron at a snail’’s pace-making each "rep"(repeat) last 14 seconds instead of the usual seven-you can safely place extraordinary demands on your muscles, and call forth an extraordinary response. Slow lifting may not be the only exercise you need, as some advocates believe, but the benefits are often dramatic. 　　Almost anyone can handle this routine. The only requirements are complete focus and a tolerance for deep muscular burn. Fox each exercise-leg press, bench press, shoulder press and so on-you set the machine to provide only moderate resistance. But as you draw out each rep, depriving yourself of impetus, the weight soon feels unbearable. Defying the impulse to stop, you keep going until you can’’t complete a rep. Then you sustain your vain effort for 10 more seconds while the weight sinks gradually toward its cradle. Intense Uncomfortable Totally. But once you embrace muscle failure as the goal of the workout, it can become almost pleasure. 　　The goal is not to burn calories while you’’re exercising but to make your body burn them all the time. Running a few miles many make you sweat, but it expends only 100 calories per mile, and it doesn’’t stimulate much bone or muscle development. Strength training doesn’’t burn many calories, either. But when you push a muscle to failure, you set off a pour of physiological changes. As the muscle recovers over several days, it will thicken-and the new muscle tissue will demand sustenance. By the time you add three pounds of muscle, your body requires an extra 9,000 calories a month just to break even. Hold your diet steady and, very quickly, you are vaporizing body fat. 　　One might have benefited from any strength-training program. But advocates insist the slow technique is safer and more effective than traditional methods. Many Americans have taken to treadmill for years by virtue of

A．Many Americans have taken to treadmill for years by virtue of
B． its greater consumption of oxygen.
C．the compliment paid by authorities.
D．the actual benefits from the exercise.

单项选择题

Americans no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter - culture as responsible for the decline of formal English. Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in education. Mr. McWhorter’’ s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the gradual disappearance of "whom", for example, to be natural and no more regrettable than the loss of the case - endings of Old English. But the cult of the authentic and the personal, "doing our own thing", has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly educated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English,talkings triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft. Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like, care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non -standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive--there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas. He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper. Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old -fashioned to most English- speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical education reforms--he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English "on paper plates instead of china". A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one. The word "talking" ( Line 6, Paragraph 3) denotes

A．modesty.
B．personality.
C． liveliness.
D．informality.

单项选择题

It may seem an exaggeration to say that ambition is the linchpin of society, holding many of its different elements together, but it is not an exaggeration by much. Remove ambition and the essential elements of society seem to fly apart. Ambition, as opposed to mere fantasizing about desires, implies work and discipline to achieve goals, personal and social, of a kind society cannot survive without. Ambition is intimately connected with family, for men and women not only work partly for their families;husbands and wives are often ambitious for each other, but harbor some of their most eager ambitions for their children. Yet to have a family nowadays-with birth control readily available, and inflation a good economic argument against having children-is nearly an expression of ambition in itself. Ambition and futurity-a sense of building for tomorrow-are inescapable. Working, saving, planning-these, the daily aspects of ambition-have always been the distinguishing marks of a rising middle class. The attack against ambition is not incidentally an attack on the middle class and what it stands for. Like it or not, the middle class has done much of society’’s work in America;and it, the middle class, has from the beginning run on ambition. 　　It is not difficult to imagine a world stripped of ambition. It would probably be a kinder world:without demands and disappointments. People would have time for reflection. Such work as they did would not be for themselves but for the collectivity. Competition would never enter in. Conflict would be eliminated, tension become a thing of the past. The stress of creation would be at an end. The family would become superfluous as a social unit, with all its former power for bringing about neurosis drained away. Longevity would be increased, for fewer people would die of heart attack or stroke caused by confused endeavor. Anxiety would be extinct. Time would stretch on and on, with ambition long departed from the human heart. 　　We do not choose our parents, our historical epoch, the country of our birth or the immediate circumstances of our upbringing. We do not, most of us, choose to die;nor do we choose the time or conditions of our death. But within all this realm of choicelessness, we do choose how we shall live:courageously or in cowardice, honorably or dishonorably, with purpose or in drift. We decide what is important and what is trivial in life. We decide that what makes us significant is either what we do or what we refuse to do. But no matter how indifferent the universe may be to our choices and decisions, these choices and decisions are ours to make. We decide. We choose. And as we decide and choose, so are our lives formed. In the end, forming our own destiny is what ambition is about. Ambition closely relates to family in that

A． its members hold great expectations of each other.
B．it’’s the right place for free revelation of ambitions.
C． it’’s what people are driving and competing for.
D． it serves as a shelter for concealing ambitions.

