Thesedaysit’scheapertothrowtha-优题课

第二部分阅读理解（共25小题。第一节每小题2分，第二节每小题1分；满分45分）
第一节　阅读下列短文，从媒体所给的四个选项（A,B,C,D）中，选出最佳选项，并在答题卡上将该项涂黑。（共20小题；每小题2分，满分40分）
Students who say they never or hardly ever used dictionaries may speak English well but usually write poorly, because they make many mistakes.
The students who use dictionaries most do not learn especially well either. The ones who look up every new word do not read fast. Therefore they do not have time to read much. Those who use small two-language dictionaries have the worst problems. Their dictionaries often give only one or two words as translations of English. But one English word often has many translations in a foreign language and one foreign word has many translations in English.
The most successful students are those who use large college edition dictionaries with about 100,000 words but do not use them too often. When they are reading, these students first try to get the general idea and understand new words from the context. Then they reread and use the dictionary to look up only key words that they still do not understand. They use dictionaries more for writing. If they are not sure how to spell a word, they always use a dictionary. Also, if they think a noun might have an unusual plural form, they check this in a dictionary.
41. According to the passage, which of the following is WRONG?
A. Dictionaries have little effect on learning to speak English.
B. Whatever new words you meet while reading, never use dictionaries.
C. Small two-language dictionaries have serious shortcomings.
D. Reading something for the first time, you’d better not use dictionaries.
42. This passage mainly tells us .
A. that students shouldn’t use small two-language dictionaries
B. what were the shortcomings of small two-language dictionaries
C. why students should use large college edition dictionaries
D. what dictionary students should choose and how to use it
43. Which is NOT mentioned in this passage?
A. How to make good use of a dictionary. B. When to use a dictionary.
C. How to improve spoken English.D. How to practice reading fast.

The new automobile fuel economy standards formally adopted by the Obama administration on Thursday will produce a series of benefits: reduced dependence on foreign oil, fewer greenhouse gas emissions(排放), and consumer savings at the pump.
This was truly a moment to celebrate. But it was tempered by the fact that some in Congress are trying to cancel the laws that made the new standards possible.
The standards will require automakers to build passenger cars, sport-utility vehicles and minivans that average 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016 — a 30 percent increase over today’s cars, and the biggest single jump in fuel economy since the original standards were adopted in the 1970s. Cars will cost more, but the government estimates that consumers will save an average of $3,000 in fuel over the life of a new vehicle.
The standards will also place the first-ever limits on automobile greenhouse gas emissions, and are expected to reduce emissions by 21 percent by 2030 compared with what the output would have been without the standards. Because emissions from passenger vehicles represent about one-fifth of America’s greenhouse gases, this is a step forward for the planet.
The automakers, who fought the rules until they went broke（破产）, have come to accept this as a step forward as well. A single national standard provides regulatory certainty, and they’ve got to get more efficient to survive.
However, some in Congress seemed determined to roll back the laws that got us here. Senator Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska, and several other senators have added a challenge to the federal government’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act — not just from automobiles but from other sources. The Supreme Court gave the Environmental Protection Agency that authority three years ago, and the new emissions standards would have been impossible without it.
There has also been talk in the Senate of eliminating California’s special authority under the Clean Air Act to set more aggressive motor vehicle standards than the federal limits. California used that authority to pass a law in 2002 setting greenhouse gas emissions limits for cars sold there. It was the first law of its kind in this country, and it provided the drive and the foundation for the new nationwide standards.
What all of these opponents mean to do is to roll back history and the hard-won environmental protections it has produced. That would be a huge mistake.
66. The following are the benefits of the new automobile economy standards EXCEPT ________.
A. reduced dependence on foreign oil
B. cancelling some of the laws
C. fewer greenhouse gas emissions
D. consumer savings at the pump
67. What goal is set for the year 2016?
A. Cars will cost more so fewer people will buy them.
B. There is a 30 percent increase in car manufacturing.
C. An average vehicle can go 35.5 miles with one gallon of gas.
D. Consumers will save an average of $3,000 in fuel per car.
68. The underlined word “it” in paragraph six refers to ________.
A. The Clean Air Act
B. The Supreme Court
C. The Environment Protection Agency
D. The federal government’s authority
69. What seems to be the root of the new automobile fuel economy standards?
A. California’s motor vehicle standards.
B. The Environment Protection Agency.
C. Some Senators, like Lisa Murkowski.
D. Greenhouse gas emissions.
70. According to the writer, the new automobile fuel economy standards will probably lead to the result that ________.
A. everyone wins
B. more cars will be sold
C. it would be a big mistake
D. nobody agrees

