1 . Elizabeth Spelke, a cognitive (认知的) psychologist at Harvard, has spent her career testing the world's most complex learning system-the mind of a baby. Babies might seem like no match for artificial intelligence (AI). They are terrible at labeling images, hopeless at mining text, and awful at video games. Then again, babies can do things beyond the reach of any AI. By just a few months old, they’ve begun to grasp the foundations of language, such as grammar. They’ve started to understand how to adapt to unfamiliar situations.
Yet even experts like Spelke don’t understand precisely how babies — or adults, for that matter — learn. That gap points to a puzzle at the heart of modern artificial intelligence: We're not sure what to aim for.
Consider one of the most impressive examples of AI, Alpha Zero, a programme that plays board games with superhuman skill. After playing thousands of games against itself at a super speed, and learning from winning positions, Alpha Zero independently discovered several famous chess strategies and even invented new ones. It certainly seems like a machine eclipsing human cognitive abilities. But Alpha Zero needs to play millions more games than a person during practice to learn a game. Most importantly, it cannot take what it has learned from the game and apply it to another area.
To some AI experts, that calls for a new approach. In a November research paper, Francois Chollet, a well-known AI engineer, argued that it’s misguided to measure machine intelligence just according to its skills at specific tasks. “Humans don’t start out with skills; they start out with a broad ability to acquire new skills,” he says. “What a strong human chess player is demonstrating is not only the ability to play chess, but the potential to fulfill any task of a similar difficulty.” Chollet posed a set of problems, each of which requires an AI programme to arrange colored squares on a grid (格栅) based on just a few prior examples. It’s not hard for a person. But modern machine-learning programmes-trained on huge amounts of data — cannot learn from so few examples.
Josh Tenenbaum, a professor in MIT's Center for Brains, Minds & Machines, works closely with Spelke and uses insights from cognitive science as inspiration for his programmes. He says much of modern AI misses the bigger picture, comparing it to a cartoon about a two-dimensional world populated by simple geometrical (几何形的) people. AI programmes will need to learn in new ways — for example, by drawing causal inferences rather than simply finding patterns. “At some point — you know, if you’re intelligent — you realize maybe there's something else out there,” he says.
1. Compared to an advanced AI programme, a baby might be better at _______________.| A．labeling images | B．identifying locations |
| C．playing games | D．making adjustments |
| A．Stimulating. | B．Measuring. | C．Beating. | D．Limiting. |
| A．AI is good at finding similar patterns |
| B．AI should gain abilities with less training |
| C．AI lacks the ability of generalizing a skill |
| D．AI will match humans in cognitive ability |
| A．What is exactly intelligence? |
| B．Why is modern AI advanced? |
| C．Where is human intelligence going? |
| D．How do humans tackle the challenge of AI? |
2 . As part of a health initiative, Berkeley is getting ready to become the first city in the US to require large grocery stores to stop allowing the sales of junk food and candy in checkout aisles(过道). The new rule is expected to go into effect in March 2021.
The “Healthy Checkout Ordinance(法规)” was approved by Berkeley’s City Council. It requires stores over 2,500 square-feet in size to sell at least 25 square-feet of healthy items within a three-foot radius(半径) of checkout registers. So now instead of candy and soda and other high calorie items, shoppers can expect to see fresh fruit and whole grain alternatives at checkout counters.
“Placement of unhealthy snacks near a register increases the likelihood that customers will purchase these foods and drinks when willpower is weak at the end of a long shopping trip,” City Council member Kate Harrison said. The new rule will affect at least 25 retailers(零售商)in Berkeley. These include Whole Foods, CVS, Walgreens and Safeway.
“It's not a ban: it's a nudge(推动),” Harrison said. “Stores can still sell candy and soda, just not at your child's eye level in the checkout.” The council said the shift to selling more healthy products at checkouts will still be profitable for stores because data shows customers are looking for more low sugar and low sodium products anyway. They also said retailers in test cases around the country and in California have seen dramatic increases in sales of healthy foods since they changed their checkouts to include more fresh options in displays.
The ordinance will make grocery stores a “more neutral and health-friendly space for consumers,” said Ashley Hickson, senior policy associate at the Center for Science in the Public Interest(CSPI). Junk food makers spend a lot to make sure their products are front and center in stores, Hickson said, but some consumers don't like the practice. In a CSPI survey, 76% of shoppers who bought unhealthy food or drink at checkout regretted the purchase, she added.
