type
status
date
slug
summary
tags
category
icon
password
前言:版权不属于我,请随意转载。
Section I Use of English
Manpower Inc., with 560 000 workers, is the world’s largest temporary employment agency. Every morning, its people 1 into the offices and factories of America, seeking a day’s work for a day’s pay.
One day at a time. 2 industrial giants like General Motors and IBM struggle to survive 3 reducing the number of employees, Manpower, based in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is booming.
4 its economy continues to recover, the US is increasingly becoming a nation of part- timers and temporary workers. This “ 5 ” work force is the most important 6 in American business today, and it is 7 changing the relationship between people and their jobs. The phenomenon provides a way for companies to remain globally competitive 8 avoiding market cycles and the growing burdens 9 by employment rules, health care costs and pension plans. For workers it can mean an end to the security, benefits and sense of 10 that came from being a loyal employee.
翻译:
拥有56万名员工的Manpower公司是世界上最大的临时就业机构。每天早上,它的员工进入美国的办公室和工厂,为了日结工资寻找日结的工作。
长期以来,像通用汽车和IBM这样的两大工业巨头为了生存而减少雇员数量,总部位于威斯康星州密尔沃基的Manpower公司正在蓬勃发展。
美国经济继续复苏,美国正日益成为一个兼职工人和临时工人的国家。这种“可抛弃的”劳动力是当今美国商业中最重要的发展趋势,它正在改变人与工作之间的关系。这种现象为企业提供了一种保持全球竞争力的途径,也避免了市场周期和就业规则、医疗保健费用和养老金计划造成的日益沉重的负担。对于员工来说,这可能意味着一个忠诚员工所带来的安全感、福利和意识的终结。
- [A]swarm [B]stride [C]separate [D]slip
- [A]For [B]Because [C]As [D]Since
- [A]from [B]in [C]on [D]by
- [A]Even though [B]Now that [C]If only [D]Provided that
- [A]durable [B]disposable [C]available [D]transferable
- [A]approach [B]flow [C]fashion [D]trend
- [A]instantly [B]reversely [C]fundamentally [D]sufficiently
- [A]but [B]while [C] and [D]whereas
- [A]imposed [B]restricted [C]illustrated [D]confined
10.[A]excitement [B]conviction [C]enthusiasm [D]importance
Section II Reading Comprehension
Part A
Text 1
It was 3: 45 in the morning when the vote was finally taken. After six months of arguing and final 16 hours of hot parliamentary debates, Australia’s Northern Territory became the first legal authority in the world to allow doctors to take the lives of incurably ill patients who wish to die. The measure passed by the convincing vote of 15 to 10. Almost immediately word flashed on the Internet and was picked up, half a world away, by John Hofsess, executive director of the Right to Die Society of Canada. He sent it on via the group’s on-line service, Death NET. Says Hofsess: “We posted bulletins all day long, because of course this isn’t just something that happened in Australia. It’s world history.”
The full import may take a while to sink in. The NT Rights of the Terminally Ill law has left physicians and citizens alike trying to deal with its moral and practical implications. Some have breathed sighs of relief, others, including churches, right-to-life groups and the Australian Medical Association, bitterly attacked the bill and the haste of its passage. But the tide is unlikely to turn back. In Australia—where an aging population, life-extending technology and changing community attitudes have all played their part—other states are going to consider making a similar law to deal with euthanasia. In the US and Canada, where the right-to-die movement is gathering strength, observers are waiting for the dominoes to start falling.
Under the new Northern Territory law, an adult patient can request death—probably by a deadly injection or pill—to put an end to suffering. The patient must be diagnosed as terminally ill by two doctors. After a “cooling off” period of seven days, the patient can sign a certificate of request. After 48 hours the wish for death can be met. For Lloyd Nickson, a 54-year-old Darwin resident suffering from lung cancer, the NT Rights of Terminally Ill law means he can get on with living without the haunting fear of his suffering: a terrifying death from his breathing condition. “I’m not afraid of dying from a spiritual point of view, but what I was afraid of was how I’d go, because I’ve watched people die in the hospital fighting for oxygen and clawing at their masks,” he says.
