1 . Humankind has tried to improve its standard of living since the very beginning of civilization (文明). Back then, and today, providing food was the basic task for a person.     1     People feel the need for not only some primary things, such as bread and shelters, but also for various facilities and luxuries. Providing humanity (人类) with these things is connected to the use of natural resources, which requires energy. In turn, the common sources of energy we use today cause pollution, so economic growth is almost inevitably connected with environmental damage.

    2     The first of these is the fact that in order to produce more goods and products, at a faster rate, the construction of large industrial plants is required. These plants produce a lot of waste, which may cause negative long-term health effects to nearby populations of animals, or people.

The traditional energy sources, which are commonly used nowadays, are considered to be the greatest polluters to the environment. There also exist so-called eco-friendly sources of energy.     3     Of course, during this time people have to make some sacrifices to support these undertakings (企业) .

In order to produce practical energy, a transformation of the natural site is often inevitable (不可避免的).     4     Application of wind energy would block airflow’s natural speed. Consequently, the pressure balance that is brought about by this current will be affected, and it is important to remember that the environment and weather conditions are directly affected by atmospheric pressure.     5     This is the embarrassment mankind has to deal with. A good balance between economic development and sustainability is forever what humankind has to keep in mind

2 . See Me

The sun prepared to rest for the evening. Saying goodbye to the clan (家族), I headed back to camp. I looked forward to setting my _______ aside for an evening to reflect on my time in Ethiopia.

“Photo, photo”, a voice behind me called. A young Surma boy followed closely at my heels as I breathed a tired sigh. Over the past four days, many in the camp had wanted their photograph _______. I had no energy left after this long day, but the boy kept appealing, “Photo, photo.” He managed to catch my gaze. With eyes full of _______, he asked me once more: “photo?”

As I looked at him, an idea flashed before me. I knelt in the cornfield and instructed the boy how to _______ . Suddenly, he became shy, losing his _______. No matter how I instructed him, I couldn’t capture the shot. Frustrated, I _______. I looked at the boy, who seemed _______.

In an effort to cheer him, I said, “You were great.” Others from his clan gathered around, cheering and clapping. The boy’s face broke into a smile. I intuitively took shots of the moment. That photograph turned out to be better than the arrangement I’d imagined because it was _______.

Reflecting on my experience, I realized I had been caught up in my own ideas and wants. When I agreed to take the shot, I was looking for a particular end _______ for myself. But all the boy had really wanted was to be __________. That was the moment that needed to be captured.

3 . During a judging period for a recent short story contest, I started thinking a lot about dialogue tags. Because in many submissions characters didn’t “say” a thing. They shouted, they inquired, they assumed. Some characters screamed while others murmured. But no one “said” anything. And I started wondering why.

Why do we tell beginner writers to avoid creative dialogue tags in the first place? Why do we insist that characters should stick to “said,” “asked,” and the occasional “sighed?” And, if the advice is so of-repeated, why are writers still unable to resist the siren call of weep, scream, snap, or laugh?

The more I thought about it, the more I understood the temptation. We’re always encouraged to use strong, actionable verbs in our prose. Why walk when you can skip or wander? Why cry when you can sob or weep? Why wouldn’t we reach for exciting verbs instead of mild-boring dull-blah said? Why couldn’t each verb be a tiny sparkling gem in its own right?

The problem, I think, is that every jewel needs a setting to become something more than the sum of its parts. Without something to provide structure, a collection of the world’s most glorious diamonds would still only amount to a heap of rocks.

And a dialogue tag should never, ever be the diamond in any given sentence.

Dialogue is your diamond, friends. When we read your work, your dialogue should be so bright, so sparkling, so lifelike, so wonderfully realistic that our brains “hear” each line instead of merely reading it. We don’t need to be told a character is shouting — we can sense it in the way they spit out words, clench fists, or storm from the room.

A dialogue tag is a mere signpost along the narrative journey, gently indicating who said what. It’s part of a story’s experience, but it’s not part of the story itself, nor should it be treated as such. Dialogue tags are similar to lighting in a Broadway play: without it, the audience would have no idea what was going on, but it usually strives to shine without calling too much attention to itself.