1. What can we infer from Harrison's words in Paragraph 3?| A．Customers tend to ignore the price when tired. |
| B．Items placed near checkouts are most profitable. |
| C．Customers will easily spend a fortune when tired. |
| D．Items placed near checkouts are inviting to customers. |
| A．Alternatives will make up for sales. |
| B．Retailers will get financial support. |
| C．Healthy food will attract more customers. |
| D．Retail prices of other goods will be raised. |
| A．Spending a lot to promote sales. | B．Advertising some unhealthy drinks. |
| C．Placing junk food at checkout aisles. | D．Replacing junk food with healthy ones. |
| A．The Negative Influences of Junk Food |
| B．How to Maximize the Profits of Stores |
| C．Berkeley Will Ban Most Junk Food at Checkouts |
| D．Berkeley Pays More Attention to People's Health |
3 . A robot with a sense of touch may one day feel “pain”, both its own physical pain and sympathy for the pain of its human companions. Such touchy-feely robots are still far off, but advances in robotic touch-sensing are bringing that possibility closer to reality.
Sensors set in soft, artificial skin that can detect both a gentle touch and a painful strike have been hooked up to a robot that can then signal emotions, Asada reported February 15 at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. This artificial “pain nervous system,” as Asada calls it, may be a small building block for a machine that could ultimately experience pain. Such a feeling might also allow a robot to “sympathize” with a human companion’s suffering.
Asada, an engineer at Osaka University, and his colleagues have designed touch sensors that reliably pick up a range of touches. In a robot system named Affetto, a realistic looking child’s head, these touch and pain signals can be converted to emotional facial expressions.
A touch-sensitive, soft material, as opposed to a rigid metal surface, allows richer interactions between a machine and the world, says neuroscientist Kingson Man of the University of Southern California. Artificial skin “allows the possibility of engagement in truly intelligent ways”.
Such a system, Asada says, might ultimately lead to robots that can recognize the pain of others, a valuable skill for robots designed to help care for people in need, the elderly, for instance.
But there is an important distinction between a robot that responds in a predictable way to a painful strike and a robot that’s able to compute an internal feeling accurately, says Damasio, a neuroscientist also at the University of Southern California. A robot with sensors that can detect touch and pain is “along the lines of having a robot, for example, that smiles when you talk to it,” Damasio says. ‘It’s a device for communication of the machine to a human.” While that’s an interesting development, “it’s not the same thing” as a robot designed to compute some sort of internal experience, he says.
1. What do we know about the “pain nervous system”?| A．It is named Affetto by scientists. | B．It is a set of complicated sensors. |
| C．It is able to signal different emotions. | D．It combines sensors and artificial skin. |
| A．Delivered. | B．Translated. | C．Attached. | D．Adapted. |
| A．Robots can smile when talked to. |
| B．Robots can talk to human beings. |
| C．Robots can compute internal feelings |
| D．Robots can detect pains and respond accordingly. |
| A．Machines Become Emotional | B．Robots Inch to Feeling Pain |
| C．Human Feelings Can Be Felt | D．New Devices Touch Your Heart |
4 . Regardless of how famous they are, and despite the star treatment they receive, many celebrities make it a point to give back to charities. Some have even set up their own private foundations. Their widely publicised visits to troubled areas of the world help to raise awareness of issues such as famine and poverty. According to Jane Cooper of Unicef UK, celebrities have a unique ability to reach huge numbers of people, many of whom might not otherwise be engaged in charitable causes. She pointed out that famous faces had played a significant role in raising funds in recent years, and their energies had produced tangible results, such as enabling millions of children in poorer countries to attend school.
But in spite of these successes there is evidence to suggest that celebrity endorsement (代言) may be overrated. In a survey of members of the public to find out if celebrity involvement would encourage people to donate, researchers found that the impact was not as great as previously thought. When shown a list of well-known organisations and famous people who represent them, over half of respondents were unable to match the celebrity with the cause. What’s more, three quarters claimed that they didn’t respond to celebrity endorsement in any way. The survey also showed that a few names did stand out as being associated with particular charities. But the presence of a celebrity in a campaign, was not a significant factor when it came to a decision to donate time or money. Instead, the majority of people contribute because of personal connections in their lives and families which make a charity important to them.
