1 . French children are saying "Hello" to the new academic year and "Bye" to their cell phones during school hours． That's because a new law has come into effect which bans phone use by students up to the age of 15． The legislation， which follows a campaign promise by French President Emmanuel Macron， also bans tablets and smart watches．

The ban is also in place at break times， with exceptions in cases of emergency and for disabled children， the French Education Ministry said in a statement． In emergencies， students can ask their teachers for permission to use their phones． Meanwhile， high schools can voluntarily carry out the measure．

Education Minister Jean-Michel Blanquer said the new rules aim to help children focus on lessons， better socialize and reduce social media use． The ban is also designed to fight online bullying and prevent thefts and violence in school． Blanquer has claimed the legislation would improve discipline among France's 12 million school students， nearly 90% of whom have mobile phones． "Being open to technologies of the future doesn't mean we have to accept all their uses，" Blanquer said in June as the bill was going through in Parliament．

As for enforcement， it's up to individual school administrations to decide how to put through the ban． School principals can decide to store students' phones in lockers or allow them to keep them， switched off， in their backpacks． The law allows teachers to take away the phones until the end of the day in case of someone disobeying the bans．

Jacqueline Kay-Cessou， whose 14-year-old son， David， is entering eighth grade at the Camille See International School， told the reporter she was happy to hear of the ban． "It's fantastic news． It's something I've wanted for years，" Kay-Ccssou said． "I think phones are socially harmful． Kids can't think and sit still anymore and it's highly addictive．"

1. What is the new rule for ordinary French students in the new term？ ______

A．They are not allowed to use their watches．

B．They should follow President Macron．

C．They should say "Hello" to school teachers．

D．They can't use their cell phones at school．

2. What is the opinion of Jean-Michel Blanquer？ ______

A．Cell phones are the main reason for school violence．

B．The society should be strict with the school students．

C．New technology should be properly applied at school．

D．None of the young students should have mobile phones．

3. Who is/are responsible for carrying out the ban？ ______

A．The school administrators．	B．The student monitors．
C．The students' parents．	D．The Education Minister．

4. What is the purpose of the last paragraph？ ______

A．To show the parental response to the ban．

B．To provide a conclusion for the text．

C．To offer an example for the new law．

D．To make a list of cell phone's harms．

2 . Parents usually teach their children how to cross the street safely, by looking both ways for cars. But do they also teach them to put away their cell phones?

The city of Honolulu, Hawaii wants everyone to learn that lesson. Texting while crossing the street will soon be banned in the city. Beginning on October 24, you could be fined from $15 to $99 if you step onto a Honolulu street while looking at your phone. Honolulu is the first major U. S. city to ban what is called "distracted walking". It recently passed a law in a seven-to-two vote. The law says: "No pedestrian shall cross a street or highway while viewing a mobile electronic device(装置).” In other words, do not look at a screen when you cross the street or you could be fined.

The law's creators hope it will lower the number of people hit and killed by cars in the city. Mayor Kirk Caldwell told Reuters news agency, "We hold the unfortunate distinction of being a major city with more pedestrians being hit in crosswalks, particularly our seniors, than that of almost any other cities in the country."

The law includes all electronic devices with screens:cell phones, tablets, gaming devices, digital cameras and laptop computers. The law does permit an exception. Pedestrians may use such devices in the street to call emergency services and rescue workers, such as firefighters and police officers.

Pedestrian deaths have been increasing as the use of cell phones rises. The Governors Highway Safety Association, or GHSA, says pedestrian deaths in the United States increased by 25 percent between 2010 and 2015. That trend continued in 2016 with the number of pedestrian deaths rising to almost 6,000, 11% higher than that in 2015. Other U. S. cities may follow Honolulu. The State of Washington was the first to outlaw distracted driving back in 2007. Now, 46 other states as well as D. C, Puerto Rico, Guam and the U. S. Virgin Islands, also have laws against texting while driving.

1. What's the passage mainly about?

A．Honolulu will ban distracted walking.

B．Texting while walking draws public attention

C．More cities in the U. S. will ban texting while driving.

D．The number of people killed by cars in Honolulu is increasing.

2. In what case can people use electric devices in Honolulu streets?

A．Walking with police officers.

B．Making urgent calls.