翻译:
投票最终在凌晨3点45分进行。经过6个月的争论和最后16个小时的激烈议会辩论,澳大利亚北领地成为世界上第一个允许医生取走希望死亡的不治之症患者生命的合法地区。这项措施以令人信服的15票对10票通过。几乎立刻,消息在互联网上传播,被半个地球之外的加拿大死亡权利协会(Right to Die Society of Canada)执行理事约翰•霍夫塞斯(John Hofsess)看到。他通过该组织的在线服务“死亡网络”发送了这个视频。Hofsess 说: “我们整天都在发布公告,因为这当然不仅仅发生在澳大利亚。这是世界历史的一部分。”
完全理解这一点可能需要一段时间。《北部地区晚期病人权利法》使得医生和公民都在尝试处理其道德和实际影响。一些人松了一口气,其他人,包括教会,生命权益组织和澳大利亚医学协会,猛烈抨击该法案及其仓促通过该法案。但这种趋势不太可能逆转。在澳大利亚,人口老龄化、延长寿命的技术和社区态度的转变都发挥了作用,其他州也将考虑制定类似的法律来处理安乐死问题。在美国和加拿大,死亡权利运动正在积聚力量,观察人士正在等待多米诺骨牌开始倒下。
根据新的北领地法律,成年病人可以要求死亡——可能通过注射或服用致命药物——以结束痛苦。病人必须由两名医生诊断为绝症。经过七天的“冷静”期后,病人可以签署一份请求证明。48小时后,死亡的愿望可以实现。对于54岁的达尔文居民劳埃德·尼克森(Lloyd Nickson)来说,他患有肺癌,《北部地区晚期病人权利法》意味着他可以继续生活,而不必每天担心自己的痛苦:因呼吸问题而导致可怕的死亡。他说: “从精神的角度来看,我并不害怕死亡,但我害怕的是我会怎么死,因为我看到过人们在医院里因为缺氧窒息而死,手里还抓着自己的氧气面罩。”。
- From the second paragraph we learn that .
[A] the objection to euthanasia is slow to come in other countries
[B] physicians and citizens share the same view on euthanasia
[C] changing technology is chiefly responsible for the hasty passage of the law
[D] it takes time to realize the significance of the law’s passage
- When the author says that observers are waiting for the dominoes to start falling, he means .
[A] observers are taking a wait-and-see attitude towards the future of euthanasia
[B] similar bills are likely to be passed in the US, Canada and other countries
[C] observers are waiting to see the result of the game of dominoes
[D] the effect-taking process of the passed bill may finally come to a stop
- When Lloyd Nickson dies, he will .
[A] face his death with calm characteristic of euthanasia
[B] experience the suffering of a lung cancer patient
[C] have an intense fear of terrible suffering
[D] undergo a cooling off period of seven days
- The author’s attitude towards euthanasia seems to be that of .
[A] opposition
[B] suspicion
[C] approval
[D] indifference
Text 2
A report consistently brought back by visitors to the US is how friendly, courteous, and helpful most Americans were to them. To be fair, this observation is also frequently made of Canada and Canadians, and should best be considered North American. There are, of course, exceptions. Small-minded officials, rude waiters, and ill-mannered taxi drivers are hardly unknown in the US. Yet it is an observation made so frequently that it deserves comment.
For a long period of time and in many parts of the country, a traveler was a welcome break in an otherwise dull existence. Dullness and loneliness were common problems of the families who generally lived distant from one another. Strangers and travelers were welcome sources of diversion, and brought news of the outside world.
The harsh realities of the frontier also shaped this tradition of hospitality. Someone traveling alone, if hungry, injured, or ill, often had nowhere to turn except to the nearest cabin or settlement. It was not a matter of choice for the traveler or merely a charitable impulse on the part of the settlers. It reflected the harshness of daily life: if you didn’t take in the stranger and take care of him, there was no one else who would. And someday, remember, you might be in the same situation.
Today there are many charitable organizations which specialize in helping the weary traveler. Yet, the old tradition of hospitality to strangers is still very strong in the US, especially in the smaller cities and towns away from the busy tourist trails. “I was just traveling through, got talking with this American, and pretty soon he invited me home for dinner—amazing.” Such observations reported by visitors to the US are not uncommon, but are not always understood properly. The casual friendliness of many Americans should be interpreted neither as superficial nor as artificial, but as the result of a historically developed cultural tradition.
As is true of any developed society, in America a complex set of cultural signals, assumptions, and conventions underlies all social interrelationships. And, of course, speaking a language does not necessarily mean that someone understands social and cultural patterns. Visitors who fail to “translate” cultural meanings properly often draw wrong conclusions. For example, when an American uses the word “friend”, the cultural implications of the word may be quite different from those it has in the visitor’s language and culture. It takes more than a brief encounter on a bus to distinguish between courteous convention and individual interest. Yet, being friendly is a virtue that many Americans value highly and expect from both neighbors and strangers.