单项选择题

No company likes to be told it is contributing to the moral decline of a nation. "Is this what you intended to accomplish with your careers" Senator Robert Dole asked Time Warner executives last week. "You have sold your souls, but must you corrupt our nation and threaten our children as well" At Time Warner, however, such questions are simply the latest manifestation of the soul-searching that has involved the company ever since the company was born in 1990. It’’s a self-examination that has, at various times, involved issues of responsibility, creative freedom and the corporate bottom line. 　　At the core of this debate is chairman Gerald Levin,56,who took over for the late Steve Ross in 1992. On the financial front, Levin is under pressure to raise the stock price and reduce the company’’s mountainous debt, which will increase to $17.3 billion after two new cable deals close. He has promised to sell off some of the property and restructure the company, but investors are waiting impatiently. 　　The flap over rap is not making life any easier for him. Levin has consistently defended the company’’s rap music on the grounds of expression. In 1992, when Time Warner was under fire for releasing Ice-T’’s violent rap song Cop Killer, Levin described rap as a lawful expression of street culture, which deserves an outlet. "The test of any democratic society," he wrote in a Wall Street Journal column, "lies not in how well it can control expression but in whether it gives freedom of thought and expression the widest possible latitude, however disputable or irritating the results may sometimes be. We won’’t retreat in the face of any threats." 　　Levin would not comment on the debate last week, but there were signs that the chairman was backing off his hard-line stand, at least to some extent. During the discussion of rock singing verses at last month’’s stockholders’’ meeting, Levin asserted that" music is not the cause of society’’s ills" and even cited his son, a teacher in the Bronx, New York, who uses rap to communicate with students. But he talked as well about the" balanced struggle" between creative freedom and social responsibility, and he announced that the company would launch a drive to develop standards for distribution and labeling of potentially objectionable music. 　　The 15-member Time Warner board is generally supportive of Levin and his corporate strategy. But insiders say several of them have shown their concerns in this matter. "Some of us have known for many, many years that the freedoms under the First Amendment are not totally unlimited," says Luce."I think it is perhaps the case that some people associated with the company have only recently come to realize this." According to the passage, which of the following is TRUE ___________.

A．Luce is a spokesman of Time Warner.
B．Gerald Levin is liable to compromise.
C．Time Warner is united as one in the face of the debate.
D．Steve Ross is no longer alive.

单项选择题

It may seem an exaggeration to say that ambition is the linchpin of society, holding many of its different elements together, but it is not an exaggeration by much. Remove ambition and the essential elements of society seem to fly apart. Ambition, as opposed to mere fantasizing about desires, implies work and discipline to achieve goals, personal and social, of a kind society cannot survive without. Ambition is intimately connected with family, for men and women not only work partly for their families;husbands and wives are often ambitious for each other, but harbor some of their most eager ambitions for their children. Yet to have a family nowadays-with birth control readily available, and inflation a good economic argument against having children-is nearly an expression of ambition in itself. Ambition and futurity-a sense of building for tomorrow-are inescapable. Working, saving, planning-these, the daily aspects of ambition-have always been the distinguishing marks of a rising middle class. The attack against ambition is not incidentally an attack on the middle class and what it stands for. Like it or not, the middle class has done much of society’’s work in America;and it, the middle class, has from the beginning run on ambition. 　　It is not difficult to imagine a world stripped of ambition. It would probably be a kinder world:without demands and disappointments. People would have time for reflection. Such work as they did would not be for themselves but for the collectivity. Competition would never enter in. Conflict would be eliminated, tension become a thing of the past. The stress of creation would be at an end. The family would become superfluous as a social unit, with all its former power for bringing about neurosis drained away. Longevity would be increased, for fewer people would die of heart attack or stroke caused by confused endeavor. Anxiety would be extinct. Time would stretch on and on, with ambition long departed from the human heart. 　　We do not choose our parents, our historical epoch, the country of our birth or the immediate circumstances of our upbringing. We do not, most of us, choose to die;nor do we choose the time or conditions of our death. But within all this realm of choicelessness, we do choose how we shall live:courageously or in cowardice, honorably or dishonorably, with purpose or in drift. We decide what is important and what is trivial in life. We decide that what makes us significant is either what we do or what we refuse to do. But no matter how indifferent the universe may be to our choices and decisions, these choices and decisions are ours to make. We decide. We choose. And as we decide and choose, so are our lives formed. In the end, forming our own destiny is what ambition is about. What distinguishes us one from another seems to be

