---Do you have any plan for this coming weekend?
---Sure, we _____ on the beach of Hawaii then.
A.lie B.will lie C.are lying D.will be lying
---Hello, Sunshine Hotel. May I help you?
---Yes, I’d like to _____ a table for three tonight.
A.supply B.serve C.reserve D.preserve
请阅读下面图片和文字，并按照要求用英语写一篇 150 词左右的文章。
Today with the development of technology, people own all kinds of mobiles phones. Wherever you go, it’s not uncommon to see people obsessed with mobile phones, taking photos, watching videos online, or getting caught up in checking or updating their WeChat Moments. Our life seems to have been taken over by mobile phones and we live in a virtual world created by mobile phones, where we no longer have intimate( 亲 密 的 )conversations that bring belly laughs.
Well aware that the overuse of phones will hurt relationships, many people have had enough of this non-interaction, especially when getting together or over meals, and changes are being made at houses. Many Chinese families set a strict “no phones at the dinner table” policy, which hopefully will stop their kids from becoming addicted to mobile phones and prevent more digital invasion of our personal space.
（写作内容）
1. 用约 30 个词概述上述图片和文字的内容；
2. 用约 120 个词就”餐桌上禁用手机”这一话题，谈谈你的看法，内容包括:
(1) 简要阐述这种做法的必要性；
(2) 结合实际，就如何避免沉迷于手机提出几点建议(不少于两点)。
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
请认真阅读下列短文，并根据所读内容在文章后表格中的空格里填入一个最恰当的单词。注意:每个空格只填 1 个单词。
Britain Supports E-Cigarettes, US Considers Ban
The United States and Britain have very different views on e-cigarettes.
American public health officials are warning of the dangers of vaping(吸电子烟)among young people. But, British officials consider electronic cigarettes to be a powerful tool for people trying to quit smoking.
Britain’s Royal College of Physicians tells doctors to promote e-cigarettes “as widely as possible” for patients trying to give up cigarettes. And Public Health England says vaping is much less dangerous than smoking.
In the United States, hundreds of people who vape have been sickened by a mysterious lung illness. Many of them are teenagers.
In answer, the federal government and some states have recently taken steps to ban the flavored e-cigarettes that appeal to young people.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now recommends that people consider not using e-cigarettes.
Dr. John Britton is director of the U.K. Center for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies at the University of Nottingham. He said the U.S. reaction is “complete madness.” Dr. Britton added, “The reality with smoking is, if you tell people to stop vaping, they will go back to tobacco and tobacco kills.”
Around the world, countries have different views on vaping. More than 30 nations ban e-cigarettes completely. Many European countries, including Austria, Belgium, Germany and Italy, consider e-cigarettes the same as tobacco products and control the sales of them.
However, France, just like Britain, hardly sets limits on the sales of e-cigarettes. In those countries, e-cigarettes are sold as usual consumer products.
E-cigarettes arrived in the United States in 2007 and have been mostly unregulated. Three years ago, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) got the power to oversee their use. Black market, illegal sales of e-cigarettes have grown quickly.
The FDA’s acting commissioner, Dr. Ned Sharpless, recently testified(作证)before Congress.
Several lawmakers suggested complete removal of e-cigarettes from the market.
“We do not consider these products safe, we think they have harm,” Dr. Sharpless said. “We do not think really anyone should be using them other than people using them in place of smoking regular tobacco cigarettes. “
How do e-cigarettes work? The vaping devices usually heat a solution(溶液)containing nicotine into a vapor, which is inhaled. The amount of nicotine differs widely. Some countries restrict the amount. There is no limit in the United States. But the widespread use of vaping devices among young people brought warnings from health officials. They said nicotine harms a teenager’s still-developing brain.
“What’s right for England might not be right for the U.S.,” said Ryan Kennedy. He is with the Institute for Global Tobacco Control at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
The CDC said that the mysterious lung illness appears to be in connection with THC vaping products. THC is a chemical compound that gives marijuana its high.
The agency said many of the 800 people who got sick reported vaping THC. It said it still needed more information to know whether a single product, substance or brand is responsible. Some researchers have blamed an ingredient used in vaping oils, especially in black market products.
