1 . Our culture has caused most Americans to assume not only that our language is universal, but that the gestures we use are understood by everyone. We do not realize that waving good-bye is the way to ask a person from the Philippines to one’s side, or that in Italy and some Latin-American countries, curling the finger to oneself is a sign of farewell.
Those private citizens who sent packages to our troops occupying Germany after World War II and marked them GIFT to escape duty payments did not bother to find out that “Gift” means poison in German. Moreover, we like to think of ourselves as friendly, yet we prefer to be at least 3 feet or an arm’s length away from others. Latins and Middle Easterners like to come closer and touch, which makes Americans uncomfortable.
Our linguistic and cultural blindness and the informality with which we take notice of the developed tastes, gestures, customs and languages of other countries, are losing us friends, business and respect in the world.
Even here in the United States, we make few compromises to the needs of foreign visitors. There are no information signs in four languages on our public buildings or monuments; we do not have multilingual guided tours. Very few restaurant menus have translations, and multilingual waiters, bank clerks and policemen are rare. Our transportation systems have maps in English only and often we ourselves have difficulty understanding them.
When we go abroad, we tend to cluster in hotels and restaurants where English is spoken. The attitudes and information we pick up are conditioned by those natives—usually the richer—who speak English. Our business dealings, as well as the nation’s diplomacy, are conducted through interpreters.
For many years, America and Americans could get by with cultural blindness and linguistic ignorance. After all, America was the most powerful country of the free world, the distributor of needed funds and goods.
But all that is past. American dollars no longer buy all good things, and we are slowly beginning to realize that our proper role in the world is changing. A l979 Harris poll reported that 55 percent of Americans want this country to play a more significant role in world affairs; we want to have a hand in the important decisions of the next century, even though it may not always be the upper hand.
1. It can be inferred that Americans being approached too closely by Middle Easterners would most probably________.A.stand still | B.scream out | C.step forward | D.draw back |
A.cultural self-centeredness | B.casual manners |
C.indifference towards foreign visitors | D.blindness to native culture |
A.are isolated by the local people |
B.are not well informed due to the language barrier |
C.tend to get along well with the natives |
D.need interpreters in hotels and restaurants |
A.it is dangerous to ignore their foreign friends |
B.it is important to maintain their leading role in world affairs |
C.it is necessary to use several languages in public places |
D.it is time to get acquainted with other cultures |
学校规定,学生在校期间不得使用手机,有的同学认为这是一项非常好的制度,但也有同学不以为然。请谈谈你对这一规定的看法,并给出理由。
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3 . In the fog of uncertainty about how new technology will change the way we work, policymakers around the world say confidently that we will need to upskill the workforce in order to cope. The view sounds reassuringly sensible: if computers are growing smarter, humans will need to learn to use them or be replaced by them. But the truth is, the people who are being “upskilled” in today’s economy are the ones who need it the least.
Research shows that workers with degrees are over three times more likely to participate in training as adults than workers with no qualifications. That creates a virtuous circle for those who did well at school, and a vicious circle for those who did not. If the robots are coming for both the accountants and the taxi drivers, you can bet it is those working with money that will be more able to retrain themselves out of danger, because the better educated tend to have more confidence and money to pay for their own training.
Employers also invest in these workers more. In the UK, a surprising number of employers send their senior managers to business schools. It is no good blaming employers for directing investments at their highly-skilled workers. They are simply aiming for the highest return they can get. And, for some types of lower-paid work, it is not always true that technological progress requires more skills. Sometimes, technology can de-skill a job. Just look at Uber drivers who follow the driving routes set by their app, rather than expanding their own knowledge of the streets. The UK’s latest Employment and Skills Survey suggests the use of literacy and numeracy skills at work has fallen since 2012, even as the use of computers has increased. However, the trouble is, when the computer makes your job easier one day, it might make it redundant the next. Many of those affected by automation will need to switch occupations, or even industries. But a retailer or warehouse company is not going to retrain its staff to help them move to a different sector.