In another study aimed at young people, most participants cited a compelling (无法抗拒的) mission as their main motivation to give. The second most important incentive was if a friend or peer recommended supporting a particular cause. Only two percent of respondents said they were motivated by celebrity endorsement. This seems to contradict the general assumption that teenagers are particularly influenced by famous people. One possible explanation is that there is a general fatigue (疲倦) with celebrity culture. There is also a suspicion that the stars are the one who benefit most when they offer to do charity work. Some critics have accused that celebrities might actually take attention away from issues by attracting more attention than the causes they represent.
So taking all these issues into account, is it time for charities to rethink their campaign strategies and look for alternative ways to reach new audiences? Whichever point of view you favour, there seems to be opportunities for more research into how charity campaigns might develop relationships with celebrities to maximise their potential. This in turn will open up more engagement, and better targeted campaigns-which can only benefit those who really matter — the people and animals that are in need of assistance.
1. What does the underlined word “tangible” in paragraph I probably mean?| A．Definite. | B．Complicated. | C．Limited. | D．Temporary. |
| A．they gain benefit from the charities |
| B．they are forced to finish a necessary task |
| C．they believe in the famous people they like |
| D．they are inspired by the people around them |
| A．what celebrities achieve in doing charities |
| B．How young people react to celebrity culture |
| C．why young people are hardly influenced by celebrities |
| D．who is to blame for taking attention away from charities |
| A．Objective. | B．Positive. |
| C．Negative. | D．Unclear. |
5 . The 2019 World Conference on VR Industry shows that Virtual Reality （VR） technology can be used to revolutionize people's experiences in practically any field．
Held in Nanchang from Oct． 19 to 22， the annual conference attracted more than 300 experts， leading scholars and company principals from over 30 countries． The theme of this year's World Conference on VR Industry was "VR+5G tor a new age of insight．" Conferences and exhibitions， which hosted more than 2，000 companies from across the world， were held during the event．
As China introduces 5G this year， experts and industry insiders said that the VR industry will hug the new era． "We will take the lead in VR technology creativity． For example， the technology has already been applied successfully to this year's National Day parade． The popularity of the technology among younger generations of users guarantees a large potential market， said Guo Ping， representative of Huawei．
In 2018， Oral Roberts University in the USA opened a new Global Learning Center， which has classrooms equipped with 360-degree cameras on the wail， which follows and records professors as they teach． Through an app on the smart phone， students can see images in 3D and manipulate （操纵）them．
In May 2019， a VR theme park opened to the public in London． Covering about 13，000 square meters with 120 sets of advanced VR equipment， the park attracts thousands of visitors every day．
During the 22nd Asian Music Festival， the musical Eight made its second appearance． Eight is a unique fusion of music， theater， VR technology and visual art， in which audience members wear VR headsets to walk through and manipulate an equipment． The show tells a poetic story of an old woman looking back on her life and it lasts for 15 minutes．
1. What does this year's World Conference suggest？ ______| A．VR technology can be used only with 5G． |
| B．VR technology can change people's lives． |
| C．China's 5G technology will take the lead． |
| D．More VR theme parks will be opened to public． |
| A．Because it attracts experts to cooperate． |
| B．Because it has a large overseas market． |
| C．Because young customers have interest in it． |
| D．Because it has changed how to teach and learn． |
| A．research | B．process |
| C．combination | D．type |
| A．China Is Leading the Way in the World |
| B．VR Technology Development in China |
| C．5G Technology： China Moves Ahead Quickly |
| D．The Bright Future of VR in Diverse Fields |
In an effort to prevent language loss, scholars from a number of organizations- UNESCO and National Geographic among them –have for many years been documenting dying languages and the cultures they reflect.
Mark Turin, a scientist at the Macmillan Center, Yale University, who specializes in the languages and oral traditions of the Himalayas, is following that tradition. His recently published book, A Grammar of Thangmi with an Ethnolinguistic Introduction to the Speakers and Their Culture, grows out of his experience living, looking and raising a family in a village in Nepal.
Documenting the Tangmi language and culture is just a starting point for Turin, who seeks to include other languages and oral traditions across the Himalayans reaches of India, Nepal, Bhutan, and China. But he is not content to simply record these voices before they disappear without record.
At the University of Cambridge Turin discovered a wealth of important materials- including photographs, films, tap recordings, and field notes- which had remained unstudied and were badly in need of care and protection.