A． the keen fantasy of gaining honor and fortune.
B．the determination of one’’s goal and way in life.
C．the reflection on general indifference to ambition.
D．the comprehension of the implications of ambition.

单项选择题

Americans no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter - culture as responsible for the decline of formal English. Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in education. Mr. McWhorter’’ s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the gradual disappearance of "whom", for example, to be natural and no more regrettable than the loss of the case - endings of Old English. But the cult of the authentic and the personal, "doing our own thing", has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly educated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English,talkings triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft. Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like, care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non -standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive--there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas. He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper. Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old -fashioned to most English- speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical education reforms--he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English "on paper plates instead of china". A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one. To which of the following statements would McWhorter most likely agree

A． Logical thinking is not necessarily related to the way we talk.
B．Black English can be more expressive than standard English.
C．Non - standard varieties of human language are just as entertaining.
D．Of all the varieties, standard English can best convey complex ideas.

单项选择题

It may seem an exaggeration to say that ambition is the linchpin of society, holding many of its different elements together, but it is not an exaggeration by much. Remove ambition and the essential elements of society seem to fly apart. Ambition, as opposed to mere fantasizing about desires, implies work and discipline to achieve goals, personal and social, of a kind society cannot survive without. Ambition is intimately connected with family, for men and women not only work partly for their families;husbands and wives are often ambitious for each other, but harbor some of their most eager ambitions for their children. Yet to have a family nowadays-with birth control readily available, and inflation a good economic argument against having children-is nearly an expression of ambition in itself. Ambition and futurity-a sense of building for tomorrow-are inescapable. Working, saving, planning-these, the daily aspects of ambition-have always been the distinguishing marks of a rising middle class. The attack against ambition is not incidentally an attack on the middle class and what it stands for. Like it or not, the middle class has done much of society’’s work in America;and it, the middle class, has from the beginning run on ambition. 　　It is not difficult to imagine a world stripped of ambition. It would probably be a kinder world:without demands and disappointments. People would have time for reflection. Such work as they did would not be for themselves but for the collectivity. Competition would never enter in. Conflict would be eliminated, tension become a thing of the past. The stress of creation would be at an end. The family would become superfluous as a social unit, with all its former power for bringing about neurosis drained away. Longevity would be increased, for fewer people would die of heart attack or stroke caused by confused endeavor. Anxiety would be extinct. Time would stretch on and on, with ambition long departed from the human heart. 　　We do not choose our parents, our historical epoch, the country of our birth or the immediate circumstances of our upbringing. We do not, most of us, choose to die;nor do we choose the time or conditions of our death. But within all this realm of choicelessness, we do choose how we shall live:courageously or in cowardice, honorably or dishonorably, with purpose or in drift. We decide what is important and what is trivial in life. We decide that what makes us significant is either what we do or what we refuse to do. But no matter how indifferent the universe may be to our choices and decisions, these choices and decisions are ours to make. We decide. We choose. And as we decide and choose, so are our lives formed. In the end, forming our own destiny is what ambition is about. The middle class is attacked owing to all of the following EXCEPT that

A． ambition has increasingly become its domain.
B． ambition has brought about its emergence.
C．its contribution to society has invited jealousy.
D．its pursuit of success in life marks its existence.

