Question

Back in the old days, when I was a child, we sat around the family roundtable at dinnertime and exchanged our daily experiences. It wasn't very organized, but everyone was recognized and all the news that had to be told was told by each family member.

We listened to each other and the interest was not put-on; it was real. Our family was a unit and we supported each other, and nurtured each other, and liked each other, and—we were even willing to admit—we loved each other.

Today, the family roundtable has moved to the local fast-food restaurant and talk is not easy, much less encouraged.

Grandma, who used to live upstairs, is now. the voice on long distance, and the working parent is far too beaten down each day to spend evening relaxation time listening to the sandbox experience of an eager four-year-old.

So family conversation is as extinct as my old toys and parental questions such as “What have you been doing, Bobby?” have been replaced by “I'm busy, go watch television. ”

And watch TV they do; count them by the millions.

But it's usually not children's television that children watch. Saturday morning, the children's hour, amounts to only about 8 percent of their weekly viewing.

Where are they to be found? Watching adult television, of course, from the Match Game in the morning, to the afternoon at General Hospital, from the muggings and battles on the evening news right through the family hour and past into Starsky and Hutch. That's where you find our kids, over five million of them, at 10 p. m. , not fewer than a million until after midnight! All of this is done with parental permission.

Television, used well, can provide enriching experiences for our young people, but we must use it with some sense. When the carpet is clean, we turn off the vacuum cleaner. When the dishes are clean, the dishwasher turns itself off.

Not so the television, which is on from the sun in the morning to the moon at night and beyond!

Parents must exercise some control and show some concern about the cultural influence on the child when a program not intended for that child is viewed. Parents need to intervene (干涉). Nonintervention may be a wise policy in international affairs, but the results of parental nonintervention will not be wise at all.

1. From the first two paragraphs one may infer that the writer's a attitude towards “the old days” is______.

A. being tired of       B. hating

C. preferring          D. disappointing

2.The working parent is not willing to listen to her (his) four-year-old child talking about his sandbox games because ______.

A. she (he) is boring        B. she (he) is busy

C. she (he) is very tired    D. she (he) is angry

3.If we use television with some ______ television can provide our young people with much knowledge.

A. instruction of experts

B. indication of teachers

C. direction of engineers

D. judgment of our own

4. What is the main idea of the last paragraph?

A. Parents must exercise some control and show some concern about the cultural influence on the children.

B. Nonintervention may be a good policy in international affairs.

C. Parental nonintervention will not be praised.

D. Parents need to intervene.

Answer

1.C

2.C

3.D

4.A

【解析】

试题分析：本文是一篇议论文，主要讲述了作者小时候经常在晚餐时间和家人一起分享一天的经历，但是现在一切都不一样了，从而引发了作者的深思。

1.C推理判断题。根据一二两段可知作者对于“以前”在晚餐时间分享一天经历的惯例是喜欢的。故选C。

2.C根据第四段the working parent is far too beaten down each day to spend evening relaxation time listening to the sandbox experience of an eager four-year-old.可知父母因为太累了以致于没有精力聆听四岁孩子堆沙盒的经历。is far too beaten down意为被（工作）击败了，此处可理解为工作太累了。故选C。

3.D根据倒数第三段Television, used well, can provide enriching experiences for our young people, but we must use it with some sense.可知如果自己有判断、有意识地去利用电视，电视也可以给年轻人带来好处。故选D。

4.

考点：考查议论类短文的阅读