In France, franglais（英式法语）was seen as a national threat. Just as we took in thousands of French words in the Middle Ages, French speakers and writers today are taking in thousands of English and American expressions. By 1994, so many English words had made their way to French that the French government passed a law forbidding the use of English words where good French words existed.

    But the latest edition of the Academy francaise dictionary did admit about 6,000 new words to the French language, including, for the first time, a number of franglais words and expressions.

    However, this sort of thing is not just limited to traditional English – French Competition. Norway and Brazil have recently taken similar measures to keep English out.

    As English spreads around the globe, it has developed rich varieties. English has been spoken in Singapore since the early 19^th century, but after independence from Britain, Singapore went a step further and English was made the official language of business and government. But the day −to–day English that the people of Singapore actually speak is a far cry from the official English that the government wants them to learn. It has become an expressive dialect called “Singlish”, full of vocabulary and grammar borrowed from the Singapores' native languages.

    And this may be the irony（讽刺）of the global spread of English. The more widely it's spoken, the more it may change into local dialects, which are not easily intelligible. People will make English their own and, in doing so, will make it something else. This has happened before to Latin which broke into French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Romanian. But English has always welcomed variety and change, and it still does.

    Chimps will cooperate in certain ways, like gathering in war parties to protect their territory. But beyond the minimum requirements as social beings, they have little instinct to help one another. Chimps in the wild seek food for themselves. Even chimp mothers regularly decline to share food with their children, who are able from a young age to gather their own food.

In the laboratory, chimps don't naturally share food either. If a chimp is put in a cage where he can pull in one plate of food for himself or, with no great effort, a plate that also provides food for a neighbor to the next cage, he will pull at random —he just doesn't care whether his neighbor gets fed or not. Chimps are truly selfish.

    Human children, on the other hand are extremely cooperative. From the earliest ages, they decide to help others, to share information and to participate in achieving common goals. The psychologist Michael Tomasello has studied this cooperativeness in a series of experiments with very young children. He finds that if babies aged 18 months see an unrelated adult with hands full trying to open a door, almost all will immediately try to help.

    There are several reasons to believe that the urges to help, inform and share are not taught .but naturally possessed in young children. One is that these instincts appear at a very young age before most parents have started to train children to behave socially. Another is that the helping behaviors are not improved if the children are rewarded. A third reason is that social intelligence develops in children before their general cognitive (认知的) skills, at least when compared with chimps. In tests conducted by Tomasello, the children did no better than the chimps on the physical world tests, but were considerably better at understanding the social world.

    The core of what children's minds have and chimps' don't is what Tomasello calls shared intentionality. Part of this ability is that they can infer what others know or are thinking. But beyond that, even very young children want to be part of a shared purpose. They actively seek to be part of a “we”, a group that intends to work toward a shared goal.

    Mandara seemed to know something big was about to happen. So she let out a yell, caught hold of her 2-year-old daughter Kibibi and climbed up into a tree. She lives at the National Zoo in Washington D.C.

    And on Tuesday, August 23rd, witnesses said she seemed to sense the big earthquake that shook much of the East Coast before any humans knew what was going on. And she's not the only one. In the moments before the quake, an orangutan (猩猩) let out a loud call and then climbed to the top of her shelter.

    “It's very different from their normal call,” said Brandie Smith, the zookeeper. “The lemurs (monkey like animals of Madagascar) will sound an alarm if they see or hear something highly unusual.”

    But you can't see or hear an earthquake 15 minutes before it happens, can you? Maybe you can——if you're an animal.

    “Animals can hear above and below our range of hearing,” said Brandie Smith. “That's part of their special abilities. They're more sensitive to the environment, which is how they survive.”

    Primates weren't the only animals that seemed to sense the quake before it happened. One of the elephants made a warning sound and a huge lizard (蜥蜴) ran quickly for cover. The flamingoes (a kind of birds) gathered before the quake and stayed together until the shaking stopped.

    So what kind of vibrations (震动) were the animals picking up in the moments before the quake? Scientist Susan Hough said earthquakes produce two types of waves——a weak “P” wave and then a much stronger “S” wave. The “P” stands for “primary”. And the “S” stands for “secondary”. She thinks the “P” wave might be what sets the animals off.

    Not all the animals behaved unusually before the quake. For example, Smith said the zoo's giant pandas didn't jump up until the shaking actually began. But many of the other animals seemed to know something was coming before it happened. “I'm not surprised at all,” Smith said.

    Learning any language is hard, but learning English can be especially challenging. Why? Because native speakers use the language in ways that textbooks could never describe. In particular, words that British people use cause many language students to scratch(JT) their heads.

