TEM4阅读训练(2).doc

TEM 4阅读训练（2）Passage 1Remember the drinking fountain, that once ubiquitous (到处存在的), and free, source of H2O? It seems quaint now. Instead, bottled water is everywhere, in offices, airplanes, stores, homes and restaurants across the country. We consumed over eight billion gallons of the stuff in 2006, a 10% increase from 2005. Its refreshing, calorie-free, convenient to carry around, tastier than some tap water and a heck of a lot healthier than sugary sodas. But more and more, people are questioning whether the water, and the package it comes in, is safe, or at least safer than tap water and if the convenience is worth the environmental impact.Evocative names and labels depicting pastoral scenes have convinced us that the liquid is the purest drink around. “But no one should think that bottled water is better regulated, better protected or safer than tap,” says Eric Goldstein, co-director of the urban program at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a nonprofit organization devoted to protecting health and the environment.Yes, some bottled water comes from sparkling springs and other pristine (纯净的) sources. But more than 25% of it comes from a municipal supply. The water is treated, purified and sold to us, often at a thousandfold increase in price. Most people are surprised to learn that theyre drinking glorified tap water, but bottlers arent required to list the source on the label. This year Aquafina will begin stating on labels that its H20 comes from public water sources. And Nestle Pure Life bottles will indicate whether the water comes from public, private or deep well sources. Dasani acknowledges on its website, but not on the label itself, that it draws from local water.Labels can be misleading at best, deceptive at worst. In one notorious case, water coming from a well located near a hazardous waste site was sold to many bottlers. At least one of these companies labeled its product “spring water”. In another case, H2O sold as “pure glacier water” came from a public water system in Alaska.Lisa Ledwidge, 38, of Minneapolis, stopped drinking bottled water a couple of years ago, partly because she found out that many brands come from a municipal supply. “Youre spending more per gallon than you would on gasoline for this thing that you can get out of the tap virtually for free,” she says. “I wondered, why am I spending this money while complaining about how much gas costs? But you dont ever hear anyone complain about the price of bottled water.” Ledwidge says she now drinks only filtered tap water.(Readers Digest 2008)1. Which of the following is CORRECT as to bottled water?7A. Its tastier than sugary sodas.B. Its healthier than tap water.C. Its easier to access and take.D. Its more expensive for its package.2. How does Eric Goldstein think about bottled water?A. Its the purest drink around us.B. Its names and labels are out of date.C. Its better protected and safer than tap water.D. Its quality may not fit to its advertisement.3. It can be inferred from the third paragraph that _.A. municipal supply is the main source of bottled waterB. whether to lable the source depend on the bottlersC. bottlers must lable their bottled water supply sourceD. bottled water from Aquafina is safer than Dasanis4. The two cases were mentioned by the author to _.A. reveal the source of spring waterB. show the danger of waste sitesC. unveil the deception of labelsD. introduce the pure glacier water5. According to Lisa Ledwidge, _.A. gas costs are higher than bottled water costsB. tap water is more economical than bottled waterC. bottled water has a price advantage over tap waterD. she prefers bottled water to the municipal supplyPassage 2Researchers are trying to tell parents something about what kinds of video games children should be playing and how much time they should spend doing it. A new study concludes what youve already suspected: Young boys who play video games do worse on tests than children who dont. Researchers who followed 64 boys from the ages of 6 to 9 for four months discovered that those who received a new PlayStation II gaming system earned lower reading and writing test scores than children who did not get the video game player. This comes on the heels of another recently reported study about video games, which concluded that kids who play violent video game become more aggressive and less caring regardless of age, sex or culture than young people who dont play these games.The study on the effects of video games on schoolwork was conducted by Denison University Associate Professor Robert Weis and Brittany Cerankosky, who graduated from Denison in 2008. It is called “Effects of Video-Game Ownership on Young Boys Academic and Behavioral Functioning”, and will be published in Psychological Science.Boys who received the system also showed greater teacher-reported academic problems at follow-up than children in the comparison group. The researchers followed 64 young boys over four months. Parents of the 64 were promised a PlayStation II gaming system in exchange for their participation, plus three E rated games. But half the families were given the video gaming system immediately and half were promised if after four months. The children underwent a battery of tests before and after the four months and parents and teachers answered questions about how the boys behaved in school and at home.The conclusion show that, boys who were he first to get the PlayStations spent more time playing video games than the boys who didnt get it immediately 39.3 minutes versus 9.3 minutes. (The boys who didnt get the gaming system right away played at a friends house). Boys who were given the PlayStation right away spent 18.2 minutes a day in after-school academic activities versus 31.6 minutes for the kids who werent. The boys who had the video games immediately achieved lower reading and writing test scores than those who didnt. But the PlayStations seemed to have no effect on the boys math and problem solving skills.Cerankosky said in a statement on the Denison University Web site that there isnt necessarily something inherent in video games that negatively affects kids. “Its an activity that detracts from time that could be spent on schoolwork,” she said. If you are wondering why we needed a study to tell us that, the researchers say that conventional wisdom is not always accurate, and it is important to prove such beliefs through experimentation.