Britain Supports E-Cigarettes, US Considers Ban | ||
Different 1.. Towards e-cigarettes | The USA | ★Warnings are given out that vaping damages health. ★A ban on flavored e-cigarettes is 2..way. ★People are advised by CDC to 3. vaping. |
Britain | ★E-cigarettes are considered as helpful for smokers to quit. ★Vaping puts people at less 4. than smoking. ★The medical administration promotes the prescription of vaping for patients trying to quit smoking. | |
Elsewhere | ★Over 30 nations ban e-cigarettes completely. ★Many European countries try to keep e-cigarettes in 5.. ★The sales of e-cigarettes face 6. rules in Britain as well as in France. | |
Reasons for the differences | ★In the USA, a mysterious lung illness, suspected to be 7. to THC vaping products, has spread among vapers including a lot of teenagers. ★It is believed in Britain, which thinks the USA overreacts, that people will 8. to deadly tobacco if vaping is banned. | |
Other facts about e-cigarettes | ★Black market has expanded quickly due to lack of proper regulations. ★FDA recently testified( 作 证 )before Congress, of which several lawmakers suggested that e-cigarettes should be 9. removed from the market. ★The amount of nicotine 10. in the solution( 溶 液 )of vaping devices differs widely. Anyway, it harms a teenager’s still-developing brain. |
I don’t know what I should talk about - about death or about love? Or are they the same? Which one should I talk about？
We were newlywed(s 新婚者). We still walked around holding hands, even if we were just going to the store. I would say to him, “I love you.” He would grab my hands, and whirl me around, and kiss me. People were walking by and smiling.
One night I heard a noise. I looked out the window. He saw me. “Close the window and go back to sleep. There’s a fire at the reactor(反应堆). I’ll be back soon.”
I didn’t see the explosion itself. Just the flames. A tall flame. And smoke. The heat was awful.
And he’s still not back.
Seven o’clock. I was told he was in the hospital. I ran there, but the police had already encircled it, and they weren’t letting anyone through. Only ambulances.
Many of the doctors and nurses in that hospital would get sick themselves and die. But we didn’t know that then. ①
I couldn’t get into the hospital that evening. There was a sea of people. Someone in the crowd said the injured firemen were being taken to Moscow that night. All the wives got together in one group. We decided we’d go with them. Let us go with our husbands! The soldiers - there were already soldiers - they pushed us back. Then the doctor came out and said, yes, they were flying to Moscow, but we needed to bring them their clothes. The clothes they’d worn at the station had been burned. We ran across the city, and came running back with their bags of clothes. But the plane was already gone. They tricked us. ②
I decided that I have to get to Moscow. By myself.
For those days I was allowed to stay in the hospital dormitory. ③
“But there’s no kitchen. How can I cook for him?”
“You don’t need to cook anymore. They can’t digest the food.”
He started to change - every day I met a “brand-new” person. The burns started to come to the surface. In his mouth, on his tongue, his cheeks - at first there were little damages, and then they grew. It came off in layers - as white film(薄膜)… the color of his face… his body… blue… red… grey-brown. And some of his internal organs began to dissolve … It’s impossible to describe! It’s impossible to write down! And even to get over. The only thing that saved me was, it happened so fast; there wasn’t any time to think, or to cry.
It was a hospital for people with serious radiation poisoning. Fourteen days. In fourteen days a person dies. ④
I was still able to make him some soup. It was all useless; he couldn’t even drink anything. He couldn’t even swallow a raw egg. But I wanted to get something tasty! As if it mattered.
It was the ninth of May. He always used to say to me: “You have no idea how beautiful Moscow is! Especially on V-Day, when they set off the fireworks. I want you to see it.”
I’m sitting with him in the room. He opens his eyes. “Is it day or night?” “It’s nine at night.”
“Open the window! They’re going to set off the fireworks!”
I opened the window. We’re on the eighth floor, and the whole city’s there before us! There was a bouquet of fire exploding in the air.
“Look at that!” I said.
“I told you I’d show you Moscow. And I told you I’d always give you flowers on holidays ...”
I look over, and he’s getting three carnations from under his pillow. He gave the nurse money, and she bought them.
I had no idea then how much I loved him! Him ... just him.
And then - the last thing. I remember it in flashes, all broken up.
I came back from outside and called the nurse’s post right away. “How is he?”“He died fifteen minutes ago.” What? I was there all night. I was gone for half an hour! Then I came to: I’ll see him one more time! Once more! I run down the stairs. He was still in his bio-chamber; they hadn’t taken him away yet. His last words were “Lyusya! Lyusenka!” “She’s just stepped away for a bit; she’ll be right back,” the nurse told him. He sighed and went quiet. I didn’t leave him anymore after that. I accompanied him all the way to the grave site. Although the thing I remember isn’t the grave; it’s the huge plastic bag. That bag used for the prevention of radiation leakage.
1.Which is the best title of the passage?
A.Alternative love B.Forever-lost love
C.Brand-new love D.Unaffordable love
2.The wives were not allowed to accompany their husbands probably because _____.