It is time to revisit older ideas. The UK once had a vibrant culture of night schools, for adults to attend after their day jobs. A revival of it could be exactly what the 21st century needs. Rather than just “upskilling” in a narrow way, people could choose to learn an entirely new skill or trade, or explore interests they never had a chance to nurture before.
It is still not clear whether the impact of new technology on the labour market will come in a trickle or a flood. But in an already unequal world, continuing to reserve all the lifeboats for the better-off would be a dangerous mistake.
1. According to the writer, policymakers’ belief in upskilling the workforce __________.A.is contrary to popular belief | B.is helpful in coping with new technology |
C.is too difficult to put it into practice | D.is not beneficial to those who need it most |
A.have confidence in outperforming those with degrees at school |
B.persuade their employers to make an investment in them |
C.minimize the risk of job loss caused by new technology |
D.assess how new technology will change the way they work |
A.unnecessary | B.undesirable | C.unskilled | D.unrewarding |
A.Workers’ literacy and numeracy skills should be enhanced without delay. |
B.Night schools can help to eliminate skill gaps among workers. |
C.Companies should attach much importance to retraining of workers. |
D.Those lower-skilled workers deserve giving more chances of retraining. |
4 . Worth nearly $1trn, Facebook is the world’s sixth-most-valuable company. Its revenues have grown by 56% in the past year, and its share price by more than a quarter. Nearly 3bn people use its products every month. Why would such a glittering success change its name, as the Verge, a news site, reports it plans to within days?
The likely official reason for the rebranding is that the firm has outgrown the social network that Mark Zuckerberg started 17 years ago in a Harvard dorm. Today it includes other social apps (Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger) and video hardware (Oculus, Portal). It has launched a digital wallet (Novi) and may yet offer a currency (Diem). Mr. Zuckerberg expects people eventually to associate his firm more with the “metaverse”, a virtual space for work, play and more, than with social media.
If the Facebook network is to take a back seat, there may be a case for regrouping under a new name. Facebook wouldn’t be the first tech giant to do so. In 2015 Google set up Alphabet, a holding company for the search engine and its many side projects. Under this model, Facebook would become just another app within a wider family, though by far its biggest earner. There is another possible motive for a makeover. For all its financial success, the Facebook brand has become tarnished. The social network is blamed for fueling everything from teenage anorexia (厌食症) to uprising at the US Capitol.
This month Frances Haugen, a former employee, told Congress that Facebook was failing to moderate content on its platform and covering up a drop in young American users (it denies this). Public trust in it is lower than in most tech giants, and falling. Although two years ago the firm started branding its apps as being “from Facebook”, its new “smart glasses”, which can record video and take phone calls, feature only the logo of its partner, Ray-Ban.
Mr. Zuckerberg himself has been a reason for much of the criticism of Facebook, and of bossy tech firms more generally. As the all-powerful founder, he has a higher profile than his opposite numbers at TikTok, YouTube and other social networks. Normally, a brand facing a reputational crisis might dump its unpopular CEO. But Mr. Zuckerberg’s position is unassailable (难以撼动的), which may explain why he would want to dump the brand instead.
1. Facebook plans to change its name mainly because ________.A.it wants people to associate its name with social media |
B.it is trying to follow the fashion led by Google |
C.it looks to expand its business to a wider range |
D.its former name has brought bad reputation to the company |
A.It was founded by Zuckerberg in his college dormitory. |
B.It has a favorable influence on teenagers’ mind and behavior. |
C.It is as popular among youngsters in the US as it used to be. |
D.It produced smart glasses with its logo on it. |
A.abandoned | B.discriminated | C.globalized | D.compromised |
A.a science review | B.a business magazine |
C.a technical report | D.the website of Facebook |
A. adulthood B. betting C. alternative D. direct E. drown F. opting G. place H. tearing I. engage J. sense K. state |
The post millennial generation best known as Gen Z — individuals now in their teens and early 20s — looked on as their parents lost jobs during the Great Recession. They’ve seen older millennial siblings
“The old systems we used to rely on aren’t working anymore, but new systems haven’t necessarily been put in
According to a survey by her firm, 78% of Gen Z-ers say getting a four-year degree no longer makes economic
Jumping into the freelance economy means taking an uncertain path, as is
6 . Progressives often support diversity missions as a path to equality and a way to level the playing field. But all too often such policies are an insincere form of virtue-signaling that benefits only the most privileged and does little to help average people.
