议论文类阅读理解模拟训练
本文作者： 21ST
A In kindergarten, my class was asked, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” Crayons (蜡笔) danced across sheets of paper to illustrate our dream occupations. Our drawings were hung in the hallway for our parents to see at Back to School Night. I remember looking down the line and seeing pictures of ballerinas (芭蕾舞女) dancing, firefighters putting out a blaze, and astronauts leaping (跳跃) across the moon–careers that were seen as typical dreams of five–year–olds. My picture showed a stick figure with brown hair holding a carton (纸板箱) of orange juice over a large rectangle (矩形) that was supposed to be a counter. Underneath was my barely legible (清晰的) handwriting: “When I grow up, I want to work at the Market Basket because it would be fun to swipe orange juice across the scanner.” To this day my parents won’t let me forget that out of everything I could have aspired (渴望) to be, my five–year–old self wished to work at the local grocery store. When we are young, questions of what we want to be when we grow up are common. Yet we are not expected to respond with an answer that is likely to come true. However, when we become teens, we are asked the very same question twice as often. The difference is, now we are supposed to answer with confidence. Teens are expected to know exactly what we want to be and how we are going to achieve that goal. Not all of us can be so sure. Even though I am in high school, I cannot answer convincingly. But I don’t consider that a bad thing. How am I supposed to know what I will want to spend my time doing at age 40? When I think about the future, I definitely don’t see myself working at the Market Basket, but in reality, if that was what would make me happy, I would do it. So, the next time someone asks me what I want to be when I grow up, I will simply say “happy”. Happiness is a destination for everyone. We may want to walk different paths in life, but we all want to be happy wherever we end up. Choose your path, but don’t worry too much about choosing wisely. Make a mistake or two and try new things. But always remember, if you’re not happy, you’re not at the end of your journey yet. By Sara D., Wyckoff, NJ 1. What did the author want to be when she was in kindergarten? A. A dancer. B. A firefighter. C. An astronaut. D. A cashier (收银员) in a grocery store. 2. According to the author, when asked what they want to be, teenagers _____. A. are sure about what they want to be B. are expected not to have the kind of ideas children have. C. might not be able to give a convincing answer D. becomes more confident about his or her abilities 3. What does the last paragraph suggest? A. We should stick to what we set out to do. B. Everyone deserves to be happy in the end. C. We are happy as long as we make only a few mistakes D. Never stop trying to find happiness. 4. The point of the article is to ______. A. tell an unusual childhood story B. share thoughts about careers and happiness C. explain how to achieve happiness D. draw attention to childhood dreams B In 2005 in the UK 13 deaths and over 400 injuries were attributed (归因于) to accidents where drivers were using cellphones, deaths which could have possibly been avoided. There are 4 main reasons for banning cellphones at the wheel: Research has proven that it is difficult to concentrate on driving and talking at the same time. A recent British study showed that talking on a mobile phone while driving was more hazardous (危险的) than operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. Tests conducted by scientists for UK–based insurance firm, Direct Line, involved 20 subjects using a driving simulator (模拟器) to test reaction times and driving performance and compared this to when drivers had too much to drink. The results showed drivers’ reaction times were, on average, 30 percent slower when talking on a handheld mobile phone than when legally drunk–and nearly 50 percent slower than under normal driving conditions. The tests also showed that drivers talking on phones were less able than drunk drivers to maintain a constant speed, and they had greater difficulty keeping a safe distance from the car in front. Speaking on a cellphone is an anti-social activity because it puts the lives of others at risk. It doesn’t matter how well we drive, if another driver is not being as professional or as careful, especially using a phone and splitting his or her attention, we are put in danger by their actions. Talking on a phone while driving reduces the competence level to control the vehicle as well as increasing the response time to any danger. It is a huge responsibility to drive a car and one which should not be taken for granted because it is associated with the lives of others. By speaking on cell phones while driving, such a responsibility is treated with impunity (不受惩罚) and the dangers ignored. The driver does not deserve to be in front of that wheel. There was a time not long ago when no one had a mobile phone and we all got on with our business quite adequately. Cellphones might be very useful for an emergency situation, but there really is no need for anyone to have one in a car and talking on it. Any other business can certainly wait until the person is stationary (非移动的). 5. What can we learn from the British study mentioned in paragraph 2? A. Drunk drivers had greater difficulty keeping a safe distance from other cars than drivers talking on the phone. B. The reaction times of sober drivers on the phone was 50% slower than that of drunken ones. C. Talking on the phone while driving is generally more dangerous than drunk driving. D. Drivers on the phone are more able to maintain a constant speed than drunken ones. 6. According to the article, which of the following statements is TRUE? A. Professional drivers never put the lives of others at risk. B. Speaking on the phone while driving is banned in many countries. C. Our safety on the road is not guaranteed unless we improve our driving skills. D. Drivers who don’t understand their responsibility for others’ lives should be banned from driving. 