Schools have banned cupcakes, issued fatness report cards and cleared space in cafeterias for salad bars. Just last month, Michelle Obama’s campaign to end childhood fatness promised to get young people moving more and restore school lunch, and drink makers said they had cut the number of liquid calories shipped to schools by almost 90 percent in the past five years.
But new research suggests that interventions(干预) aimed at school-aged children may be, if not too little, too late.
More and more evidence points to essential events very early in life — during the child years, babyhood and even before birth, in the womb(胎) — that can set young children on a fatness path that is hard to change by the time they’re in kindergarten. The evidence is not ironclad, but it suggests that prevention efforts should start very early.
Among the findings are these:
The fat angel-like baby who is growing so nicely may be growing too much for his or her own good, research suggests.
Babies whose mothers smoked during pregnancy are at risk of becoming fat, even though the babies are usually small at birth.
Babies who sleep less than 12 hours are at increased risk for fatness later. If they don’t sleep enough and also watch two hours or more of TV a day, they are at even greater risk.
Some early interventions are already widely practiced. Doctors recommend that overweight women lose weight before pregnancy rather than after, to cut the risk of fatness and diabetes in their children; breast-feeding is also recommended to lower the obesity risk.
Like children and teenagers, babies and toddlers have been getting fatter. One in 10 children under age 2 is overweight. The percentage of children ages 2 to 5 who are fat increased to 12.4 percent in 2006 from 5 percent in 1980. But most prevention programs have avioded intervening at very young ages, partly because the school system offers an efficient way to reach large numbers of children, and partly because the rate of fat teenagers is even higher than that of younger children — 18 percent.
Scientists like Dr. Birch worry about what are called epigenetic changes. The genes taken over from mother and father may be turned on and off and the strength of their effects changed by environmental conditions in early development. Many doctors are concerned about women being fat and unhealthy before pregnancy because the womb is the baby’s first environment.
Experts say change may require abandoning some treasured cultural attitudes. “The idea that a big baby is a healthy baby, and a crying baby is probably a hungry baby who should be fed, are things we really need to rethink,” Dr. Birch said.
61. What is NOT included in Michelle Obama’s campaign?
A. To restore school lunch.
B. To get young people moving more.
C. To issue fatness report cards.
D. To end childhood fatness.
62. Why should fatness prevention efforts start very early?
A. Because children now are growing too much for their own good.
B. Because there is too much liquid calories in drinks for children.
C. Because experiences even when in the womb can affect a child.
D. Because fat children cannot be healthy ones when they grow up.
63. Which of the following is closest in meaning to the word “ironclad” in paragraph three?
A. right B. protectiveC. objective D. positive
64. Which of the following is NOT right?
A. 18% of the younger children are fatter than fat teenagers.
B. 10 % of the children under age 2 gain too much weight.
C. 12.4% of the children ages 2-5 were overweight in 2006.
D. In 1980, only 5% of the children ages 2-5 were too fat.
65. What does Dr. Birch’s statement mean in the last paragraph?
A. Feeding the baby when it is crying is not right.
B. Fat babies may not be so healthy as people think.
C. Parents should take responsibility for fat babies.
D. Lovely babies shouldn’t be so fat as people think.