Now, through the two organizations that he has founded-the Digital Himalaya Project and the World Oral Literature Project- Turin has started a campaign to make such documents, found in libraries and stores around the world, available not just to scholars but to the youngers.
Generations of communities from whom the materials were originally collected.Thanks to digital technology and the widely available Internet. Turin notes, the endangered languages can be saved and reconnected with speech communities.
1. Many scholars are making efforts to ________.
| A．promote global languages |
| B．rescue the disappearing languages |
| C．search for language communities |
| D．set up languages research organizations |
| A．Having first records of the languages. |
| B．Writing books on language searching. |
| C．Telling stories about language users. |
| D．Linking with the native speakers. |
| A．The cultural statics in India. |
| B．The documents available at Yale. |
| C．His language research in Britain. |
| D．His personal experience in Nepal. |
| A．Write sell and donate. |
| B．Record, repeat and reward. |
| C．Collect, protect and reconnect. |
| D．Design, experiment and report. |
7 . If you wear glasses, chances are you are smarter. Research published in the famous British journal Nature Communications has found that people who displayed higher levels of intelligence were almost 30 percent more likely to wear glasses.
The scientists studied the genes of thousands of people between the ages of 16 and 102.The study showed intelligence can be connected to physical characteristics. One characteristic was eyesight. In out of 10 people who were more intelligent, there was a higher chance they needed glasses. Scientists also said being smarter has other benefits. It is connected to better health.
It is important to remember these are connections which are not proven causes. Scientists call this correlation. Just because something is connected to something else does not mean one of those things caused the other. And it’s worth noting that what constitutes intelligence is subjective and can be difficult, if not impossible, to measure.
Forget genes though. Plenty of proof shows wearing glasses makes people think you are more intelligent, even if you do not need glasses. A number of studies have found people who wear glasses are seen as smarter, hard-working and honest. Many lawyers use this idea to help win their cases. Lawyer Harvey Solves explained this. Glasses soften their appearance. He said Sometimes there has been a huge amount of proof showing that people he was defending broke the law. He had them wear glasses and they weren’t found guilty.
Glasses are also used to show someone is intelligent in movies and on TV. Ideas about people who wear glasses have begun to shift. People who do not need glasses sometimes wear them for fashion only. They want to look worldly or cool. But not everyone is impressed by this idea, though. GQ magazine said people who wear glasses for fashion are trying too hard to look smart and hip (时髦的). However, that hasn’t stopped many celebrities from happily wearing glasses even if they do not need them. Justin Bieber is just one high-profile fan of fashion glasses.
1. What does the new study show?| A．People wearing glasses are smarter. |
| B．People wearing glasses are healthier. |
| C．Wearing glasses can make people cleverer. |
| D．Wearing glasses is associated with higher IQ. |
| A．Shift. | B．Link. | C．Proof. | D．Consequence. |
| A．Because it can create a moral image. |
| B．Because it can mislead the witnesses. |
| C．Because it can highlight clients’ qualities. |
| D．Because it can prove the clients’ innocence. |
| A．Positive. | B．Negative. | C．Mixed | D．Indifferent. |
8 . To learn to think is to learn to question. Those who don't question never truly think for themselves. These are simple rules that have governed the advancement of science and human thought since the beginning of time. Advancements are made when thinkers question theories and introduce new ones. Unfortunately, it is often the great and respected thinkers who end up slowing the progress of human thought. Aristotle was a brilliant philosopher whose theories explained much of the natural world, often incorrectly. He was so esteemed by the scientific community that even 1，200 years after his death, scientists were still trying to build upon his mistakes rather than correct them!
Brilliant minds can intimidate upandcoming thinkers who are not confident of their abilities. They often believe they are inferior to the minds of giants such as Aristotle, leading many to accept current paradigms instead of questioning them.
I, like many thinkers of the past, once believed in my mental inferiority. I was certain that my parents, my teachers-adults in general-were always right. They were like a textbook to me; I didn't question what was written on those pages. I respected them, and accepted whatever they told me. But that attitude soon changed. My mind's independence was first stimulated in the classroom.
A stern, 65yearold elementaryschool science teacher once told me that light is a type of wave. I confidently went through years of school believing that light is a wave. One day，however I heard the German exchange student mention that light could be made up of particles. As the others laughed at his statement, I started to question my beliefs.