单项选择题

No company likes to be told it is contributing to the moral decline of a nation. "Is this what you intended to accomplish with your careers" Senator Robert Dole asked Time Warner executives last week. "You have sold your souls, but must you corrupt our nation and threaten our children as well" At Time Warner, however, such questions are simply the latest manifestation of the soul-searching that has involved the company ever since the company was born in 1990. It’’s a self-examination that has, at various times, involved issues of responsibility, creative freedom and the corporate bottom line. 　　At the core of this debate is chairman Gerald Levin,56,who took over for the late Steve Ross in 1992. On the financial front, Levin is under pressure to raise the stock price and reduce the company’’s mountainous debt, which will increase to $17.3 billion after two new cable deals close. He has promised to sell off some of the property and restructure the company, but investors are waiting impatiently. 　　The flap over rap is not making life any easier for him. Levin has consistently defended the company’’s rap music on the grounds of expression. In 1992, when Time Warner was under fire for releasing Ice-T’’s violent rap song Cop Killer, Levin described rap as a lawful expression of street culture, which deserves an outlet. "The test of any democratic society," he wrote in a Wall Street Journal column, "lies not in how well it can control expression but in whether it gives freedom of thought and expression the widest possible latitude, however disputable or irritating the results may sometimes be. We won’’t retreat in the face of any threats." 　　Levin would not comment on the debate last week, but there were signs that the chairman was backing off his hard-line stand, at least to some extent. During the discussion of rock singing verses at last month’’s stockholders’’ meeting, Levin asserted that" music is not the cause of society’’s ills" and even cited his son, a teacher in the Bronx, New York, who uses rap to communicate with students. But he talked as well about the" balanced struggle" between creative freedom and social responsibility, and he announced that the company would launch a drive to develop standards for distribution and labeling of potentially objectionable music. 　　The 15-member Time Warner board is generally supportive of Levin and his corporate strategy. But insiders say several of them have shown their concerns in this matter. "Some of us have known for many, many years that the freedoms under the First Amendment are not totally unlimited," says Luce."I think it is perhaps the case that some people associated with the company have only recently come to realize this." In face of the recent attacks on the company , the chairman ___________.

A．stuck to a strong stand to defend freedom of expression
B．softened his tone and adopted some new policy
C．changed his attitude and yielded to objection
D．received more support from the 15-member board

单项选择题

For three decades we’’ve heard endlessly about the virtues of aerobic (increasing oxygen consumption) exercise. Medical authorities have praised running and jumping as the key to good health, and millions of Americans have taken to the treadmill(踏车) to reap the rewards. But the story is changing. Everyone from the American Heart Association to the surgeon general’’s office has recently embraced strength training as a complement to aerobics. And as weight lifting has gone mainstream, so has the once obscure practice known as "Super Slow" training. Enthusiasts claim that by pumping iron at a snail’’s pace-making each "rep"(repeat) last 14 seconds instead of the usual seven-you can safely place extraordinary demands on your muscles, and call forth an extraordinary response. Slow lifting may not be the only exercise you need, as some advocates believe, but the benefits are often dramatic. 　　Almost anyone can handle this routine. The only requirements are complete focus and a tolerance for deep muscular burn. Fox each exercise-leg press, bench press, shoulder press and so on-you set the machine to provide only moderate resistance. But as you draw out each rep, depriving yourself of impetus, the weight soon feels unbearable. Defying the impulse to stop, you keep going until you can’’t complete a rep. Then you sustain your vain effort for 10 more seconds while the weight sinks gradually toward its cradle. Intense Uncomfortable Totally. But once you embrace muscle failure as the goal of the workout, it can become almost pleasure. 　　The goal is not to burn calories while you’’re exercising but to make your body burn them all the time. Running a few miles many make you sweat, but it expends only 100 calories per mile, and it doesn’’t stimulate much bone or muscle development. Strength training doesn’’t burn many calories, either. But when you push a muscle to failure, you set off a pour of physiological changes. As the muscle recovers over several days, it will thicken-and the new muscle tissue will demand sustenance. By the time you add three pounds of muscle, your body requires an extra 9,000 calories a month just to break even. Hold your diet steady and, very quickly, you are vaporizing body fat. 　　One might have benefited from any strength-training program. But advocates insist the slow technique is safer and more effective than traditional methods. According to the author," Super Slow" training

A．has been misunderstood for decades.
B．has been widely accepted recently
C． has been the basis of weight lifting.
D．has become the nucleus of aerobics.