A pair of bills sponsored by Massachusetts state Senator Jason Lewis and House Speaker Pro Tempore Patricia Haddad, to ensure “gender equality” on boards and commissions, provide a case in point.
Haddad and Lewis are concerned that more than half the state-government board are less than 40 percent female. In order to ensure that elite women have more such opportunities, they have proposed imposing government quotas (配额). If the bills become law, state boards and commissions will be required to set aside 50 percent of board seats for women by 2022.
The bills are similar to a measure recently adopted in California, which last year became the first state to require gender quotas for private companies. In signing the measure, California Governor Jerry Brown admitted that the law, which clearly classifies people on the basis of sex, is probably unconstitutional.
The US Supreme Court frowns on sex-based classifications unless they are designed to address an “important” policy interest. Because the California law applies to all boards, even where there is no history of prior discrimination, courts are likely to rule that the law violates the constitutional guarantee of “equal protection”.
But are such government mandates even necessary? Female participation on corporate boards may not currently mirror the percentage of women in the general population, but so what?
The number of women on corporate boards has been steadily increasing without government interference. According to a study by Catalyst, between 2010 and 2015 the share of women on the boards of global corporations increased by 54 percent.
Requiring companies to make gender the primary qualification for board membership will inevitably lead to less experienced private sector boards. That is exactly what happened when Norway adopted a nationwide corporate gender quota.
Writing in The New Republic, Alice Lee notes that increasing the number of opportunities for board membership without increasing the pool of qualified women to serve on such boards has led to a “golden skirt ”phenomenon, where the same elite women occupy multiple seats on a variety of boards.
Next time somebody pushes corporate quotas as a way to promote gender equity, remember that such policies are largely self-serving measures that make their sponsors feel good but do little to help average women.
1. The author believes that the bills sponsored by Lewis and Haddad will __________.A.help little to reduce gender bias. |
B.pose a threat to the state government. |
C.raise women’s position in politics. |
D.greatly broaden career options. |
A.the harm from absolute board decision. |
B.the importance of constitutional guarantees. |
C.the pressure on women in global corporations. |
D.the needlessness of government interventions. |
A.the underestimation of elite women’s role |
B.the objection to female participation on boards. |
C.the entry of unqualified candidates into the board. |
D.the growing tension between labor and management. |
A.Women’s need in employment should be considered. |
B.Feasibility should be a prime concern in policy making. |
C.Everyone should try hard to promote social justice. |
D.Major social issues should be the focus of the government. |
The internet and its cultural impact are most often viewed through the lens of the “tech bro”. Biographies, and memoirs about these big-tech bosses have shaped readers’ understanding of
Influencers—the (usually female) people behind the most popular accounts on Instagram, TikTok and YouTube—have large followings, often in the hundreds of thousands or millions. People like Jackie Aina, Matilda Djerf and Molly-Mae Hague earn a living from a combination of sponsored posts, commissions
Though they shape digital culture, too often influencers
Taylor Lorenz,
Ms. Lorenz makes the case that, despite its bad rap, influencing has “given more people the chance to benefit directly from their labor than at any other time in history”,
Some experts estimate as much as 90% of online content could be AI-generated by 2026.
