Questions 1 to 4 are based on the conversation you have just heard.-|||-1.A)She is attracted to the beauty of modern buildings.-|||-B)She is preoccupied with her dream to be an architect.-|||-C)She is influenced by her father who teaches architecture.-|||-D)She is drawn to its integration of design and engineering.-|||-2.A)Through hard work. C)By studying the subject online.-|||-B)With the professor`s help. D)By taking prerequisite courses.-|||-3.A)It is groundbreaking. C)It is immaterial.-|||-B) It is long-lasting. D)It is immortal.-|||-4.A)Economics. C)Computer science.-|||-B)Philosophy. D)Western art.

A.) Most of her schoolmates are younger than she is.B.) She simply has no idea what school to transfer to.C.) There are too many activities for her to cope with.D.) She worries she won't fit in as a transfer student.

Questions 16 to 18 are based on the recording you have just heard.-|||-16.A)They are quite friendly to humans. C)They are unafraid of humans.-|||-B)They are shrinking in numbers. D)They are especially fond of garbage.-|||-17.A)It is strictly forbidden C)It is a gesture of human generosity.-|||-B)It is an uncommon sight D)It is allowed only in certain areas.Questions 16 to 18 are based on the recording you have just heard.-|||-16.A)They are quite friendly to humans. C)They are unafraid of humans.-|||-B)They are shrinking in numbers. D)They are especially fond of garbage.-|||-17.A)It is strictly forbidden C)It is a gesture of human generosity.-|||-B)It is an uncommon sight D)It is allowed only in certain areas.

The Nanjing Yangtze River Bridge is one of the most significant cultural _ of 1960s-70s China.A. ruinsB. contributionsC. emblemsD. regions

12题选（）。A. We are running out of natural resources soonB. Only combined efforts can make a differenceC. The waste problem will eventually hurt all of usD. All of us can actually benefit from recycling

My husband and I booked a ten-day tour of China with ABC Tour. It was an excellent experience. Everything was so well organized that I never had to 20 anything. The group was small and it felt like we were a big group of old-friends all 21 , not just passengers on the bus. I was very happy with how well-informed each guide was, how flexible they were to 22 we all had a great time. Our trip to China was 23 . We will definitely 24 ABC Tour when we return to China for yet another visit.1、 2、 3、 4、 5、

Female applicants to postdoctoral positions in geosciences were nearly half as likely to receive excellent letters of recommendation, compared with their male counterparts. Christopher Intagliata reports.As in many other fields, gender bias is widespread in the sciences. Men score higher starting salaries, have more mentoring （指导）, and have better odds of being hired. Studies show they're also perceived as more competent than women in STEM （Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics） fields. And new research reveals that men are more likely to receive excellent letters of recommendation, too."Say, you know, this is the best student I've ever had," says Kuheli Dutt, a social scientist and diversity officer at Columbia University's Lamont campus. "Compare those excellent letters with a merely good letter: 'The candidate was productive, or intelligent, or a solid scientist or something that's clearly solid praise,' but nothing that singles out the candidate as exceptional or one of a kind."Dutt and her colleagues studied more than 1,200 letters of recommendation for postdoctoral positions in geoscience. They were all edited for gender and other identifying information, so Dutt and her team could assign them a score without knowing the gender of the student. They found that female applicants were only half as likely to get outstanding letters, compared with their male counterparts. That includes letters of recommendation from all over the world, and written by, yes, men and women. The findings are in the journal Nature Geoscience.Dutt says they were not able to evaluate the actual scientific qualifications of the applicants using the data in the files. But she says the results still suggest women in geoscience are at a potential disadvantage from the very beginning of their careers starting with those less than outstanding letters of recommendation."We're not trying to assign blame or criticize anyone or call anyone conscious sexist. Rather, the point is to use the results of this study to open up meaningful dialogues on implicit gender bias, be it at a departmental level or an institutional level or even a discipline level." Which may lead to some recommendations for the letter writers themselves.What do we learn about applicants to postdoctoral positions in geosciences?A.There are many more men applying than women.B.Chances for women to get the positions are scare.C.More males than females are likely to get outstanding letters of recommendation.D.Male applicants have more interest in these positions than their female counterparts.What do studies about men and women in scientific research show?A.Women engaged in postdoctoral work are quickly catching up.B.Fewer women are applying for postdoctoral positions due to gender bias.C.Men are believed to be better able to excel in STEM disciplines.D.Women who are keenly interested in STEM fields are often exceptional.What do the studies find about the recommendation letters for women applicants?A.They are hardly ever supported by concrete examples.B.They contain nothing that distinguishes the applicants.C.They provide objective information without exaggeration.D.They are often filled with praise for exceptional applicants.What did Dutt and her colleagues do with the more than 1,200 letters of recommendation?A.They asked unbiased scholars to evaluate them.B.They invited women professionals to edit them.C.They assigned them randomly to reviewers.D.They deleted all information about gender.What does Dutt aim to do with her study?A.Raise recommendation writers' awareness of gender bias in their letters.B.Open up fresh avenues for women post—doctors to join in research work.C.Alert women researchers to all types of gender bias in the STEM disciplines.D.Start a public discussion on how to raise women's status in academic circles.