C．Helping rescue workers.

D．Texting to consult about emergency services.

3. What does the author convey in Paragraph 5?

A．Texting while walking should be banned quickly.

B．Distracted walking caused a severe problem in Honolulu.

C．Cell phones led to more and more pedestrian deaths in the U. S.

D．Pedestrian deaths were caused by texting while walking.

4. Which U. S. state was the first to ban texting while driving?

A．Hawaii	B．Washington
C．Puerto Rico	D．Guam

3 . With the possible exception of equal rights, perhaps the most controversial issue across the United States today is the death penalty. Many argue that it is an effective deterrent (威慑) to murder, while others maintain there is no convincing evidence that the death penalty reduces the number of murders.

The principal argument advanced by those opposed to the death penalty, basically, is that it is cruel and inhuman punishment, which is the mark of a brutal society, and finally that it is of questionable effectiveness as a deterrent to crime anyway.

In our opinion, the death penalty is a necessary evil. Throughout recorded history there have always been those extreme individuals in every society who were capable of terribly violent crimes such as murder. But some are more extreme than others.

For example, it is one thing to take the life of another in a fit of blind rage, but quite another to coldly plot and carry out the murder of one or more people in the style of a butcher. Thus, murder, like all other crimes, is a matter of relative degree. While it could be argued with some conviction that the criminal in the first instance should be merely separated from society, such should not be the fate of the latter type murderer.

The value of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime may be open to debate. But the overwhelming majority of citizens believe that the death penalty protects them. Their belief is strengthened by evidence which shows that the death penalty deters murder. For example, from 1954 to 1963, when the death penalty was consistently imposed in California, the murder rate remained between three and four murders for each 100,000 population. Since 1964 the death penalty has been carried out only once, and the murder rate has risen to 10.4 murders for each 100,000 population. The sharp climb in the state’s murder rate, which began when executions stopped, is no coincidence. It is convincing evidence that the death penalty does deter many murderers. If the bill reestablishing the death penalty is banned, innocent people will be murdered—some whose lives may have been saved if the death penalty were in effect. This is literally a life or death matter. The lives of thousands of innocent people must be protected.

1. The principal purpose of this passage is to________.

A．speak for the majority	B．initiate a ban
C．criticize the government	D．argue for the value of the death penalty

2. The author’s response to those who urge the death penalty for all is likely to be________.

A．negative	B．friendly
C．supportive	D．neutral

3. According to the Paragraph 4, it can be inferred that________.

A．the death penalty is the most controversial issue in the United States today

B．the ban of the bill reestablishing the death penalty is of little importance

C．the second type of murderers should be sentenced to death

D．the value of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime is not to be debated

4. The passage attempts to establish a relationship between________.

A．the effects of execution and the effects of isolation

B．the murder rate and the imposition of the death penalty

C．the importance of equal rights and that of the death penalty

D．executions and murders

5. The author’s attitude towards “death penalty” is________.

A．opposing	B．supporting
C．neutral	D．not clear

4 . “What kind of rubbish are you?”This question might normally cause anger，but in Shanghai it bas brought about weary complaints over the past few months. On July 1st，the city introduced strict rubbish-sorting regulations that are expected to be used as a model for our country. Citizens must divide their waste into four separate categories and put it into specific public bins. They must do so at scheduled times, when monitors are present to ensure that rules are obeyed and to examine the nature of one's rubbish.

Violators could be hit with fines of up to 200 yuan ($29). For repeat violators, the city can add black marks to their credit records, making it harder for them to obtain hank loans or even buy train tickets.

Shanghai authorities are responding to obvious environmental problem. It produces 9 million tons of garbage a year. But like other cities in china, it lacks a recycling system. Instead, it has relied on rubbish pickers to pick out whatever can be reused. This has limits. As people get wealthier, fewer of them want to do such dirty work. The waste, meanwhile, just keeps piling up. China produces 80 billion pairs of one-off chopsticks a year.

Many citizens appear to support the idea of recycling in general but are frustrated by the details. Rubbish must be divided according to whether it is food, recyclable, dry or hazardous（有害的），the distinctions among which can be confusing, though there are apps to help work it out. Some have complained about the rules surrounding food waste. They must put it straight in the required public bin, forcing them to tear open plastic bags and toss（投掷）it by hand, Most annoying are the short periods for throwing trash, typically a couple of hours, morning and evening. Along with the monitors at the bins, this means that people go at around the same time and can keep an eye on what is being thrown out; no one wants to look bad.