翻译:
前往美国的游客一致反映,大多美国人对于他们来说,友好、彬彬有礼,并且乐于助人。公正地说,这种评论也经常适用于加拿大和加拿大人,应该被视为北美的行为方式。当然,也有例外。在美国,小心眼的官员、粗鲁的服务员和无礼的出租车司机并不罕见。然而,这种评论如此频繁地被提及,值得我们谈论。
在很长一段时间内,在这个国家的很多地方,旅行者都能打破原来人们沉闷的生活。寂寞、沉闷常常困扰着那些生活在遥远距离的家庭。所以,陌生人和旅行者成了最受欢迎的娱乐来源,他们带来了许多关于外部世界的消息。
边境地区严酷的现实也塑造了这种好客的传统。独自旅行的人,若饥饿、受伤或生病,除了最近的小屋或定居点,他们通常无处可去。这不是旅行者的选择,也不仅仅是定居者的冲动行为。它反映了日常生活的艰辛:如果你不收留这个陌生人并照顾他,那么没有其他人会这样做。记住,将来你也可能会处于同样的境地。
如今,有许多专门帮助疲惫旅行者的慈善组织。然而,对陌生人的好客传统在美国依然非常强烈,特别是在远离热门旅游线路的小城市和小镇。 "我当时只是路过,与这个美国人聊天了一会儿,很快他就邀请我去他家吃晚饭了——太惊人了。"这样的观察并不罕见,但并非始终被正确理解。许多美国人的随意友善既不应被解读为肤浅的,也不是做作的表现,而是历史上发展起来的文化传统的结果。
正如任何发达社会一样,一系列复杂的文化信号、想法和习俗,是所有社会相互关系的基础。当然,会说一门语言并不一定意味着那个人理解当地的社会和文化模式。如果游客们未能正确“翻译”文化含义,就很可能得出错误的结论。例如,当一个美国人使用“朋友”这个词时,它在文化上的涵义可能与游客的语言和文化中的涵义完全不同。要区分彬彬有礼的惯例和个人兴趣,需要更多的相处时间。然而,友好是许多美国人非常重视的美德,他们对邻居和陌生人都有所期待。
- In the eyes of visitors from the outside world .
[A] rude taxi drivers are rarely seen in the US
[B] small-minded officials deserve a serious comment
[C] Canadians are not so friendly as their neighbors
[D] most Americans are ready to offer help
- It could be inferred from the last paragraph that .
[A] culture exercises an influence over social interrelationship
[B] courteous convention and individual interest are interrelated
[C] various virtues manifest themselves exclusively among friends
[D] social interrelationships equal the complex set of cultural conventions
- Families in frontier settlements used to entertain strangers .
[A] to improve their hard life
[B] in view of their long-distance travel
[C] to add some flavor to their own daily life
[D] out of a charitable impulse
- The tradition of hospitality to strangers .
[A] tends to be superficial and artificial
[B] is generally well kept up in the United States
[C] is always understood properly
[D] has something to do with the busy tourist trails
Text 3
Technically, any substance other than food that alters our bodily or mental functioning is a drug. Many people mistakenly believe the term drug refers only to some sort of medicine or an illegal chemical taken by drug addicts. They don’t realize that familiar substances such as alcohol and tobacco are also drugs. This is why the more neutral term substance is now used by many physicians and psychologists. The phrase “substance abuse” is often used instead of “drug abuse” to make clear that substances such as alcohol and tobacco can be just as harmfully misused as heroin and cocaine.
We live in a society in which the medical and social use of substances (drugs) is pervasive: an aspirin to quiet a headache, some wine to be sociable, coffee to get going in the morning, a cigarette for the nerves. When do these socially acceptable and apparently constructive uses of a substance become misuses? First of all, most substances taken in excess will produce negative effects such as poisoning or intense perceptual distortions. Repeated use of a substance can also lead to physical addiction or substance dependence. Dependence is marked first by an increased tolerance, with more and more of the substance required to produce the desired effect, and then by the appearance of unpleasant withdrawal symptoms when the substance is discontinued.
Drugs (substances) that affect the central nervous system and alter perception, mood, and behavior are known as psychoactive substances. Psychoactive substances are commonly grouped according to whether they are stimulants, depressants, or hallucinogens. Stimulants initially speed up or activate the central nervous system, whereas depressants slow it down. Hallucinogens have their primary effect on perception, distorting and altering it in a variety of ways including producing hallucinations. These are the substances often called psychedelic (from the Greek word meaning “mind-manifestation”) because they seemed to radically alter one’s state of consciousness.
