I think you can ______ the first five chapters before the deadline.
A. live through B. put through
C. get through D. see through
Several years ago, I quit my job to chase my dream of writing a book, but that book was ______ repeatedly. Everybody was asking, “How’s the book coming?” I was so ______.
My friend got together one day and I blurted out(脱口而出), “I don’t know my purpose in life.” The outburst was met with ______ and stares. Finally, Pam said, “I don’t know, either.” She was in a job she ______. Teresa said, “Me either.” I was sure that Bette would have a(n) ______. She was suffering from cancer and, surely she had figured things out since she was facing a likely terminal outcome. ______, she shook her head.
Two years passed and, during that time, I sold my ______, Teresa went back to school, Pam switched ______, and Bette kept on living as best as she could.
Actually, for those two years, Bette lived a ______ life than any of us. She built a butterfly garden in her neighborhood. She spent time with her family, went hiking, ______ and lived.
My book was finally ______and Bette made it to my first big signing. A day or two later, she was back in the ______ as she was seriously ill. I left on tour for several weeks, and when I______, she was close to ______.
The day came when her brother called to let me know Bette had ______. He asked me to write her obituary(讣告). I thought about how she’d filled every moment with as much joy as she could find. That obituary wasn’t a list of ______. It was the story of a woman who lived ______ what life threw at her, she lived.
That was when I ______ what I’d learned through her passing. She defined her purpose in life by simply living her life. That’s all any of us are here to do. In the end, the only thing that ______ is that we breathe in our time here and fill it with ______
1.A. read B. printed C. rejected D. written
2.A. excited B. confident C. envious D. embarrassed
3.A. darkness B. smoke C. danger D. silence
4.A. hated B. lost C. found D. created
5.A. present B. answer C. dream D. excuse
6.A. Therefore B. However C. Besides D. otherwise
7.A. house B. car C. paper D. book
8.A. jobs B. methods C. topics D. channels.
9.A. fuller B. poorer C. sadder D. simpler
10.A. complained B. shouted C. laughed D. learned
11.A. revised B. published C. reviewed D. translated
12.A. hospital B. school C. garden D. company
13.A. hollowed B. returned C. escaped D. recovered
14.A. success B. death C. trouble D. wealth
15.A. given up B. shown off C. turned down D. passed away
16.A. requirements B. suggestions C. achievements D. agreements
17.A. Other than B. Rather than C. Regardless of D. In case of
18.A. guessed B. decided C. expected D. realized
19.A. works B. matters C. exists D. changes
20.A. life B. trust C. luck D. nature
Violent Games: Fun or Harmful?
If you play lots of video games, you’ve probably blown a zombie(僵尸) into tiny bits. 1. Many adults worry that playing such games could make children act violently in real life. Is that true?
The American Academy of Pediatrics(儿科) says that violence in any kind of media --- from TV to music to video games --- presents a risk to kids’ health. A number of studies have shown a link between video games and aggression, including one published in JAMA Pediatrics in 2014, which found that kids who played violent video games showed an increase in aggressive thoughts and behaviors. 2.
But not all studies agree that violent games cause kids to act out. Another study replaced violent deaths with evaporation(蒸发) in a game. 3. People who played the non-violent game without any training were more aggressive afterward than people who played the violent version but learned to control themselves first.
And here’s an even stranger fact: When violent video games are released, people carry out fewer violent crimes! Why? 4. Steve Levitt, coauthor of the book Freakonomics, said, “If you can make video games fun enough, then kids will stop watching TV, and they’ll stop going out and creating violent disorder on the street.”
What do you think? 5.
A. One possible explanation: potential criminals are at home playing the new game.
B. Then, before playing the game, some people received training and others didn’t.
C. More than 3,000 kids answered survey questions during a two-year period.
D. For example, thinking it’s OK to hit someone you don’t like.
E. Have you ever played any violent video games?
F. Do violent video games cause bad behavior?
G. Some games even pile up dead bodies.
When asked about her childhood in the documentary Alive Inside, a 90-year-old woman with dementia(痴呆) replies, “I’ve forgotten so much.” Filmmaker Michael Rossato-Bennett then plays music from her past for her. “That’s Louis Armstrong,” she says. “He’s singing When the Saints Go Marching In and it takes me back to my school days.” She then recalls exact details from her life.
Why does it happen? Music tends to accompany events that arouse emotions or otherwise make strong impressions on us --- such as weddings and graduations. These kinds of experiences form strong memories, and the music and memories likely become intertwined(紧密相连) in our neural(神经的) networks, according to Julene Johnson, a professor at the University of California. Movements, such as dancing, also often pair with our experience of music, which can help form memories. Even many years later, hearing the music can bring back memories of these long-past events.
As Alive Inside shows, music has this power even for many people with dementia. Researchers note that the brain areas that process and remember music are typically less damaged by dementia than other areas, and they think it may explain the phenomenon.
They also pay attention to elderly people with dementia, especially those in nursing homes. “It’s possible those long-term memories are still there,” Johnson says, “but people just have a harder time accessing them because they’re in a strange place and there are not a lot of circumstances in which someone could pull out those memories.”
Johnson also notes that music is not universally useful for all people with dementia since there are some people with dementia whose brain area that recognizes music is damaged.
Despite music’s apparent benefits, few studies have explored its influence on memory recall in people with dementia. “It’s really an untapped area,” Johnson says. Petr Janata is one researcher investigating the topic of music and memory. He says that scientists still do not have the answers for why and how music reawakens memories in people with dementia, but this phenomenon is real and it’s just a matter of time before it’s fully borne out by scientific research.
1.What helps the old woman in Alive Inside recall her childhood?