1. What's the purpose of Paragraph l?

A．To complain about rubbish dividing.

B．To explain the four categories of the waste.

C．To introduce the rules on waste sorting.

D．To show the goal of rubbish, sorting regulations.

2. What does the underlined word "Violators" in Paragraph 2 refer to?

A．People who don't pay for train tickets.	B．People who argue with the monitors.
C．People who obtain bank loans.	D．People who are against the regulations.

3. What makes the citizens upset most about the rules?

A．Complex distinction among the four categories of rubbish.

B．Short scheduled time for tossing rubbish.

C．Being observed by monitors when throwing the garbage.

D．Being fined when blamed due to improper behavior.

4. What can be the best title for the text?

A．A Restart of Waste-sorting	B．A New Age of Garbage Classification
C．Learning to Classify Rubbish	D．Rubbish-sorting Benefits the World

5 . The Pacific nation of Palau will soon ban many types of sunscreen in an effort to protect its coral reefs.

President Tommy Remengesau Jr, signed legislation (法令) recently that bans “reef toxic” (对珊瑚有毒) sunscreen beginning in 2020. The law defines reef toxic sunscreen as containing any one of 10 chemicals, including oxybenzone. Other chemicals may also be banned.

Officials will take banned sunscreens from visitors who carry them into the country, Businesses that sell the banned products will be fined up to $1,000.

In a statement, Remengesau said that the punishments find the right balance between “educating tourists and scaring them away.”

The law also requires tour operators to start providing customers with reusable cups, drinking straws and food containers.

The president said the legislation was introduced based on information from a 2017 report. The report found that sunscreen products were widespread in Palau’s famous Jelly fish Lake. The lake was closed for more than a year because of a decrease in jellyfish numbers. It was recently reopened.

The president also noted that plastic waste, chemical pollution, and climate change all threaten the country’s environmental health.

Scientists have found that some chemicals in sunscreen can be toxic to coral reefs. The reels are an important part of the ocean environment and popular with tourists, But some critics say there are not enough independent scientific studies on the issue. Others worry that people will suffer from too much sun contact if they stop using the products.

Some manufacturers have already started selling “reef-friendly” sunscreen.

Palau is located east of the Philippines and north of Indonesia. The nation is home to 21,000 people. Its economy depends on tourism and fishing.

1. What can we learn about Palau’s new legislation?

A．It contributes to the balance of nature.

B．It benefits the health of the tourists.

C．It allows for environmental protection.

D．It is based on a scientific research.

2. What will happen to visitors carrying banned sunscreens into Palau after 2020?

A．They will be put into prison.

B．Their sunscreens will be taken away.

C．They will be fined up to $1,000

D．They will be driven out of the country.

3. Which of the following is True according to the text?

A．Reef-toxic sunscreen contains 10 chemicals.

B．Jellyfish Lake was once closed and reopened in 2017.

C．Tourists to Palau have suffered much from sun contact.

D．“Reef-friendly” sunscreen are on sale in Palau.

4. What can be a suitable title for the text?

A．Palau Carried out New Legislation

B．Sunscreen Products Are Reef-toxic

C．Palau to Ban Sunscreen to Save Its Coral Reefs

D．Palau to Sell “Reef-friendly” Sunscreen

6 . The Philippines, a tropical island nation in the Pacific, will now require by law all graduating students from elementary school to college plant 10 trees each before they can graduate.

The law was supported in the House and is now sent to the Philippines Senate for action, Supporters of the law see this as an opportunity for the Filipino youth to help deal with climate change and air pollution and build a greener environment for their generation.

“To this end, the educational system shall be a centre of spreading continuous use of natural resources among the young to make them socially-responsible citizens, The House bill stated, which was authored by representative Gary Alejano.

Alejano estimates that over the course of one generation the bill will be responsible for 525 billion trees planted.This comes from over 12 million students graduating from elementary school each year, 5 million from high school and 500,000 from college, equaling 175 million new trees planted each year.