7. What does the last paragraph suggest? A. There were fewer accidents on the road when no one had a cellphone. B. Mobile phones have changed the ways we do business. C. If it is really urgent, pull over your car before making or answering a call. D. The use of cellphones is necessary for business success. 8. The author’s purpose of writing this article is to ______. A. draw public attention to drunk driving B. give an account of the findings of a study on driving on the phone C. argue that talking on the phone while driving should be banned D. call on drivers to stop using cellphones C I used to like them–honest. We’d have lunch, talk on the phone or exchange e-mails, and they all seemed normal enough. Then came Facebook, and I was introduced to a sad fact: Many of my friends have dark sides that they had kept from me. Sure, there were times these dark sides would surface–after too many drinks, say–but apologies and denials (否认) would follow, and all seemed healthy ... or at least acceptable. Today my friends trumpet the more unpleasant aspects of their personalities via Facebook status updates. They’re thrown in my face like TV commercials –unavoidable and endless advertisements for the worst aspects of their personalities. Take Fred. If you were to have lunch with him, you’d find him warm, down-to–earth and modest. Read his status updates and you realize he’s an unbearable (难以忍受的), food–obsessed bore. He’d pause on his way to save a drowning man to sip a cup of coffee–and then write about it. Take Andy. You won’t find a smarter CEO anywhere, but in tough economic times, he’s a CEO without a company to run. So he plays Mafia Wars on Facebook. He’s doing well–level 731, whatever that means. And thanks to Facebook and his status updates, I know he’s playing about 18 hours a day. Andy, you’ve run four companies–and this is how you spend your downtime? What happened to golf? What happened to getting another job? And then there’s Liz. She is positive the H1N1 vaccine will kill us all and that we should avoid it. Chris likes to post at least 20 times a day on every site he can find, so I get to read his thoughts twice, once on Facebook and once on Twitter. In real life, I don’t see these sides of people. Face–to–face, my friends edit themselves, showing me their best. They’re nice, smart people. Whereas face–to–Facebook, my friends are like a blind date gone horribly wrong, one in which you sit there listening while the person on the other side of the table talks on and on, pretty much forgetting you exist and not always making the best impression. I’m left with a problem. Who is my real friend? Is it the Liz I have lunch with ... or the anti–vaccine madman on Facebook? Is it the Fred I can grab a sandwich with ... or the Fred who weeps if he’s at a party and the wine isn’t up to his standards? I know too much about them. And what do they think of me? The guy who lurks (潜伏) online, afraid to reveal (揭露) the simplest fact about himself while judging others and making fun of their comments? I probably don’t seem like much of a prize either. By Stephen Randall, Los Angeles Times 9. What made the author change his opinions of his friends? A. Their secrets on Facebook being exposed. B. The changes to his friends. C. The comments they made online. D. The "dark sides" his friends show online. 10. From Fred’s status updates, we can see that he seems to be ______. A. as helpful and caring online as he is in real life B. ready to help those in need C. obsessed with food and drink D. exactly what the author expects of him 11. The author compared his friends to a blind date gone terribly wrong to show ______. A. His disappointment at seeing his friends’ real selves B. His curiosity about other aspects of his friends’ lives C. His expectation that they will improve D. His pleasure in discovering the “dark sides” to his friends’ characters 12. We can tell from the article that the author ______. A. is against showing one’s true self online B. is confused about what kind of people his friends really are C. knows too many secrets about his friends to stay friendly with them. D. hates people who constantly updates their status online D There is a famous story about British poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge. He was writing a poem when he was interrupted by a knock at the door. This was an age before telephones. Someone was delivering a message. When Coleridge got back to his poem, he had lost his inspiration. His poetic mood had been broken by the knock on his door. His unfinished poem, which could otherwise have been a masterpiece, would now never be more than a fragment (片段). This story tells how unexpected communication can destroy an important thought. Which brings us to the cellphone. The most common complaint about cellphones is that people talk on them to the annoyance of people around them. But more damaging may be the cellphone’s disruption (中断) of our thoughts. We have already entered a golden age of little white lies about our cellphones, and this is by and large a healthy, protective development. “I didn’t hear it ring” or “I didn’t realize my phone had shut off” are among the lies we tell to give ourselves space where we’re beyond reach. The notion of being unreachable is not a new concept–we have “Do Not Disturb” signs on the doors of hotel rooms. So why must we feel guilty when it comes to cellphones? Why must we apologize if we decide to shut off the phone for a while? The problem is that we come from a long–established tradition of difficulty with distance