翻译:
在技术上,除了食物之外,任何改变我们身体或心理功能的物质都是药物。许多人错误地认为药物这个词只指某种药品或供吸毒人员使用的非法化学品。他们没有意识到,像酒精和烟草这样常见的物质也是药物。这就是为什么许多医生和心理学家现在使用更为中性的术语物质。人们经常使用“物质滥用”这个短语来代替“药物滥用”,以明确表示酒精和烟草这样的物质也可能会像海洛因和可卡因一样被滥用并带来伤害。
我们生活在一个药物(药品)的医疗使用和社会使用过于泛滥的社会中:用阿司匹林缓解头痛,喝一些葡萄酒用于社交,喝咖啡迎接早晨,吸一支香烟缓解神经紧张。这些社会上被接受和表面上有益的药物什么时候成为了药物滥用呢?首先,过量使用大多数药物都会产生负面效应,如中毒或感知扭曲。药物的反复使用也可能导致身体上的药物成瘾或药物依赖。依赖首先表现为对药物的耐受性增加,需要使用更多的药物才能产生期望的效果,然后在停止使用药物时出现不良的戒断症状。
影响中枢神经系统并改变感知、情绪和行为的药物(物质)被称为精神活性物质。精神活性物质通常根据它们是否是兴奋剂、镇静剂还是迷幻剂来分类。兴奋剂最初会加速或激活中枢神经系统,而抑制剂则会使其减速。致幻剂主要作用于感知,通过各种方式扭曲和改变感知,包括产生幻觉。这些物质通常被称为迷幻剂(来自希腊语,意思是“精神显现”) ,因为它们似乎从根本上改变了一个人的意识状态。
- “Substance abuse”(Line 5, Paragraph 1) is preferable to “drug abuse” in that .
[A] substances can alter our bodily or mental functioning if illegally used
[B] “drug abuse” is only related to a limited number of drugtakers
[C] alcohol and tobacco are as fatal as heroin and cocaine
[D] many substances other than heroin or cocaine can also be poisonous
- The word “pervasive” (Line 1, Paragraph 2) might mean .
[A] widespread
[B] overwhelming
[C] piercing
[D] fashionable
- Physical dependence on certain substances results from .
[A] uncontrolled consumption of them over long periods of time
[B] exclusive use of them for social purposes
[C] quantitative application of them to the treatment of diseases
[D] careless employment of them for unpleasant symptoms
- From the last paragraph we can infer that .
[A] stimulants function positively on the mind
[B] hallucinogens are in themselves harmful to health
[C] depressants are the worst type of psychoactive substances
[D] the three types of psychoactive substances were commonly used in groups
Text 4
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.”
翻译:
没有一家公司喜欢被告知它正在导致一个国家的道德滑坡。“这就是你们想要在职业生涯中实现的目标吗?”参议员罗伯特•多尔(Robert Dole)上周质询时代华纳的高管。“你们已经出卖了你们的灵魂,但你们一定要腐化我们的国家并且威胁我们的孩子吗?”然而,在时代华纳,这些问题只是该公司自1990年成立以来进行的内省的最新表现。这是一种自我反省,在不同时期,涉及到责任、创作自由和公司底线等问题。
这场辩论的核心是现年56岁的主席杰拉德•莱文(Gerald Levin) ,他在1992年接替已故的史蒂夫•罗斯(Steve Ross)。在财务方面,莱文正面临着提高股价和减少公司巨额债务的压力。在两笔新的有线电视交易完成后,公司债务将增加到173亿美元。他已承诺出售部分地产,并对公司进行重组,但投资者正在焦急地等待。
狡辩不会让他的生活变得好过。莱文一直以表达为由为公司的说唱音乐辩护。1992年,时代华纳因发行 Ice-T 的暴力说唱歌曲《警察杀手》而受到抨击,莱文将说唱形容为街头文化的合法表达,这值得发泄。他在《华尔街日报》(Wall Street Journal)的一篇专栏文章中写道: “对任何一个民主社会的考验,不在于它能在多大程度上控制言论,而在于它能否给予思想和言论自由尽可能广泛的自由,不管结果有时可能多么有争议或令人恼火。”。我们不会在任何威胁面前退缩。”
莱文不愿对上周的辩论置评,但有迹象表明,这位美联储主席正在收回自己的强硬立场,至少在某种程度上是这样。在上个月的股东大会上,莱文在讨论摇滚歌手的歌词时断言,“音乐不是社会弊病的根源”,他甚至引用了自己的儿子——纽约布朗克斯区的一名教师——用说唱与学生交流的例子。但他也谈到了创作自由和社会责任之间的“平衡斗争”,他宣布,公司将发起一项运动,为可能引起反感的音乐的发行和标签制定标准。
时代华纳董事会由15名成员组成,总体上支持莱文和他的公司战略。但知情人士说,他们中的一些人已经表达了对此事的担忧。“我们中的一些人很多很多年前就知道,根据第一修正案,自由并不是完全无限的,”卢斯说。“我认为,也许一些与该公司有关的人最近才意识到这一点。”
- 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
- 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
- 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
- The best title for this passage might 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
Text 5
Much of the language used to describe monetary policy, such as “steering the economy to a soft landing” or “a touch on the brakes”, makes it sound like a precise science. Nothing could be further from the truth. The link between interest rates and inflation is uncertain. And there are long, variable lags before policy changes have any effect on the economy. Hence the analogy that likens the conduct of monetary policy to driving a car with a blackened windscreen, a cracked rear-view mirror and a faulty steering wheel.