Maybe the teachers and textbooks hadn't given me the whole story. I went to the library, did some research and learned of the lightasawave versus lightasaparticle debate. I read about Einstein's discovery of the dual nature of light and learned the facts of a paradox(悖论) that puzzles the world's greatest thinkers to this day. Light behaves as both a particle and a wave, it is both at once. I realized I had gone through life accepting only half of the story as the whole truth.
Each new year brought more new facts, and I formulated even more questions. I found myself in the library after school, trying to find my own answers to gain a more complete understanding of what I thought I already knew. I discovered that my parents and teachers are incredible tools in my quest for knowledge, but they are never the final word. Even textbooks can be challenged. I learned to question my sources, I learned to be a thinker. I once believed that everything I learned at home and at school was certain, but I have now discovered to reexamine when necessary.
Questions are said to be the path to knowledge and truth, and I plan to continue questioning. How many things do we know for sure today that we will question in the future? At this moment, I know that our sun will burn for another five billion years, and I know nothing can escape the gravity of a black hole. This knowledge, however, may change in the next 20 years-maybe even in the next two. The one thing we can control now is our openness to discovery. Questions are the tools of open minds, and open minds are the key to intellectual advancement.
1. In the first paragraph, Aristotle is taken as an example to show that ______.| A．he is the greatest and respected philosopher of all time |
| B．huge influence of great thinkers may block human thought |
| C．advancements are made when thinkers question theories |
| D．great thinkers often make mistakes and then correct them |
| A．Frighten. | B．Encourage. | C．Strength. | D．Persuade. |
| A．what he learned from textbooks before turned out to be wrong |
| B．he was inspired by the different ideas from an exchange student |
| C．he was laughed at by other students for his unacceptable statement |
| D．he was not satisfied with his life and desperate to achieve success |
| A．looks down upon great thinkers all the time |
| B．never doubts what he has learned in the textbook |
| C．always throws himself into the laboratory |
| D．determines to be a thinker and questioner |
| A．the author is not quite sure about his future |
| B．we human beings don't dare to predict future |
| C．theory of black holes will change in two years |
| D．questioning is necessary to promote advancement |
| A．Following rules. | B．Challenging yourself. |
| C．Questioning giants. | D．Predicting future. |
9 . The outstanding biography — from the same author who brought us Steve Jobs and Einstein — portrays the life of the complicated Renaissance (文艺复兴时期的) artist with details. We come to see da Vinci as not only an inventor of musical instruments and early flying machines, but also a notebook keeper and vegetarian (素食者), who had trouble finishing many of the projects and paintings he started.
Yet what is most thrilling is getting to know da Vinci the scientist. Isaacson explains how loving science and applying the scientific method to observing the world was really what made da Vinci a great artist and, Isaacson argues, a genius.
Da Vinci was fascinated with observing and understanding phenomena in nature, from the proportions of the human body to how the muscles of the lips moved. He wanted to know about everything around him, in minute detail, Isaacson writes. He wondered about questions “most people over the age of ten no longer puzzle about”— for instance, how the tongue of a woodpecker works.
To learn about the world, da Vinci combined his own observations with experimentation. Never formally schooled, “he preferred to induce from experiments rather than deduce from theoretical principles,” Isaacson explains. He recorded his observations, looked for patterns among them, and then tested those patterns through additional observation and experimentation.
“When he became fascinated with the idea that he could invent flying machines, three and a half centuries before the Wright brothers flew the first airplane, he observed various birds and filled notebooks with the function and speed at which their wings flapped. That’s why lsaacson calls da Vinci an exemplar of this scientific method.” He goes on: “Galileo, born 112 years after Leonardo, is usually credited with being the first to develop this kind of approach and is often regarded as the father of modern science,” the historian Fritjof Capra wrote. “There can be no doubt that this honor would have been bestowed (赐予) on Leonardo da Vinci had he published his scientific writings during his lifetime, or had his notebooks been widely studied soon after his death.”
Da Vinci’s emphasis on empirical observation also helped him improve his art. First, he was able to use what he learned from looking at nature to paint and draw. His studies of the body, animals, motion, shadow and light, perspective and proportion helped him better understand what he was seeing in front of him, and render it in art more accurately and finely than anyone else of his time. He also used his observations of nature to make connections among phenomena. A recorder (竖笛) was like a larynx (喉管) in the throat. Here’s Isaacson again: What Leonardo probably began as four distinct elements ended up woven together in a way that illustrates a fundamental theme in his art and science: the interconnectedness of nature, the unity of its patterns, and the similarity between the workings of the human body and those of the earth.