PART THREE READING COMPREHENSION
Directions: Read the following three passages. Each passage is followed by several questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A, B, C and D. Choose the one that fits best according to the information given in the passage.
A previously unknown kind of human group disappeared from the world so completely that it has left behind the merest piece of evidence that it ever existed — a single bone from the little finger of a child, buried in a cave in the Altai Mountains of southern Siberia.
Researchers removed DNA from the bone and reported that it differed obviously from that of both modern humans and of Neanderthals（尼安德特人）, living in Europe until the arrival of modern humans on the continent some 44,000 years ago.
The child carrying the DNA line was probably 5 to 7 years old, but it is not yet known if it was a boy or a girl. The finger bone was unearthed in 2008 from a place known as the Denisova cave.
Researchers are careful not to call the Denisova child a new human species, though it may prove to be so, because the evidence is initial.
But the genetic material removed from the bone, found in a layer laid down on the cave floor between 48,000 and 30,000 years ago, belonged to a distinct human line that traveled out of Africa at a different time from the two known ancient human species. Homo erectus（直立人）, found in East Asia, left Africa two million years ago, and the ancestor of Neanderthals moved away some 500,000 years ago. The numbers of differences found in the child’s DNA indicate that its ancestors left Africa about one million years ago.
The region was inhabited by both Neanderthals and modern humans at that time. Counting the new human line, three human species may have lived together.
The standard view has long been that there were three human resettlements out of Africa — those of Homo erectus; of the ancestor of Neanderthals; and finally, some 50,000 years ago, of modern humans. But in 2004, archaeologists reported that they had found the bones of small humans who lived on the Indonesian island of Flores until 13,000 years ago, causing a serious problem to this view. The new line is the second such challenge.
If the nuclear DNA of the Denisova child should differ as much as its mitochondrial（线粒体） DNA does from that of Neanderthals and modern humans, the case for declaring it a new species would be strengthened. But it would be unusual for a new species to be recognized on the basis of DNA alone.
In new diggings starting this summer, archaeologists will look for remains more analytical than the finger bone. Researchers will also begin re-examining the fossil collections in museums to see if any wrongly assigned bones might belong instead to the new line.
56. According to the passage, ________.
A. modern humans arrived in Europe before Neanderthals
B. modern humans arrived in Europe about 44,000 years ago
C. Neanderthals arrived in Europe about 44, 000 years ago
D. Neanderthals arrived in Europe soon after modern humans did
57. Evidence from the bone of the child shows that _________.
A. the Denisova child belonged to Neanderthals
B. the Denisova child is a new human species
C. its ancestor moved to Europe 1,000,000 years ago
D. the habitat of its ancestor was in Africa
58. Which human line is the first challenge to the standard view of human resettlement?
A. Neanderthals.
B. Modern humans.
C. Small humans in Indonesia
D. Homo erectus.
59. The underlined part in last paragraph implies ________.
A. some other bones of the new line must have been wrongly identified
B. some other bones might give some evidence to support the new line
C. some other bones could help find the belongings of the new line
D. some other bones belonging to the new line might not have been found yet
60 The best title of the passage could be ________.
A. Bone May Reveal a New Human Group
B. Bone of a New Human Group Is Found
C. Human Group Once Existed in Southern Siberia
D. Bone Gives Evidence to a New Human Group

If there is one thing that matters in high school－and for your whole life－it is friendships．
My latest novel，THE UNWRITTEN RULE，is about a girl，Sarah，who falls for her best friend Brianna’s boyfriend，Ryan，but it’s more about wrestling with feelings for a guy that you know you shouldn’t have．A lot of the book deals with friendship，the kind of lifelong friendship that means the world to you．．．and what happens when you realize that maybe it isn’t what you think it is．
Maybe your best friend isn’t your best friend．Maybe she isn’t even a friend at all．
Friendships are tricky things．You can he sure everything is fine，and that your friendship is going to last forever．．．and it can just end．No explanation，no anything．And it is not easy．In fact，I think losing a friend is worse than losing a boyfriend，especially when it is a friend you’ve had in your life for a long time．
One of the things that Sarah struggles with in THE UNWRITTEN RULE，beyond her feelings for Ryan，is her friendship with Brianna—how long they’ve been friends，how she understands Brianna in a way no one else does，and what to do when a crack appears in their friend ship，not because of Sarah’s feelings for Ryan，but because Sarah begins to wonder if maybe Brianna isn’t her best friend after all．
Having a friendship end is incredibly painful and one of the things I hated when I was younger—and that I still hate now—is how people say．“Oh，it’ll be okay．You’ll move on，you’ll be fine．”
It is true that you will eventually move on and that you will be fine．But you will also always carry that lost friendship with you．It may not take up all of your heart like it does at first，but it will take part of it．
And that，I think，is something no one ever talks about and that I wish we could — and would．
What do you do when someone you are friends with decides your friendship is over? How do you deal with it?
Maybe my latest novel can provide something for you．
47．From the passage we can infer that．
A．it may takes Sarah a long time to recover after she lost Brianna’s friendship
B．Sarah and Brianna are still best friends after a long period of time
C．Sarah does not value Brianna’s friendship at all
D．Ryan would feel puzzled about his real love
48．What do you think the book THE UNWRITTEN RULE is mainly about?
A．Friendship． B．School life．
C．Love．D．Wrestling with feelings．
49．What’s the writer’s attitude towards friendship?
A．We will all lose some friends in our life．
B．Ending a friendship is worse than losing a boyfriend．
C．It’s usual when a crack appears．
D．You will eventually move on after you lose a friendship．
50．What do you think is the best title for the passage above?
A．My Latest Novel．B．Tricky Friends．
C．Sarah and Brianna． D．Unforgettable Friendship

A．To keep a DIY way.	B．To put them away themselves.
C．To purchase what they like.	D．To donate them to charities.

A．Call2 Recycle.	B．TechSoup.
C．eBay’s Rethink Initiative.	D．Electronic Recycling Association.