单项选择题

Americans no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter - culture as responsible for the decline of formal English. Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in education. Mr. McWhorter’’ s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the gradual disappearance of "whom", for example, to be natural and no more regrettable than the loss of the case - endings of Old English. But the cult of the authentic and the personal, "doing our own thing", has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly educated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English,talkings triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft. Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like, care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non -standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive--there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas. He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper. Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old -fashioned to most English- speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical education reforms--he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English "on paper plates instead of china". A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one. The description of Russians’’ love of memorizing poetry shows the author’’ s

A．interest in their language.
B．appreciation of their efforts.
C．admiration for their memory.
D．contempt for their old -fashionedness.

单项选择题

For three decades we’’ve heard endlessly about the virtues of aerobic (increasing oxygen consumption) exercise. Medical authorities have praised running and jumping as the key to good health, and millions of Americans have taken to the treadmill(踏车) to reap the rewards. But the story is changing. Everyone from the American Heart Association to the surgeon general’’s office has recently embraced strength training as a complement to aerobics. And as weight lifting has gone mainstream, so has the once obscure practice known as "Super Slow" training. Enthusiasts claim that by pumping iron at a snail’’s pace-making each "rep"(repeat) last 14 seconds instead of the usual seven-you can safely place extraordinary demands on your muscles, and call forth an extraordinary response. Slow lifting may not be the only exercise you need, as some advocates believe, but the benefits are often dramatic. 　　Almost anyone can handle this routine. The only requirements are complete focus and a tolerance for deep muscular burn. Fox each exercise-leg press, bench press, shoulder press and so on-you set the machine to provide only moderate resistance. But as you draw out each rep, depriving yourself of impetus, the weight soon feels unbearable. Defying the impulse to stop, you keep going until you can’’t complete a rep. Then you sustain your vain effort for 10 more seconds while the weight sinks gradually toward its cradle. Intense Uncomfortable Totally. But once you embrace muscle failure as the goal of the workout, it can become almost pleasure. 　　The goal is not to burn calories while you’’re exercising but to make your body burn them all the time. Running a few miles many make you sweat, but it expends only 100 calories per mile, and it doesn’’t stimulate much bone or muscle development. Strength training doesn’’t burn many calories, either. But when you push a muscle to failure, you set off a pour of physiological changes. As the muscle recovers over several days, it will thicken-and the new muscle tissue will demand sustenance. By the time you add three pounds of muscle, your body requires an extra 9,000 calories a month just to break even. Hold your diet steady and, very quickly, you are vaporizing body fat. 　　One might have benefited from any strength-training program. But advocates insist the slow technique is safer and more effective than traditional methods. The phrase "to break even" ( Line 7, Par. 3 ) most probably means

A． to upset physical energy balance.
B． to disturb the calmness of the body.
C．to gain a greater profit than a loss
D． to make neither a profit nor a loss.

单项选择题

It may seem an exaggeration to say that ambition is the linchpin of society, holding many of its different elements together, but it is not an exaggeration by much. Remove ambition and the essential elements of society seem to fly apart. Ambition, as opposed to mere fantasizing about desires, implies work and discipline to achieve goals, personal and social, of a kind society cannot survive without. Ambition is intimately connected with family, for men and women not only work partly for their families;husbands and wives are often ambitious for each other, but harbor some of their most eager ambitions for their children. Yet to have a family nowadays-with birth control readily available, and inflation a good economic argument against having children-is nearly an expression of ambition in itself. Ambition and futurity-a sense of building for tomorrow-are inescapable. Working, saving, planning-these, the daily aspects of ambition-have always been the distinguishing marks of a rising middle class. The attack against ambition is not incidentally an attack on the middle class and what it stands for. Like it or not, the middle class has done much of society’’s work in America;and it, the middle class, has from the beginning run on ambition. 　　It is not difficult to imagine a world stripped of ambition. It would probably be a kinder world:without demands and disappointments. People would have time for reflection. Such work as they did would not be for themselves but for the collectivity. Competition would never enter in. Conflict would be eliminated, tension become a thing of the past. The stress of creation would be at an end. The family would become superfluous as a social unit, with all its former power for bringing about neurosis drained away. Longevity would be increased, for fewer people would die of heart attack or stroke caused by confused endeavor. Anxiety would be extinct. Time would stretch on and on, with ambition long departed from the human heart. 　　We do not choose our parents, our historical epoch, the country of our birth or the immediate circumstances of our upbringing. We do not, most of us, choose to die;nor do we choose the time or conditions of our death. But within all this realm of choicelessness, we do choose how we shall live:courageously or in cowardice, honorably or dishonorably, with purpose or in drift. We decide what is important and what is trivial in life. We decide that what makes us significant is either what we do or what we refuse to do. But no matter how indifferent the universe may be to our choices and decisions, these choices and decisions are ours to make. We decide. We choose. And as we decide and choose, so are our lives formed. In the end, forming our own destiny is what ambition is about. The author believes that without ambition