Most importantly, his curiosity-driven explorations, and ability to connect art and science, helped him innovate in his work. They helped him think differently, Isaacson argues. Da Vinci made surprisingly diverse series of discoveries, including conceptualizing the helicopter and solar power and advancing knowledge about everything from the reproductive organs to botany. This genius is also what drew lsaacson to Albert Einstein and Steve Jobs as subjects: They’re all innovators who were inspired by and drew connections between art and science.
“Leonardo da Vinci is the ultimate example of the main theme of my previous biographies: how the ability to make connections across disciplines — arts and sciences, humanities and technology — is a key to innovation, imagination, and genius,” Isaacson writes. And this wonderful book is a reminder, in a time of increasingly narrow specialization and focus, that the methods of Renaissance men like da Vinci are as relevant as ever.
1. What made da Vinci’s thinking different from others?| A．He was used to skipping school. |
| B．He kept his childhood’s sense of curiosity. |
| C．He was filled with ambition to become an artist and inventor. |
| D．He developed a fascination with historical novels. |
| A．To introduce his important findings. |
| B．To memorize the father of modern science. |
| C．To show the prejudice faced by da Vinci during his lifetime. |
| D．To illustrate the significance of da Vinci' s research method. |
| A．express | B．mix | C．confirm | D．associate |
| A．They are too complicated to understand. |
| B．They focus on the workings of the human body. |
| C．They are more accurate than modern methods. |
| D．They still apply to contemporary scientific research. |
| A．How a Genius Changed the World |
| B．The Features of Renaissance Art |
| C．How Science Shaped His Art |
| D．The Comparison between Induction and Deduction |
10 . According to a new study， teens focus on rewards and have a hard time learning to avoid punishment or consider the consequences of alternative actions.
University College London researchers compared how teens and adults learn to make choices based on the available information. They tracked the way in which 18 volunteers aged 12-17 and 20 volunteers aged 18-32 completed tasks in which they had to choose between abstract symbols.
Each symbol was consistently associated with a fixed chance of a reward, punishment, or no outcome. As the trial progressed ， participants learned which symbols were likely to lead to each outcome and adjusted their choices accordingly. Teens and adults were equally good at learning to choose symbols associated with reward， but teens were less good at avoiding symbols associated with punishment. Adults also performed significantly better when they were told what would have happened if they had chosen the other symbol after each choice， while teens did not appear to take this information into account.
“From this experimental lab study we can draw conclusions about learning during the teen years. We find that teens and adults learn in different ways， something that might be relevant to education," said lead author Dr. Stefano Palminteri. " Unlike adults, teens are not so good at learning to adjust their choices to avoid punishment. This suggests that incentive systems based on reward rather than punishment may be more effective for this age group. Additionally, we found that teens did not learn from being shown what would have happened if they made alternative choices."
To interpret the results, the researchers developed computational models of learning and ran simulations （模拟）applying them to the results of the study. The first was a simple model, one that learned from rewards, and the second model added to this by also learning from the option that was not chosen. The third model was the most complete and took the full context into account, with equal weight given to punishment avoidance and reward seeking. For example, obtaining no outcome rather than losing a point is weighted equally to gaining a point rather than having no outcome.
Comparing the experimental data to the models, the team found that teens" behavior followed the simple reward-based model while adults" behavior matched the complete, contextual model. “Our study suggests that teens are more receptive to rewards than they are to punishments of equal value, ” said senior author Dr. Sarah-Jayne Blakemore. “As a result, it may be useful for parents and teachers to frame things in more positive terms.”
1. It can be learned from the study that .| A．adults made choices faster than teens |
| B．adults understood rewards better than teens |
| C．teens reacted better to reward than punishment |
| D．teens were aware of the outcome of each choice |
| A．They reflected people’s strong desire for punishment avoidance. |
| B．They gave circumstances different degrees of consideration. |
| C．They paid equal attention to reward and punishment. |
| D．They shaped the behavior of people at different ages. |
| A．accustomed | B．opposed |
| C．sympathetic | D．responsive |
| A．“If you insist on doing things in this way， you will lose ten points. " |
| B．“If we had talked about this earlier， you wouldn’t have made the mistake. " |
| C．“ If you hand in your assignment ahead of time， you will get an extra bonus." |
| D．“If you want to approach a problem differently ， you can talk to your parents. " |