The Philippines consists of 7,641 islands in Southeast Asia.Across those islands,deforestation has been a primary environmental issue.Agriculture has led to a significant drop in forested areas across the Philippines. Through the 20th century, forested area in the Philippines decreased from 70 percent to 20 percent.It is estimated that 24.2 million acres of forests were cut down from 1934 to 1988, primarily from logging.

The performance of this new law could set off a situation, by which the Philippines switches from net loss to net gain of trees, a simple and powerful message to the Filipino youth with the potential for long term positive influence.

1. Why does the Philippines make the law to plant trees?

A．To create a better environment to live in.

B．To show the government is taking action.

C．To make sure students can graduate easily.

D．To raise people's awareness of education.

2. What does Alejano think is important?

A．Natural resources.	B．The future generation
C．Powerful messages.	D．The educational system.

3. How many trees will high school graduating students plant each year?

A．5 million.	B．50 million.
C．120 million.	D．175 million.

4. What has caused a sharp drop in forests across the Philippines?

A．A.loss of soil.	B．Agriculture.
C．Climate change.	D．Air pollution.

7 . Traveling by subway can sometimes be quite an adventure, especially during rush hour. There are the times when you have to avoid cups of coffee that could spill (溅) on you. The smells of some passengers’ food are very strong, too. According to the Beijing subway passenger regulations, which went into effect on May 15th, passengers except babies and the sick are no longer allowed to eat or drink on the subway. Violators (违反者) who do not stop after being asked to will be asked to get off. The violation will also be recorded in the violators’ credit record.

Some support the rule. The reason is that the smell of food and drink can annoy other passengers. “The smell of food fills the carriage, causing people discomfort, especially in the hot summer, Besides, eating on the subway produces rubbish. And on subway trains, people often spill their drinks,” said Zheng Yiou, 17, a student from Hefei.

However, others question this rule. “Some citizens live so far from their work places that they have limited time to have breakfast before they go to work. Eating while they travel saves them time and decreases the chance that they will be late for work,” He Songlin, a 17-year-old student from Chengdu said, “And some people, like those with low- blood sugar levels, get sick if they can’t eat when they must.”

Other Chinese cities like Nanjing and Chengdu have similar regulations. Some foreign cities also ban eating and drinking on the subway. For example, eating and drinking have long been banned on the subway in Washington DC. Singapore fines people who eat or drink on the subway up to 500 Singapore dollars, which is RMB 2,417 yuan.

Chen Yanyan, a professor from Beijing University of Technology, believed we should consider the need of some people to eat or drink on the subway. “Commuters (上班族) and travelers are sometimes too busy to eat. Maybe we could learn from Tokyo, where there are many subway stations equipped with services, allowing passengers to eat and drink,” she said.

1. In which city was subway passenger regulations carried out on May 15th?

A．Chengdu.	B．Nanjing.
C．Washington DC.	D．Beijing.

2. What’s the punishment for the passengers who break the rules in Singapore?

A．Eating on the subway.	B．Drinking on the subway.
C．Being fined up to 2417 yuan.	D．Being asked to get off the train.

3. What is Chen Yanyan’s attitude to eating or drinking on the subway?

A．Worried.	B．Sympathetic.
C．Doubtful.	D．Uninterested

4. What would be the best title for the text?

A．Food and Drink Banned on Subway.

B．The Adventure of Subway Traveling

C．Ways to Eat and Drink on Subway.

D．The Services on Subway Stations

8 . Kentucky Fried Chicken has filed a lawsuit（提起诉讼） against three companies in China， because their social media accounts spread false information about its food， including that its chickens have eight legs． The case comes as the Beijing government holds an activity to clean up rumours （谣言）on social media（媒体）． Internet marketers have been accused （指控） of trying to control online opinions of their customers by posting false information about their competitors．

In an announcement posted on its Chinese website， KFC said one of the best-known false rumours was that chickens used by the company have six wings and eight legs． It is requesting 1.5 million yuan and an official apology from each of three companies． It is also asking for an immediate stop to their activities to hurt it by spreading rumours．

The fried chicken chain is China's biggest restaurant operator and is a kind of fast food for young people in China． It has more than 4， 600 restaurants in the country， and on average， opens a new branch every day． KFC'S China chief executive officer（行政长官）， Qu Cuirong， said that it is difficult for companies to protect their brands（品牌） against rumours because it is hard for them to collect evidence． She added， "The efforts by the government in recent years to purify（净化） the online environment have offered us much more confidence．"