A．our world would be stern, calm and stable.
B．our work motives would be unquestionable.
C． our life would be much lighter and longer.
D．our life would become still and tedious.

单项选择题

Americans no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter - culture as responsible for the decline of formal English. Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in education. Mr. McWhorter’’ s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the gradual disappearance of "whom", for example, to be natural and no more regrettable than the loss of the case - endings of Old English. But the cult of the authentic and the personal, "doing our own thing", has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly educated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English,talkings triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft. Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like, care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non -standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive--there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas. He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper. Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old -fashioned to most English- speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical education reforms--he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English "on paper plates instead of china". A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one. According to the last paragraph, "paper plates" is to "china" as

A．"temporary" is to "permanent".
B．"radical" is to "conservative".
C． "functional" is to "artistic"
D．"humble" is to "noble".

单项选择题

No company likes to be told it is contributing to the moral decline of a nation. "Is this what you intended to accomplish with your careers" Senator Robert Dole asked Time Warner executives last week. "You have sold your souls, but must you corrupt our nation and threaten our children as well" At Time Warner, however, such questions are simply the latest manifestation of the soul-searching that has involved the company ever since the company was born in 1990. It’’s a self-examination that has, at various times, involved issues of responsibility, creative freedom and the corporate bottom line. 　　At the core of this debate is chairman Gerald Levin,56,who took over for the late Steve Ross in 1992. On the financial front, Levin is under pressure to raise the stock price and reduce the company’’s mountainous debt, which will increase to $17.3 billion after two new cable deals close. He has promised to sell off some of the property and restructure the company, but investors are waiting impatiently. 　　The flap over rap is not making life any easier for him. Levin has consistently defended the company’’s rap music on the grounds of expression. In 1992, when Time Warner was under fire for releasing Ice-T’’s violent rap song Cop Killer, Levin described rap as a lawful expression of street culture, which deserves an outlet. "The test of any democratic society," he wrote in a Wall Street Journal column, "lies not in how well it can control expression but in whether it gives freedom of thought and expression the widest possible latitude, however disputable or irritating the results may sometimes be. We won’’t retreat in the face of any threats." 　　Levin would not comment on the debate last week, but there were signs that the chairman was backing off his hard-line stand, at least to some extent. During the discussion of rock singing verses at last month’’s stockholders’’ meeting, Levin asserted that" music is not the cause of society’’s ills" and even cited his son, a teacher in the Bronx, New York, who uses rap to communicate with students. But he talked as well about the" balanced struggle" between creative freedom and social responsibility, and he announced that the company would launch a drive to develop standards for distribution and labeling of potentially objectionable music. 　　The 15-member Time Warner board is generally supportive of Levin and his corporate strategy. But insiders say several of them have shown their concerns in this matter. "Some of us have known for many, many years that the freedoms under the First Amendment are not totally unlimited," says Luce."I think it is perhaps the case that some people associated with the company have only recently come to realize this." The best title for this passage could be ___________.