(Washington Post 2010)6. Which of the following is CORRECT according to the first paragraph?A. The researchers call for a ban on children video games.B. Video games have less influence on girls performance.C. Evaluation is needed before buying children video games.D. The new PlayStation II gaming system is too violent to children.7. What can we learn from the follow-up study?A. All the 64 boys got a PlayStation II gaming system at start.B. Parents and teachers participation contributed to the result.C. Children in the study were allowed to play games at class.D. Parents of the 64 boys were asked to buy their children video games.8. The studys conclusions show that the PlayStations _.A. are helpful in after-school academic activitiesB. have no direct influence on the boys math skillsC. can decrease the participants problem-solving skillsD. have no effect on the boys who didnt get them firstly9. How does Cerankosky think about the video games?A. They negatively affect the childrens nature.B. They have no inherent influence on schoolwork.C. They can cause inaccurate conventional wisdom.D. They disorder the childrens time arrangement.10. What does this passage mainly talk about?A. The new PlayStation II gaming system.B. The academic performance of young boys.C. The study on video games and schoolwork.D. The negative effect of violent video games.Passage 3Forget Black Friday. The real bargains this year are showing up on Cyber Monday, the first work day following Thanksgiving when people return to their offices, ignore the tasks at hand, and begin to surf the Internet in earnest for this years holiday gifts. Roughly 45% of online retailers expect their holiday sales to increase this year by at least 15% compared with 2008, according to the industry group Shop. org. “People view the Internet as the place to save money and find the best prices through comparison shopping,” says Scott Silverman, Shop. orgs executive director.Online sales may be the lone sweet spot for retailers in this otherwise dismal economy. With double-digit unemployment and a foreclosure crisis that just wont quit, consumers are expected to spend even less this season. Overall, the National Retail Federation expects consumers to spend an average of $682.74 on holiday-related gear, food, and gifts, compared with an average of $705.01 in 2008.While traditional retailers have had their ups and downs over the last decade, online sales have risen steadily since 1999. Thats when companies such as A, Priceline, and eBay first rose to prominence, prompting Newsweek to proclaim that these three businesses had set out to “change the way you shop”. Since then, the sector has grown from a $4.6 billion industry to a $31.5 billion industry. “The story of the last decade is that there has been consistent 20% growth,” says Ken Casear, vice president of industry insights for the Nielsen Co., about online shopping.That growth may have something to do with online retailers willingness and ability to pass on their reduced overhead costs in the form of discounts to consumers. Roughly nine out of 10 online businesses recently surveyed by Shop. org planned to offer some type of promotion for Cyber Monday in the form of one-day sales, free shipping, and “deal of the hour” sales. Roughly 57% plan to offer free shipping this year; Target started waiving (推迟) shipping and handling fees on Nov. 1, a full two weeks before the promotion normally starts. This year, about 15% of all retailers will no longer require consumers to spend a certain amount of money to qualify for free shipping.Form the retailers perspective, the best part about online holiday shopping is that its success is not measured on a single day. The results from Black Friday are often used to forecast consumers moods about the entire holiday season or, worse, the first quarter of the following year. By comparison, online holiday shopping remains steady throughout the month of December, says Andrew Lipsman, director of industry analysis for ComScore, a research firm. If there is a peak with holiday online sales, it happens over an entire workweek, usually between Dec. 10 and 15, he says.Even with this cheerleading over online sales, retail researchers acknowledge that e-commerce will never really usurp (取代) Black Friday. Online retail spending year-round including spending on food, cars, and gas still accounts for just 8% of retail sales overall, says Lipsman. “People like to get out into a store,” he says. “Black Friday is still a cultural phenomenon.” (Newsweek 2009)11. It can be concluded from the first paragraph that _.A. Black Friday has lost its traditional meaningB. Cyber Monday means Thanksgiving dayC. online retailers may offer good bargainsD. Internet goes against firms routine tasks12. One cause for the National Retail Federations expectation of a consumer expenditure decline is _.A. the online salesB. the quit of retailersC. the prosperous economyD. the high unemployment13. Companies like Amazon. Com and eBay were mentioned to indicate _.A. the ups and downs of traditional retailersB. the consistent rise of online shoppingC. the steadily growth of traditional retailersD. the retailers ad promotion on Newsweek14. For this years Cyber Monday, most online retailers will offer the following EXCEPT _.A. consumer discountsB. free shoppingC. one-day salesD. goods promotion15. We can infer from the retail researchers that _.A. online sales will lead the retail marketB. online retail had no cultural meaningC. e-commerce is identical with Black FridayD. traditional shopping still holds the marketPassage 4Consumers around the world want governments to stop haggling (争辩) and start acting on climate change, according to a survey carried out in 12 countries by a coalition of climate groups.Despite the looming prospect of a deep global recession, 43% of the 12,000 respondents of the survey chose climate change ahead of the global economy when asked about their current concerns. Worldwide, 77% of respondents wanted to see their governments cutting carbon by their fair share or more, in order to allow developing countries to grow their economies.The survey was carried out for the HSBC Climate Partnership, a collaboration between the international bank and climate NGOs including WWF, the Climate Group, Earthwatch Institute and the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute.Lord Stern, and adviser to HSBC on economic development and climate change and former adviser to the UK government, said: “This research demonstrates the need for decisive action on climate change. The urgent challenge is to build a framework for a global deal so that consensus can be reached in Copenhagen and the discussions in Poznan are a critical stepping stone to achieving this. Now is the time to lay the foundations of a new form of growth that can transform our economies and societies.”The results of the groups climate confidence monitor are based on an internet questionnaire presented to 1,000 people each in 12 countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Mexico, UK and the US. The survey was conducted between mid-September and early October.Even in many emerging countries, people said their governments must reduce greenhouse gases 62% of respondents in China said they should reduce emissions and only 4% said the countrys emissions should be allowed to increase. In Mexico and Brazil, more than 80% wanted emissions cuts that tallied with (符合，吻合) their fair share of global targets as high a level as in developed countries. In the US, 72% of people said their country should reduce emissions by at least as much as other countries.David Nussbaum, the chief executive of WWF-UK, said: “The current global economic crisis is a stark reminder of the consequences of living beyond our means. As the world looks to restore its economies we must build in long-term environmental as well as economic sustainability.”Steve Howard, chief executive of the Climate Group, a coalition of businesses and governments aimed at moving towards a low-carbon economy, said t