Virtually nothing on earth can stop a person with a(n)______ attitude and a clear goal from being successful.A. positiveB. oddC. individualD. concerned

Low-carbon Future：We Can Afford to Go Green Tackling climate change will cost consumers the earth．Those who campaign for a green revolution are out to destroy our western lifestyles．Such are the cries of opponents of emissions cuts，and their message has political impact：a number of surveys have found that the enthusiasm of voters for policies to reduce climate change falls off as the price tag increases． However，a new (模型化)exercise suggests that these fears are largely unfounded．It projects that radical cuts to the UK’s emissions will cause barely noticeable increases in the price of food，drink and most other goods by 2050．Electricity and petrol costs will rise significantly，but with the right policies in place，say the modellers，this need not lead to big changes in our lifestyle． "these results show that the global project to fight climate change is feasible，"says Alex Bowen，a climate policy expert at the London School of Economics．"It’s not such a big ask as people are making out．" Although it is impossible to precisely predict prices four decades from now．the exercise is one of the most detailed examinations yet of the impact of climate change policies on UK consumers．It provides a useful rough guide to our economic future． Though its results speak directly to the UK consumer，previous research has come to similar conclusions for the US．In June，one study found that if the US were to cut emissions by 50 per cent by 2050，prices of most consumer goods would increase by less than 5 per cent．The findings are also consistent with analyses by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change in Washington DC．"Even cutting emissions by 80 per cent over four decades has a very small effect on consumers in most areas，”says Manik Roy of the Pew Center．"The challenge is now to convince consumers and policy-makers that this is the case．" The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recommends that wealthy nations cut their emissions to between 80 and 95 per cent below 1990 levels by 2050 in order to avoid the worst effects of climate change．The UK government aims to reduce its contribution by 80 per cent and leaders of the other G8 nations have discussed following suit．To meet this goal，industries will have to cut down fossil fuel consumption，and low-carbon power sources will have to massively expand. Companies will have to pay increasingly higher prices for the right to emit greenhouse gases. How will this affect the average citizen’s wallet To measure the impact of the 80 per cent target on the UK population, New Scientist approached Cambridge Econometrics, a firm known for its modelling of the European economy. The firm used historic economic data to predict the impact of emissions reductions on prices in over 40 categories of goods and services. It compared the impact of the 80 per cent cut with a baseline situation in which the government takes no action other than the limited emissions restrictions already in place as a result of the (京都议定书). Most of the price increases are a consequence of rising energy costs, in part because coal and gas are re-placed by more expensive low-carbon sources. The price of electricity is projected to be 15 per cent higher in 2050 compared with the baseline. In today’s prices, that would add around ￡5 onto typical monthly household electricity bills. It will also result in higher prices elsewhere, as every industrial sector uses electricity. But electricity and other forms of energy make up only a small part of the price of most goods. Other factors-raw materials, labour and taxes-are far more important. The energy that goes into producing food, alcoholic drinks and tobacco, for example, makes up just 2 per cent of the consumer price. For motor vehicle purchases and hotel stays, the figure is 1 per cent. Only for energy-intensive industries does the contribution climb above 3 per cent. As a result, most products cost just a few per cent more by 2050. At current prices, going low-carbon is forecast to add around 5 pence to the price of a slice of bread or a pint of beer. The price of household appliances such as washing machines rises by a few pounds. There is one major exception to the pattern. Airlines do not currently have a low-carbon alternative to jet fuel. Unless one is found, they will bear the full burden of carbon pricing, and average fares will rise by at least 140 per cent--raising the cost of a typical London to New York return trip from around ￡350 to ￡840. Achieving the overall picture of low prices does require government action. The model forecasts that by 2050 natural gas and petrol will cost 160 per cent and 32 per cent more respectively. To avoid large price rises in home heating and road transport while still hitting the 80 per cent target, the Cambridge researchers had to build two major policies into their analysis. They assumed that future governments will provide grants to help switch all domestic heating and cooking to electricity, and invest in the basic facilities needed for electric cars to almost completely replace petroleum-fuelled vehicles. Both policies have been discussed in recent UK government strategy documents, though the detail of how they would be implemented still needs further discussion. Firm policies must follow if ambitious emissions cuts are going to be made, says Chris Thoung of Cambridge Econometrics. So is tackling climate change going to be easier than expected, in terms of consumer costs While the Cam-bridge Econometrics model is widely respected and regularly used by the UK government’s climate change advisers, any attempt to forecast four decades ahead can be diverted from its intended course by unforeseen events. That leads some economists to question the model’s results. For example, companies could move to countries with less strict carbon regulations, points out Richard Tol of the Economic and Social Research Institute in Dublin, Ireland. Incomes in the UK would fall, making goods relatively more expensive. Tol also questions whether it is reasonable to use historical prices as a basis for projecting beyond 2020. Despite this, the Cambridge Econometrics results, together with other recent studies, do provide a useful guide for governments, says Michael Grubb of the University of Cambridge. They suggest that the overall challenge is conquerable, even if many of the details will only become clear in years to come.According to the modellers, emission cuts won’t change the lifestyle, provided that______. A．the price of food and drink remains stableB．appropriate policies are carried outC．electricity and pettol costs don’t riseD．the public has a strong faith in it