communication. Until the recent mass deployment (使用) of cellphones, it was easy to communicate with someone next to us or a few feet away, but difficult with someone across town, the country or the globe. We came to take it for granted. But cellphones make long-distance communication common, and endanger our time by ourselves. Now time alone, or a conversation with someone next to us which cannot be interrupted by a phone, is something to be cherished. Even cellphone devotees, myself usually included, can’t help at times wanting to throw their phone away, or curse the day they were invented. But we don’t and won’t, and there really is no need. All that’s required to take back our private time is a general social recognition that we have the right to it. In other words, we have to develop a healthy contempt (轻视) for the rings of our own phones. Given the ease of making and receiving cellphone calls, if we don’t talk to the caller right now, we surely will shortly later. A cellphone call deserves no greater priority (优先考虑的事) than a random (随机的) word from the person next to us. Though the call on my cellphone may be the one–in–a–million from Steven Spielberg–who has finally read my novel and wants to make it his next movie. But most likely it is not, and I’m better off thinking about the idea I just had for a new story, or the slice of pizza I’ll eat for lunch. By Paul Levinson 13. What is the point of the anecdote about the poet Coleridge in the first three paragraphs? A. To direct readers’ attention to the main topic. B. To show how important inspiration is to a poet. C. To emphasize the disadvantage of not having a cellphone. D. To encourage readers to read the works of this poet. 14. What does the writer think about people telling “white lies” about their cellphones? A. It is a way of signaling that you don’t like the caller. B. It is natural to tell lies about small things. C. It is basically a good way to protect one’s privacy. D. We should feel guilty when we can’t tell the truth. 15. According to the author, what is the most annoying problem caused by cellphones? A. People get so obsessed with the cellphone rings that they fail to notice anything else. B. People feel guilty when they are not able to answer their cellphones. C. Cellphones interrupt people’s private time. D. With cellphones it is no longer possible to be unreachable. 16. What does last paragraph suggest? A. A person who calls us from afar deserves more of our attention. B. Steven Spielberg once called the author to talk about the author’s novel. C. You should always finish your lunch before you answer a call on the cellphone. D. Never let cellphones interfere too much with your life. E Despite the emergence of Facebook, Twitter, and e-mail, Americans still need the post office. It is the only business whose establishment (建立) is authorized by the Constitution, and Congress (国会) would be foolish to abandon it. Private delivery companies like Federal Express and UPS do very well in big cities and bustling (熙熙攘攘的) suburbs. But only the Postal Service guarantees the low–cost delivery of letters, magazines, and parcels for the millions of Americans who live in sparsely (稀疏地) settled places like Wyoming and Alaska. What’s more, Federal Express and UPS could decide at any point to go into another line of business or could even go out of business altogether. Then how would retirees (退休者) get Social Security checks? How would the rest of us get all our packages from Amazon? The post office also provides a great back–up communications system if our digital communications were to fail, in the event of, say, a huge blackout (停电) or a cyber attack (网络攻击) by terrorists. The post office is projected to lose more than $7 billion this year, leading some to urge Congress to pull the plug (使终止业务). Yet its financial record is no worse than that of many Fortune 500 corporations. And perhaps we should be more forgiving, since Congress requires the post office to perform many non–postal tasks, such as processing passport applications, that increase its costs. In the past year, Congress bailed out (救助) the banking industry and the auto industry. Is the post office any less deserving of taxpayer funding? For much of its history, the post office has lost money and few Americans objected. That’s because it provides a public service that Americans value. So long as it does, it deserves our continued support and respect. By Richard R. John 17. What advantage does the post office have over Facebook, Twitter and email? A. It doesn’t cost customers as much as the other three. B. It provides a back-up communication system in case of emergency. C. It requires less money from the government. D. It offers a faster service and is much more reliable. 18. Paragraph 2 wants to tell us that ______. A. UPS and Federal Express only do business in big cities B. it would be silly to rely totally on private delivery companies C. goods ordered from Amazon can only be delivered by the post office D. Federal Express and UPS have significant influence on people’s everyday lives 19. Some people have doubts about the postal service because _______. A. its financial record is very inferior to many Fortune 500 corporations B. the Congress is considering abandoning the post office C. the post office is expected to suffer a great fall in profits this year D. other postal services are thriving in the big cities of the US 20. The purpose of the article is to tell us that ______. A. the post office is still necessary and deserves support B. other postal services are developing quickly with the decline of the post office C. the status of American postal service has not and shouldn’t be changed D. we should all be concerned about the future of the post office |  |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
京公网安备 11010502033664号