What’s more, readers may not initially imagine a particular line being “sobbed.” When we reach the end of a sentence and find out our leading lady has actually sobbed instead of whispered, it pulls us right out of the story. We pause. We reread the line. We adjust our understanding and begin again. But that wonderful momentum when we’re fully immersed in the scene, holding our breath to find out what our heroine says next, is lost.

Creating a successful work of fiction is about giving the reader all the materials they need to build your fictional world in their mind and not a scrap more. Readers need believable dialogue. They need voices so compelling that they pop right off the page and into our ears. And if you’ve created dynamic characters who speak words we can really hear, you will never need to tell us how something was said.

Senior Editor

4 . As Frans de Waal, a primatologist (灵长动物学家), recognizes, a better way to think about other creatures would be to ask ourselves how different species have developed different kinds of minds to solve different adaptive problems. Surely the important question is not whether animals can do the same things humans can, but how those animals solve the cognitive (认知的) problems they face, like how to imitate the sea floor. Children and some animals are so interesting not because they are smart like us, but because they are smart in ways we haven’t even considered.

Sometimes studying children’s ways of knowing can cast light on adult-human cognition. Children’s pretend play may help us understand our adult taste for fiction. De Waal’s research provides another interesting example. We human beings tend to think that our social relationships are rooted in our perceptions, beliefs, and desires, and our understanding of the perceptions, beliefs, and desires of others — what psychologists call our “theory of mind.” In the 80s and 90s, developmental psychologists showed that pre-schoolers and even infants understand minds apart from their own. But it was hard to show that other animals did the same. “Theory of mind” became a candidate for the special, uniquely human trick.

Yet de Waal’s studies show that chimps (黑猩猩) possess a remarkably developed political intelligence — they are much interested in figuring out social relationships. It turns out, as de Waal describes, that chimps do infer something about what other chimps see. But experimental studies also suggest that this happens only in a competitive political context. The evolutionary anthropologist (人类学家) Brain Hare and his colleagues gave a junior chimp a choice between pieces of food that a dominant chimp had seen hidden and other pieces it had not seen hidden. The junior chimp, who watched all the hiding, stayed away from the food the dominant chimp had seen, but took the food it hadn’t seen.

Anyone who has gone to an academic conference will recognize that we may be in the same situation. We may say that we sign up because we’re eager to find out what other human beings think, but we’re just as interested in who’s on top. Many of the political judgments we make there don’t have much to do with our theory of mind. We may show our respect to a famous professor even if we have no respect for his ideas.

Until recently, however, there wasn’t much research into how humans develop and employ this kind of political knowledge. It may be that we understand the social world in terms of dominance, like chimps, but we’re just not usually as politically motivated as they are. Instead of asking whether we have a better everyday theory of mind, we might wonder whether they have a better everyday theory of politics.

6 . In general, the society is becoming one of giant enterprises directed by a bureaucratic (官僚主义的) management in which man becomes a small, well-oiled cog in the machinery. The oiling is done with higher wages, well-equipped factories and piped music, and by psychologists and “human-relations” experts; yet all this oiling does not change the fact that man has become powerless, that he does not wholeheartedly participate in his work and he is bored with it. In fact, the blue-collar and the white-collar workers have become economic puppets who dance to the tune of automated machines and bureaucratic management.

The worker and employee are anxious, seemingly because they might find themselves out of a job or they would say that they are unable to acquire any real satisfaction or interest in life. In fact, they feel desperate as they live and die without ever having confronted the fundamental realities of human existence as emotionally and intellectually independent and productive human beings.

Those higher up on the social ladder are no less anxious. Their lives are no less empty than those of their subordinates. They are even more insecure in some respects. They are in a highly competitive race. To be promoted or to fall behind is not a matter of salary but even more a matter of self-respect. When they apply for their first job, they are tested for intelligence as well as for the right mixture of submissiveness and independence. From the moment on they are tested again and again by the psychologists, for whom testing is a big business, and by their superiors, who judge their behavior, sociability, capacity to get along, etc. This constant need to prove that one is as good as or better than one’s fellow-competitor creates constant anxiety and stress, the very causes of unhappiness and illness.

