1 . What is a challenging book? By calling a book “challenging”, I do not mean books whose language is hard for us to understand, but the ones that challenge and provoke(激起).

Kafka once said that “the only books worth reading are those that bite and kick, not happy books we could write ourselves”. That is what I mean by a “challenging” book. Oliver Twist is not a hard book because everything ends happily. Great Expectations is a “hard” book because Pip forces us to confront our own selfishness. Through Pip’s choices, Dickens forces us to realize that we too often abandon those who have cared for us simply because they do not have money.

The challenging books are books which force us to think deeply about ourselves and our world. Karl Marx’s works are challenging, and so are Adam Smith’s, both bringing great influence on economic and political history. Both thinkers critically analyze our world and lay its faults bare before us. Richard Wright and Dante are both challenging writers because their works force us to see that all is not well in our world. Baldwin’s Giovanni’s Room is challenging because it shows us the hurt we suffer when we choose to follow social customs instead of our hearts.

Is there a test that tells us which books are challenging and which are not? No. Most people may read Austen’s Mansfield Park with a smile on their faces, but a reader sensitive to the pains of imperialism (帝国主义) knows that the wonderful society shown in the novel depends upon slavery for its livelihood. I want to end this by stressing that difficulty in terms of books depends on the reader, but that there are some books, by the nature of the author’s genius and the books’ expansive vision, covering so broad a range that they are challenging for almost everyone to read.

1. What does the underlined words “bite and kick” in paragraph 2 mean?

A．Make readers uncomfortable and reflect.

B．Focus on men’s personal life and growth.

C．Remind people of their own struggles.

D．Use complex language and structures.

2. What can we infer about challenging books from paragraph 3?

A．They don’t have happy endings.

B．They don’t have to be literary works.

C．They combine literature and social sciences.

D．They focus on the negative side of social rules.

3. What is the writer’s conclusion in the last paragraph?

A．Austen’s Mansfield Park is critical of imperialism.

B．Writers are more important than readers in literature.

C．Challenges in reading come from personal experiences.

D．A book’s broad vision helps contribute to its difficulties.

4. What is the purpose of the text?

A．To show the importance of hard books.

B．To discuss a common theme in literature.

C．To share an understanding of challenging books.

D．To recommend some classic works.

2 . There once was a very wealthy and curious king. This king had a huge rock _________in the middle of a road. Then he _________nearby to see if anyone would try to remove the gigantic rock from the road.

The first group of people to pass by were some of the _________merchants and the king's officials. Rather than moving it, they simply walked _________ it. Though they had made a tidy fortune, these _________merchants and officials never thought of making any contribution. A few even loudly_________the king for the inconvenience caused by not _________the roads. Not one of them tried to move the rock.

Finally, a peasant _________. His arms were full of vegetables and farm tools. When he got near the rock, rather than simply going around it, the peasant put down his _________and tried to move the stone to the side of the road. It took a lot of effort but he __________succeeded.

The peasant gathered up his load and was ready to go on his way when he saw a purse lying on the __________where the rock had been. The peasant __________the purse. The purse was stuffed full of gold coins and a note from the king. The king's note __________the gold was a __________for him, because he moved the rock from the road. Then, the king walked out from where he had hidden to meet the peasant.

The king__________the peasant what many of us never understand: every obstacle gives an opportunity to improve our condition.

1.

A．broken

B．thrown

C．placed

D．moved

2.

A．hid

B．lived

C．sat

D．stood

3.

A．poorest

B．wealthiest

C．greatest

D．brightest

4.

A．behind

B．over

C．under

D．around

5.

A．generous

B．devoted

C．evil

D．selfish

6.

A．blamed

B．begged

C．mentioned

D．encouraged

7.

A．removing

B．constructing

C．maintaining

D．keeping

8.

A．turned out

B．rushed off

C．came along

D．settled down

9.

A．vegetables

B．load

C．tools

D．purse

10.

A．eventually

B．gradually

C．merely

D．hardly

11.

A．stone

B．farm

C．square

D．road

12.

A．tore

B．opened

C．dropped

D．caught

13.

A．read

B．wrote

C．knew

D．witnessed

14.

A．praise

B．test

C．reward

D．souvenir

15.

A．represented

B．showed

C．declared

D．announced

3 . A study of violinists found that merely good players practised as much as better players, leaving other factors such as quality of education, learning skills and perhaps natural talent to account for the difference.

This finding challenges the 10, 000-hour rule promoted in Malcolm Gladwell’s 1993 study of violinists and pianists. Gladwell states that enough practice will make an expert of anyone. “The idea has been popular and entrenched in our culture for years. It’s not an idiom but an overstatement,” said Brooke Macnamara, the lead author. “When it comes to human skill, a complex combination of environmental factors and genetic factors explains the performance differences across people.”

Macnamara and her colleagues set out to repeat part of the 1993 study to see whether they reached the same conclusion. They interviewed three groups of 13 violinists regarded as best, good, or less accomplished about their practice habits, before having them complete daily diaries of their activities over a week. While the less skillful violinists reached an average of about 6,000 hours of practice by the age of 20, there was little to separate the good from the best, with each reaching an average of about 11,000 hours. In all, the number of hours spent practising accounted for about a quarter of the skill difference across the three groups.

Macnamara believes practice is less of a driver. “Once you get to the highly skilled groups, practice stops accounting for the difference. Everyone has practised a lot and other factors are at play in determining who goes on to a higher level,” she said. “The factors depend on the skill being learned: in chess it could be intelligence or working memory; in sport it may be how efficiently a person uses oxygen. To complicate matters further, one factor can drive another. Children who enjoy playing the violin, for example, may be happy to practise because they do not see it as a trouble.”

The authors of the 1993 study are unimpressed. Macnamara said it was important for people to understand the limits of practice, though. “Practice makes you better than you were yesterday, most of the time,” she said. “But it might not make you better than your neighhour or the other kid in your violin class.”

1. What does the underlined word “entrenched” in paragraph 2 probably mean?

A．Rooted.

B．Advanced.

C．Changed.

D．Unconfirmed.

2. What can we learn about Macnamara’s study?

A．It convinced Malcolm Gladwell.	B．It involved violinists and pianists.
C．Its process was similar to the 1993 study.	D．Its result is consistent with the 1993 study.

3. What does Macnamara find about highly skilled people?

A．Practicing for 11,000 hours is their main driver.

B．They enjoy keeping diaries about their progress.

C．Environmental factors have little relation to their success.

D．More practice makes little difference to their further progress.

4. What is the best title for the text?

A．What makes an expert?	B．Does practice make perfect?
C．The early bird catches the worm	D．Enthusiasm is the key to success