8 . Today’s youth will drive tomorrow’s growth. Young people have always confused their elders. Today’s youngsters are no different. They have thin wallets but
A good place to start analyzing the psyche of young consumer is to consider the
These two big
In many ways youngsters’ shopping habits, like their lives, are defined by the “
These “always-on purchasers” often avoid a weekly shop so that they can have quicker
The internet has also changed how the young discover brands. Print, billboard or TV advertising has
How the young shop is clearly shifting. What they buy, too, is changing. What older generations consider optional, such as wellness and luxury, has become
More broadly, young consumers claim to be more
A.pleasant | B.expensive | C.mild | D.refreshing |
A.prize | B.boast | C.mix | D.challenge |
A.recycle | B.desire | C.deliver | D.package |
A.education | B.institution | C.family | D.economy |
A.busier | B.luckier | C.stronger | D.calmer |
A.reforms | B.ends | C.trends | D.shocks |
A.doubt | B.opposition | C.criticism | D.ignorance |
A.bubble | B.attention | C.knowledge | D.green |
A.refunds | B.possessions | C.fixes | D.trials |
A.approved | B.facilitated | C.reversed | D.updated |
A.made peace with | B.made up for | C.run parallel to | D.given way to |
A.looks | B.scents | C.textures | D.atmospheres |
A.However | B.Hence | C.Apparently | D.Otherwise |
A.souvenirs | B.essentials | C.memories | D.treasures |
A.dream-connected | B.hobbies-motivated | C.values-driven | D.money-focused |
9 . Not so long ago one could set one’s watch by the arrival of the post. I live in a quiet street in north-west London, so that used to mean two deliveries a day at fixed time. Now of course there is one, arriving at an unpredictable hour, and containing nothing one would ever miss a heartbeat for. The only certainty today is that there will be no personal letters.
What destructively efficient times we live in! Now of course it’s all emails and texts and tweets. But for Christmas there appears to be hope. Having failed to write letters during the rest of the year, we are now catching up, sending greetings to those we barely contact from January to November. Is it guilt that leads to this outpouring? Perhaps a little. But I think we also recognize the greater integrity involved when we touch pen to paper and bother to lick a stamp. In our busy lives we manage to send a message that says “I still have time for you.”
Seasonal greetings may be one of the last great traditions to fall. Earlier this month I was honoured to be part of an extraordinary event in which the true worth of letters was given with the full celebrity support. At a small church in the Notting Hill area of London, some actors read letters by the famous and the not-so famous. Among them, there was the Christmas letter of a British postal worker named Chris Barker and his wife-to-be Bessie Moore. It was 1944, so Barker was fighting in Greece and Moore was escaping bombs in London. Christmas appeared to be both an irrelevance and a vital tie for both of them, and while they regretted not being together they celebrated the ability of the letter to connect them.
Unlike today, it was all they had. Today, the temptations of Skype and e-card threaten to prevent our trip to the posting box. But Christmas cards continue to connect us. They offer a reminder that we have not died in the course of the year, and that we still value the personal touch. They will not be enough to rescue the world’s digitally challenged postal systems, but they may just be enough to make up for our digitally challenged souls.
1. What does the writer feel when he got a letter now?A.Entertained | B.Disappointed | C.Uncertain | D.Indifferent |
A.it’s another way we can try besides emails, texts and tweets |
B.writing Christmas cards is efficient, practical and hopeful |
C.we won’t feel sorry about not contacting friends for long |
D.we manage to slow down our busy lives to send greetings |
A.Because they were not together and they only had letters. |
B.Because they were to be married but they were separated |
C.Because they didn’t have Skype and had to send cards. |
D.Because they celebrated Christmas by writing letters. |
A.they can resist the temptations of Skype and e-card |
B.they are the proof that we are still alive, safe and sound |
C.the personal touch between people is still valued |
D.the postal systems, though challenged, are able to recover |
More Americans are opting to work well
One in three Americans who are at least 40 have or plan to have a job in retirement to prepare for a longer life, according to a survey
Financial needs aren’t the only culprit for “the unretirement” trend.
“The concept of retirement is evolving,” said Christine Russel, senior manager of retirement at TD Ameritrade. “It’s not just about finances. The value of work is also driving folks
One reason for the change in retirement patterns: Americans are living longer. The share of the population 65 and older was 16% in 2018, up 3.2% from the prior year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. That’s also up 30.2% since 2010. Older Americans are also the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. workforce, and boomers are expected to live longer than previous generations. The percentage of retirement-age people in the labour force has doubled over the past three decades. About 20% of people 65 and older were in the workforce in February, up from an all-time low of 10% in January in 1985, according to money manager United Income.
Unfortunately, many people who
“