Given all these disadvantages, central bankers seem to have had much to boast about of late. Average inflation in the big seven industrial economies fell to a mere 2.3% last year, close to its lowest level in 30 years, before rising slightly to 2.5% this July. This is a long way below the double-digit rates which many countries experienced in the 1970s and early 1980s.
It is also less than most forecasters had predicted. In late 1994 the panel of economists which The Economist polls each month said that America’s inflation rate would average 3.5% in 1995. In fact, it fell to 2.6% in August, and is expected to average only about 3% for the year as a whole. In Britain and Japan inflation is running half a percentage point below the rate predicted at the end of last year. This is no flash in the pan; over the past couple of years, inflation has been consistently lower than expected in Britain and America.
Economists have been particularly surprised by favourable inflation figures in Britain and the United States, since conventional measures suggest that both economies, and especially America’s, have little productive slack. America’s capacity utilisation, for example, hit historically high levels earlier this year, and its jobless rate (5.6% in August) has fallen below most estimates of the natural rate of unemployment—the rate below which inflation has taken off in the past.
Why has inflation proved so mild? The most thrilling explanation is, unfortunately, a little defective. Some economists argue that powerful structural changes in the world have up-ended the old economic models that were based upon the historical link between growth and inflation.
翻译:
许多用来描述货币政策的语言,比如“引导经济软着陆”或“轻踩刹车”,听起来像是一门精密的科学。事实并非如此。利率和通货膨胀之间的联系是不确定的。而且,在政策变化对经济产生任何影响之前,存在着长期的、可变的滞后。因此,有人将货币政策行为比作驾驶一辆挡风玻璃变黑、倒后镜破裂、方向盘出现问题的汽车。
考虑到所有这些不利因素,央行行长们近来似乎有很多值得夸耀的地方。去年,七大工业经济体的平均通胀率降至仅2.3% ,接近30年来的最低水平,今年7月则略有上升至2.5% 。这远远低于许多国家在上世纪70年代和80年代初经历的两位数增长率。
这也低于大多数预测者的预测。1994年末,《经济学人》每月调查的经济学家小组称,1995年美国的平均通货膨胀率为3.5% 。事实上,8月份这一比例降至2.6% ,预计全年平均仅为3% 左右。在英国和日本,通货膨胀率比去年年底预测的水平低半个百分点。这不是昙花一现,在过去的几年里,英国和美国的通货膨胀率一直低于预期。
经济学家对英国和美国有利的通货膨胀数据尤其感到惊讶,因为传统的衡量标准表明,这两个经济体,尤其是美国,几乎没有生产闲置。例如,今年早些时候,美国的产能利用率达到了历史最高水平,失业率(8月份为5.6%)低于大多数估计的自然失业率(过去通胀率低于这一水平)。
为什么通货膨胀如此温和?不幸的是,最激动人心的解释是有一点缺陷。一些经济学家认为,世界上强有力的结构性变化颠覆了基于增长与通胀之间历史联系的旧经济模式。
- From the passage we learn that .
[A] there is a definite relationship between inflation and interest rates
[B] economy will always follow certain models
[C] the economic situation is better than expected
[D] economists had foreseen the present economic situation
- According to the passage, which of the following is TRUE?
[A] Making monetary policies is comparable to driving a car.