A．A Company under Fire
B．A Debate on Moral Decline
C．A Lawful Outlet of Street Culture
D．A Form of Creative Freedom

单项选择题

For three decades we’’ve heard endlessly about the virtues of aerobic (increasing oxygen consumption) exercise. Medical authorities have praised running and jumping as the key to good health, and millions of Americans have taken to the treadmill(踏车) to reap the rewards. But the story is changing. Everyone from the American Heart Association to the surgeon general’’s office has recently embraced strength training as a complement to aerobics. And as weight lifting has gone mainstream, so has the once obscure practice known as "Super Slow" training. Enthusiasts claim that by pumping iron at a snail’’s pace-making each "rep"(repeat) last 14 seconds instead of the usual seven-you can safely place extraordinary demands on your muscles, and call forth an extraordinary response. Slow lifting may not be the only exercise you need, as some advocates believe, but the benefits are often dramatic. 　　Almost anyone can handle this routine. The only requirements are complete focus and a tolerance for deep muscular burn. Fox each exercise-leg press, bench press, shoulder press and so on-you set the machine to provide only moderate resistance. But as you draw out each rep, depriving yourself of impetus, the weight soon feels unbearable. Defying the impulse to stop, you keep going until you can’’t complete a rep. Then you sustain your vain effort for 10 more seconds while the weight sinks gradually toward its cradle. Intense Uncomfortable Totally. But once you embrace muscle failure as the goal of the workout, it can become almost pleasure. 　　The goal is not to burn calories while you’’re exercising but to make your body burn them all the time. Running a few miles many make you sweat, but it expends only 100 calories per mile, and it doesn’’t stimulate much bone or muscle development. Strength training doesn’’t burn many calories, either. But when you push a muscle to failure, you set off a pour of physiological changes. As the muscle recovers over several days, it will thicken-and the new muscle tissue will demand sustenance. By the time you add three pounds of muscle, your body requires an extra 9,000 calories a month just to break even. Hold your diet steady and, very quickly, you are vaporizing body fat. 　　One might have benefited from any strength-training program. But advocates insist the slow technique is safer and more effective than traditional methods. In practicing slow lifting, one has to

A．complete each rep with great demands for his muscles.
B． bear the unendurable reaction caused by the training.
C．suffer the bitter effect called forth by the exercise.
D． exert unusual pressure on his legs and shoulders.

单项选择题

For three decades we’’ve heard endlessly about the virtues of aerobic (increasing oxygen consumption) exercise. Medical authorities have praised running and jumping as the key to good health, and millions of Americans have taken to the treadmill(踏车) to reap the rewards. But the story is changing. Everyone from the American Heart Association to the surgeon general’’s office has recently embraced strength training as a complement to aerobics. And as weight lifting has gone mainstream, so has the once obscure practice known as "Super Slow" training. Enthusiasts claim that by pumping iron at a snail’’s pace-making each "rep"(repeat) last 14 seconds instead of the usual seven-you can safely place extraordinary demands on your muscles, and call forth an extraordinary response. Slow lifting may not be the only exercise you need, as some advocates believe, but the benefits are often dramatic. 　　Almost anyone can handle this routine. The only requirements are complete focus and a tolerance for deep muscular burn. Fox each exercise-leg press, bench press, shoulder press and so on-you set the machine to provide only moderate resistance. But as you draw out each rep, depriving yourself of impetus, the weight soon feels unbearable. Defying the impulse to stop, you keep going until you can’’t complete a rep. Then you sustain your vain effort for 10 more seconds while the weight sinks gradually toward its cradle. Intense Uncomfortable Totally. But once you embrace muscle failure as the goal of the workout, it can become almost pleasure. 　　The goal is not to burn calories while you’’re exercising but to make your body burn them all the time. Running a few miles many make you sweat, but it expends only 100 calories per mile, and it doesn’’t stimulate much bone or muscle development. Strength training doesn’’t burn many calories, either. But when you push a muscle to failure, you set off a pour of physiological changes. As the muscle recovers over several days, it will thicken-and the new muscle tissue will demand sustenance. By the time you add three pounds of muscle, your body requires an extra 9,000 calories a month just to break even. Hold your diet steady and, very quickly, you are vaporizing body fat. 　　One might have benefited from any strength-training program. But advocates insist the slow technique is safer and more effective than traditional methods. Slow weight lifters are required to make each rep

A．without using any driving force.
B．without movement of their body
C．with unbearable iron weights.
D．with the feeling of muscle failure.

你可能感兴趣的试题