The companies are Shanxi Weilukuang Technology Company， Taiyuan Zero Point Technology Company and Yingchenanzhi Success and Culture Communication in Shenzhen， south-east China． Calls to numbers listed for the companies either rang unanswered or were not available． In fact， authorities（官方） began an activity two years ago to clean up what they called online rumours． Comments in state media have argued that a clean-up is needed．

1. The reason why KFC filed a lawsuit against three Chinese companies is that ______ ．

A．they started an activity to control KFC

B．they spread untrue information about KFC

C．they have been acting against the law

D．they are acting as customers to spread information

2. What can be learned from the second paragraph？ ______ ．

A．KFC uses chickens that have six wings and eight legs

B．Only one rumor about KFC'S chickens has been spread

C．KFC is asking for a large sum of money and an apology

D．The three companies have accepted KFC'S request

3. According to the last paragraph， we know that ______ ．

A．the three companies are in the same province

B．no one in the three companies answered the phone

C．everyone thought that cleaning up the online rumours was necessary

D．nobody has called the three companies

4. Where can we most probably find this text？ ______ ．

A．On a fashion website	B．In a food magazine．
C．On an official poster	D．In a newspaper．

9 . 阅读下面短文，在空白处填入1个适当的单同或括号内单词的正确形式。

China    1    (witness) rapid growth in dealing with cases between citizens and government departments over the past five years. But    2    (take) officials to court (法庭)would have been unheard of 30 years ago.

“The question of whether to allow citizens to sue (起诉)government departments caused heated debates back then,” said Yang Jingyu，82，a retired lawmaker     3    at the time was a member of the Standing Committee of the National Peopled Congress.

He looked back     4     discussions about the Maritime Traffic Safety Law, which     5    (regard) as a basis of China’s legal system. But it started a debate on whether governments could be sued, because some officials thought what they do is in the name of the country.

However Peng Zhen, who     6     (devote) to making the laws, argued that it would be unfair    7     we did not allow citizens to appeal (上诉)in court. For example, sailors, especially    8    who had worked many years to become captains, would be jobless or fall into trouble if they were     9    (wrong) punished.

Now, according to the laws, courts must accept cases without     10     (hesitate) if litigants (当事人)provide enough material.

10 . New drivers who are caught using a phone at the wheel will lose their license under new law that comes into force today.

From Wednesday anyone found calling, texting or using an app while driving will face a 200 pounds on-the-spot fine and six points on their license. It means that new drivers—who can lose a maximum of six points before being banned for the first two years after passing their test—will face an immediate ban for sending a single text message. Previously they were able to avoid getting points on their license by taking part in retraining courses. More experienced motorists can lose their license if they receive 12 points in a three-year period.

It follows a tragic(灾难的) incident in which Polish lorry driver Tomasz Kroker killed four members of the same family after failing to stop while scrolling (滚动) through music on his phone. Twenty-two people were killed and 99 seriously injured in accidents on Britain’s roads in 2015 where a motorist using a mobile was a main cause of accidents.

Research by the RAC has found that one in four motorists admit checking texts, emails and social media while driving. Chris Grayling, the Transport Secretary, said increasing punishment would act as a “strong deterrent(震慑物)”. He added, “Everyone has a part to play in encouraging their family and friends not to use their phones while driving. It is as inexcusable(不可原谅的) as drink-driving. ”

1. People will lose six points on their license while driving except________.

A．calling	B．texting
C．using an app	D．carrying phones

2. Who will lose his license according to the passage?

A．New drivers lose 5 points for the first two years.

B．New drivers lose 6 points during three years.

C．Experienced drivers lose 12 points in three years.

D．Experienced drivers lose 6 points in three years.

3. What led to the appearance of the new law?

A．The research by the RAC.

B．A serious accident.

C．The survey of the website.

D．The news on TV.

4. What can we learn from the last paragraph?

A．More severe punishment is effective.

B．Most of drivers use phones while driving.

C．A driver’s family and friends make no difference.

D．Using phones while driving is more harmful than drink-driving.