Am I suggesting a return to the pre-industrial mode of production or to nineteenth-century “free enterprise” capitalism? Certainly not. Problems are never solved by returning to a stage which one has already outgrown. I suggest transforming the social system from a bureaucratically managed industrialism in which maximal production and consumption are ends in themselves into a humanist industrialism in which man and full development of his potentialities — those of all love and of reason — are the aims of social arrangements. Production and consumption should serve as means to this end, and should be prevented from ruling man.

7 . One summer night in a seaside cottage, a boy felt himself lifted from bed. Then, with the swiftness of a dream, he was held in his father’s arms out onto the nearby beach. Overhead the sky blazed with stars. “Watch!” Incredibly, as his father spoke, one of the stars moved. In a line of golden fire it flashed across the astonished heavens. And before the wonder of this could fade, another star leaped from its place, then another, plunging towards the restless sea.

“What’s this?” the child whispered.

“Shooting stars. They come every year on a certain August night. I thought you’d like to see the show.”

That was all: just an unexpected glimpse of something mysterious and beautiful. But, back in bed, the child stared for a long time into the dark, knowing that all around the quiet house, the night was full of the silent music of the falling stars.

Decades have passed, but I remember that night still, because I was the fortunate boy whose father believed that a new experience was more important for a small boy than an unbroken night’s sleep. No doubt I had all the usual childhood entertainment, but those are forgotten now. What I remember is the night of the shooting stars, and the day we rode in a caboose (列车末尾的职工车厢), the telegraph we made that really worked, and the “trophy table” in the dining room where we children were encouraged to exhibit things we had found — anything unusual or beautiful — snake skins, seashells, flowers, arrowheads... I remember the thought-provoking (引人深思的) books left by my bedside that pushed back my horizons and sometimes actually changed my life.

My father had, to a marvellous degree, the gift of opening doors for his children, of leading them into areas of splendid newness. This subtle art of adding dimensions to a child’s world doesn’t necessarily require a great deal of time. It simply involves doing things more often with our children instead of for them or to them.

10 . Do you listen to quiet music to help you wind down before sleep? However, this practice could be counter-productive, according to a new study by Michael K. Scullin and colleagues at Baylor University. The work, published in Psychological Medicine, found that bedtime music was associated with more sleep disruptions and that instrumental music is even worse than music with lyrics.

In the first study, 199 online participants living in the US reported on their sleep quality and music listening frequency and timing, as well as their beliefs about how this affected their sleep. Almost all—87%—believed that music improves sleep, or at least does not disrupt it. However, the team found that more overall time spent listening to music was associated with poorer sleep and daytime sleepiness. Just over three quarters of the participants also reported experiencing frequent “earworms”—having a song or tune “stuck” and replaying in their minds. A quarter reported experiencing these during the night at least once per week, and these people were six times as likely to report poor sleep quality. The team’s analysis suggested that listening specifically to instrumental music near bedtime was linked to more sleep-related earworms and poorer sleep quality.

The team then ran an experimental study on 48 young adults. After arriving at the sleep lab at 8:45 p. m., participants went to a quiet bedroom, where they completed questionnaires that included measures of stress, sleep quality and daytime sleepiness. They also had electrodes applied, ready for the night-time polysomnography to record their brain wave activity, as well as heart rate and breathing, and reported on how relaxed, nervous, energetic, sleepy and stressed they felt. At 10:00 p. m., they were given some “downtime”, with quiet music playing. Half were randomized to hear three songs while the other half heard instrumental-only versions of these same songs.

Participants reported decreases in stress and nervousness and increased relaxation after listening to either set of songs, and also showed decreases in blood pressure. So-as earlier studies have also suggested- quiet music at bedtime was indeed relaxing at the time. However, a quarter of the participants woke from sleep with an earworm, and the polysomnography data showed that instrumental versions of the songs were more likely to induce these awakenings as well as other sleep disruptions, such as shifts from deeper sleep to lighter sleep. Taken together, the findings represent “causal evidence for bedtime instrumental music affecting sleep quality via triggering earworms” the team writes.

Why instrumental-only songs should have a bigger impact than music with lyrics isn’t clear. The three songs used in this study were chosen because they were likely to be familiar. Hearing them without the lyrics might have prompted the participant’s brains to try to add the words, which might have made earworms more likely. If this is the case, all instrumental music may not have the same effect. However, the data from the first study is consistent with the idea that instrumental music generally is more of a problem.