A.they failed to bring clean clothes for their men
B.they would stop the treatment going on smoothly
C.the plane couldn’t accommodate so many people
D.their husbands were suffering radiation poisoning
3.According to the underlined sentence, how does the woman feel about her husband?
A.Bored. B.Impressed. C.Heartbroken. D.Relieved.
4.The sentence “Nobody mentioned radiation.” should be put back to _____.
A.① B.② C.③ D.④
5.The passage is developed mainly by _____.
A.giving examples B.telling a story
C.making comparisons D.explaining an argument
6.The following sentences can show the deep love between the couple EXCEPT _____.
A.We ran across the city, and came running back with their bags of clothes (Paragraph 7)
B.But I wanted to get something tasty! As if it mattered (Paragraph 14)
C.I look over, and he’s getting three carnations from under his pillow (Paragraph 22)
D.Although the thing I remember isn’t the grave; it’s the huge plastic bag (Paragraph 25)
Attacking billionaires is gaining popularity - especially among candidates to be America’s president. “Every billionaire is a policy failure,” goes a common left-wing slogan. In Britain’s election, too, the super-rich are under fire. Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party, says that a fair society would contain none.
Left-wingers’ criticizing inequality is nothing new. But the idea that huge personal fortunes are made possible only when government goes wrong is a more novel and serious idea. It is also misguided.
The left’s accusation is based on a bit of truth. When competition is fierce and fair, persistently high profits should be difficult to sustain. Yet on both sides of the Atlantic some companies make large profits in concentrated markets, and some billionaires have become successful where competition has failed. For example, Facebook and Google dominate online advertising. About a fifth of America’s billionaires made their money in industries in which government control or market failure is common.
Yet many others operate in competitive markets. The retailers owned by Mike Ashley, one of Mr Corbyn’s targets, are known for low prices and cruel competition. For every Mark Zuckerberg, the boss of Facebook, there are several technology entrepreneurs( 创 业 者 )with lots of rivals. Nobody can seriously accuse these innovators of having dominated their markets or of depending on state favors. The same goes for sportsmen such as Michael Jordan or musicians like Jay-Z, billionaires both.
When capitalism functions well, competition reduces profits for some but also produces them for others as entrepreneurs seize more markets. Their success will eventually set off another cycle of disruption( 颠 覆 ), but in the meantime fortunes can be made. This process creates vast benefits for society. According to estimates by William Nordhaus, an economist, between 1948 and 2001 innovators captured only 2% of the value they created. Perhaps that is why billionaires are tolerated even by countries with perfect social-democratic system: Sweden and Norway have more billionaires per person than America does.
Taxes should be increased progressively. But that does not justify limitless redistribution or punitive(惩罚性的)tax increase. Ms Warren’s wealth tax has already doubled once during her campaign. Thomas Piketty, an economist behind many of the most-cited inequality statistics, proposes a wealth tax of up to 90% on the richest billionaires. Such expropriation(征收)would surely discourage motivation to innovate and to allocate capital efficiently. An economy with fewer entrepreneurs might have fewer billionaires but would ultimately be less dynamic, leaving everyone worse off.
Whatever Mr Corbyn says, Britain is hardly corrupt by global standards. But it does have a problem with inherited wealth, the source of one-fifth of billionaires’ fortunes. Higher inheritance taxes would be welcome there and in America, where it is too easy to pass wealth between the generations. Besides, a broader agenda of attacking monopoly(垄断)while maintaining dynamism would help weaken over-protection of intellectual-property and copyright, and promote competition in old and new industries alike.
Doing all this would achieve much more than an unfair attack on the rich - and without the associated damage. By all means, correct policy failures. But billionaires are usually the wrong target.
1.The examples of Facebook and Google are mentioned in Paragraph 3 to show _____.
A.the situation is unique to America
B.most billionaires benefit from government’s protection
C.some billionaires do succeed in less competitive situations
D.profits are impossible in fiercely competitive industries
2.What will happen when capitalism works well?
A.Tax on the rich will be increased as a punishment.
B.More wealth will be produced for the whole society.
C.Billionaires will get most of the wealth they have created.
D.Billionaires are not accepted even in social-democratic societies.
3.The writer thinks expropriation like Thomas Piketty’s proposal will _____.
A.increase taxes progressively B.allocate capital more efficiently
C.prevent economic development D.motivate people to strive for success
4.What does the writer mainly tell us in the last but one paragraph?
A.Intellectual property and copyright protection must be weakened.
B.It makes no sense for the government to increase inheritance taxes.
C.It’s possible to promote market competition without fighting monopoly.
D.Practical measures can be taken to deal with the gap between rich and poor.