A. A film she has watched before.
B. A song she has listened to before.
C. The voice of her childhood friend.
D. The description of her school days.
2.What benefit of music is discussed in Paragraph 2?
A. It helps make lasting memories.
B. It helps cure patients of dementia.
C. It helps arouse emotions in special events.
D. It helps remember dance movements easily.
3.According to Johnson, what should we do for elderly people with dementia?
A. Send them to nursing homes for good care.
B. Provide familiar environments for them.
C. Play lots of classical music to them.
D. Talk to them about their past.
4.What do we know about the study into music and memory recall in people with dementia?
A. It is criticized by Petr Janata.
B. It is a ground-breaking study.
C. It is supported by solid evidence.
D. It applies to all people with dementia.
Dyeing eggs has long been an Easter tradition, but it’s the dyeing of baby chicks that is upsetting in some states.
The dye, which is often ordinary food coloring, is either injected into eggs being hatched or sprayed onto newly hatched chicks. Although hatchery owners say the practice is harmless, critics argue that spraying the birds with color is stressful and that dyeing the animals transforms them into something attractive that can be thrown away when their colorful feathers disappear.
“These are living creature and dyeing them sends out a message saying that they are more of a new and unusual object than a living animal,” said Dr. Marc Copper, senior scientific manager for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
Dyed chicks --- and sometimes rabbits --- have been a traditional part of the Easter holiday in some parts of the world, but the practice has gone largely underground in the U.S. because many people view it as cruel.
Today, about half of U.S. states ban the dyeing of animals, but last month the Florida Legislature passed a bill to remove the state’s 45-year-old ban. The drive to end the law wasn’t related to Easter chicks; it was done at the request of a dog groomer(美容师) who wanted to enter pet beauty contests.
Florida governor Rick Scott must agree to remove the ban, which would be lifted July 1, but the Animal Rights Foundation of Florida(ARFF) has asked him not to remove the ban. In addition to allowing animals dyeing, the law would also lift a ban on selling baby animals as pets, and the organization fears that next year the state could see hundreds of dyed baby chicks on the market.
As long as the dye is not poisonous, experts say the birds’ health isn’t affected, and there are scientific reasons to dye animals. Wildlife researchers often inject eggs with dye to track birds in the wild, and teachers have dyed chicks for educational purposes. However, animal advocates are quick to point out that dyeing baby chicks for Easter isn’t educational --- it’s done simply to earn profits.
1.What can we infer from Cooper’s words?
A. He finds it dangerous to dye eggs.
B. He likes dyed birds’ colorful feathers.
C. He is in support of the hatchery owners.
D. He is among the critics of dyeing animals.
2.What do we learn about dyed baby chicks in the U.S.?
A. They are mainly sold in secret.
B. They are as common as dyed eggs.
C. They are welcomed by most Americans.
D. They are getting more popular in the world.
3.What was the purpose of the bill?
A. To protect Easter chicks.
B. To ban pet beauty contests.
C. To make animals dyeing legal.
D. To prevent the sale of baby animals.
4.What is the ARFF’s attitude toward the bill?
A. Tolerance.
B. Opposition.
C. Doubt.
D. Caution.
There is virtue in working standing up. It sounds like a fashion. But it does have a basis in science.
That, by itself, may not be surprising. Health ministries ask people for decades to do more exercise. What is surprising is that long periods of inactivity are bad regardless of how much time you also spend on officially approved high-impact stuff like pounding treadmills(跑步机) in the gym. What you need instead, the latest research suggests, is constant low-level activity. This can be so low-level that you might not think of it as activity at all. Even just standing up counts, for it invokes muscles that sitting does not.
Researchers in this field trace the history of the idea that standing up is good for you back to 1953, when a study published in The Lancet found that bus conductors, who spent their days standing, had a risk of heart attack half that of bus drivers, who spent their shifts on their backsides. But as the health benefits of exercise and vigorous(强度大的) physical activity began to become clear in the 1970s, says David Dunstan, a researcher at the Baker IDI Heart & Diabetes Institute in Melbourne, Australia, interest in low-intensity activity --- like walking and standing --- became weaker.
Over the past few years, however, interest has been excited again. A series of studies, none big enough to provide convincing evidence, but all pointing in the same direction, persuaded Emma Wilmot of the University of Leicester, in Britain, to carry out a meta-analysis. This is a technique that combines diverse studies in a statistically meaningful way. Dr Wilmot combined 18 of them, covering almost 800,000 people and concluded that those individuals who are the least active in their normal daily lives are twice as likely to develop diabetes(糖尿病) as those who are the most active. She also found that the immobile are twice as likely to die from a heart attack and two-and-a-half times as likely to suffer cardiovascular disease as the most mobile. Crucially, all this seemed to be independent of the amount of vigorous, gym-style exercise that volunteers did.
1.The surprising thing mentioned in Paragraph 2 is that ______.
A. Low-level activities are better than high-level ones.
B. Long periods of inactivity are bad to people’s health
C. The benefits of high-impact exercise are not highly approved by people
D. Strong physical activities cannot make up for the bad effects of inactivity.
2.Why did people lose interest in low-intensity activity in the 1970s?
A. Researchers didn’t devote much to studying their health benefits.
B. The health benefits of high-impact exercise were widely recognized.
C. It was believed to be unable to invoke all the muscles of the body.
D. It was proved not so effective in reducing the risk of heart attacks.
3.The findings made by Dr Wilmot ______.
A. disagreed with her assumption
B. consisted with the results of the 1953 study
C. changed her original research objectives
D. confirmed David Dunstan’s research results
4.What’s the passage mainly about?
A. The history of the theory.
B. The benefits of standing up.
C. Low-level activity and health.
D. A series of epidemiological studies.