[B] An extremely low jobless rate will lead to inflation.
[C] A high unemployment rate will result from inflation.
[D] Interest rates have an immediate effect on the economy.
- The sentence “This is no flash in the pan” (Line 5, Paragraph 3) means that .
[A] the low inflation rate will last for some time
[B] the inflation rate will soon rise
[C] the inflation will disappear quickly
[D] there is no inflation at present
- The passage shows that the author isthe present situation .
[A] critical of
[B] puzzled by
[C] disappointed at
[D] amazed at
Part B (translate)
Do animals have rights? This is how the question is usually put. It sounds like a useful, ground-clearing way tostart. 31)Actually, it isn’t, because it assumes that there is an agreed account of human rights, which is something the world does not have.
On one view of rights, to be sure, it necessarily follows that animals have none.32)Some philosophers argue that rights exist only within a social contract, as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements. Therefore animals cannot have rights. The idea of punishing a tiger that kills somebody is absurd, for exactly the same reason, so is the idea that tigers have rights. However, this is only one account, and by no means an uncontested one. It denies rights not only to animals but also to some people—for instance, to infants, the mentally incapable and future generations. In addition, it is unclear what force a contract can have for people who never consented to it: how do you reply to somebody who says “I don’t like this contract”?
The point is this: without agreement on the rights of people, arguing about the rights of animals is fruitless.33)It leads the discussion to extremes at the outset: it invites you to think that animals should be treated either with the consideration humans extend to other humans, or with no consideration at all. This is a false choice. Better to start with another, more fundamental, question: is the way we treat animals a moral issue at all?
Many deny it.34)Arguing from the view that humans are different from animals in every relevant respect, extremists of this kind think that animals lie outside the area of moral choice. Any regard for the suffering of animals is seen as a mistake—a sentimental displacement of feeling that should properly be directed to other humans.
This view, which holds that torturing a monkey is morally equivalent to chopping wood, may seem bravely “logical”. In fact it is simply shallow: the confused centre is right to reject it. The most elementary form of moral reasoning—the ethical equivalent of learning to crawl—is to weigh other’s interests against one’s own. This in turn requires sympathy and imagination: without which there is no capacity for moral thought. To see an animal in pain is enough, for most, to engage sympathy.35)When that happens, it is not a mistake: it is mankind’s instinct for moral reasoning in action, an instinct that should be encouraged rather than laughed at.
31.事实上,它不是,因为假设有一个它公认的关于人权的叙述,这不是自然界本来就有的东西。
32.一些哲学家认为权利只存在于社会契约中,作为义务和权利交换的一部分。
33.它在一开始就把讨论引向了极端: 它让你认为,对待动物要么应该考虑到人类对其他人类的影响,要么根本不应该考虑。
34.这类极端主义者认为,人类在各个相关方面都与动物不同,动物不属于道德选择的范畴。
35.当这种情况发生时,它不是一个错误: 它是人类在行动中进行道德推理的本能,一种应该受到鼓励而不是嘲笑的本能。
Section III Writing
Directions:
Study the following set of pictures carefully and write an essay in no less than 120 words.
Your essay must be written clearly on ANSWER SHEET 2.
Your essay should cover all the information provided and meet the requirements below:
1.Interpret the following pictures.
2.Predict the tendency of tobacco consumption and give your reasons.

Tobacco consumption and tobacco industry have always been a hot-debated issue in our society. With the increasing scope of the tobacco industry, more and more people become addicted to smoking. The annual economic loss due to tobacco consumption amounts to 200 billion US dollars, and meanwhile 3 million people worldwide lose their lives because of smoking-related diseases.The good news is that with the rapid development of society and economy, more and more people realise the harm of tobacco. And there is a tendency for declining tobacco consumption. The year between 1994 and 1995, as indicated by chart 1, witnessed a drop in total tobacco production in the world.
If this trend can be maintained, the number of people dying of smoking-related diseases can be significantly reduced. Therefore, great efforts should be made by people in all walks of the society to stop smoking. Needless to say, no easy solution can be found to solve the smoking problem.
First and foremost, one of the most important reasons is that tobacco industry still plays a very important role in the development of the economy. In addition, another major factor is that the percentage of smokers is too large. It wouldn’t be an easy task to persuade such a large amount of people to give up their smoking habits, especially the heavy smokers.
I am of the opinion that it is a daunting task to properly address the issue of the harm caused by smoking. As a consequence, only with concerted efforts of all people, can this problem be properly dealt with.