    Here's an example: You happen to hear a Briton calling someone a “wazzock”. But what exactly is a wazzock? This word, in fact, means a foolish person, although there's nothing about it that would help you guess that. There are many strange terms like this in British English - the Oxford English Dictionary would be much smaller without these strange usages filling its pages.

    How can these odd words be explained? Part of the answer is the British sense of humor. Britons don't like to take things too seriously, and this is evident through many British words and phrases. For example, to spend a penny means to use the bathroom. It refers to the days when people had to pay a penny to use a public toilet.

    In an interview for the BBC's website, British linguist David Crystal suggested there may be historical reasons for the sheer number of odd words and phrases in British English. He thinks that they began in the late 16th and. early 17th centuries. This was a great age for the theatre, when Shakespeare and other writers worked hard to keep up with the demand for new plays. The theatre's popularity also created an incentive (刺激) to invent new words.

    With this in mind, perhaps Shakespeare and his peers are to blame for unusual British words such as “codswallop” and “balderdash”—which both, ironically, mean nonsense.

    While these strange words may be confusing to non-native speakers, they certainly make studying English a lot more interesting.

Unhealthy health care bills, long emergency-room waits and inability to find a primary care physician just scratch the surface of the problems that patients face daily.

Primary care should be the backbone of any health care system. Countries with appropriate primary care resources score highly when it comes to health outcomes and costs. The U.S. takes the opposite approach by emphasizing the specialists rather than the primary care physician.

A recent study analyzed the providers who treat Medicare Beneficiaries(老年医保受惠人). The startling finding was that the average Medicare patient saw a total of seven doctors — two primary care physicians and five specialists — in a given year. Contrary to popular belief, the more physicians taking care of you don't guarantee better care. Actually increasing breakup of care results in a corresponding rise in costs and medical errors.

How did we let primary care slip so far? The key is how doctors are paid. Most physicians are paid whenever they perform a medical service. The more a physician does, regardless of quality or outcome, the better he's reimbursed (返还费用). Moreover, the amount of a physician receives leans heavily toward medical or surgical procedures. A specialist who performs a procedure in a 30-minute visit can be paid three times more than a primary care physician using that same 30 minutes to discuss a patient's disease. Combine this fact with annual government threats to indiscriminately cut reimbursements, physicians are faced with no choice but to increase quantity to boost income.

Primary care physicians who refuse to compromise quality are either driven out of business or to cash-only practices, further contributing to the decline of primary care.

Medical students are not blind to this scenario. They see how heavily the reimbursement deck is stacked against primary care. The recent numbers show that since 1997, newly graduated U.S. medical students who choose primary care as a career have declined by 50%. This trend results in emergency rooms being overwhelmed with patients without regular doctors.

How do we fix this problem?

It starts with reforming the physician reimbursement system. Remove the pressure for primary care physicians to squeeze in more patients per hour, and reward them for optimally managing their diseases and practicing evidence-based medicine. Make primary care more attractive food to medical students by forgiving students loans for those who choose primary care as a career and harmonizing the marked difference between specialist and primary care physician salaries.

We're at the point where primary care is needed more than ever. Within a few years, the first wave of 76 million Baby Boomers will become qualified for Medicare. Patients older than 85, who need chronic care most, will rise by 50% this decade.

Who will be there to treat  them？

    People may have different dreams as they grow older. What do you want to be when you grow up? {#blank#}1{#/blank#} 

When I was a little girl, my parents always asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I used to tell them a general a doctor, a guard, and many more that I probably don't remember. {#blank#}2{#/blank#} , I want to be a fashion designer (时装设计师).

What made me want to be a fashion designer? I often watch TV. {#blank#}3{#/blank#} . The tall, thin models wear beautiful clothes and walk beautifully on the stage (舞台). So I decide to be a designer and design beautiful clothes for people and make them look even better.

I have all kinds of dolls and I enjoy looking at their colorful clothes. {#blank#}4{#/blank#} . I try to put one doll's clothes on another doll and see how it looks. Sometimes a skirt looks nice on one doll, but doesn't look so good on another.

I also like reading fashion magazines. They are quite expensive, but my parents say they will pay for them if I am really interested in reading them. {#blank#}5{#/blank#} . I'lI try my best to make my dream come true. I believe that one day my parents will take pride in what I can do.

A. The fashion shows on TV are fascinating.

B. They want me to learn as much as possible.

C. But now I really know what I want to be.

D. I often change my doll's clothes.

E. Everyone needs to answer this question.