—If only you          the issue more thought.

—        . The floating cities are perhaps an alternative solution.

    For a long time, I thought a present and a gift were no different. I grew up in a household where presents 1 special occasions, say there were always presents for Christmas and our birthdays.

    So when I married Gary who did not give presents on a 2 basis, I had to make an adjustment. Gary did not wholly avoid gift­giving, though. 3 noticing how many hours I spend on the 4, he brought home a shoulder pad (垫肩) for the telephone receiver. But mostly, he 5 holidays, let alone shop for earrings to 6to me showing his affection.

    I tried to change him 7. I bought books for his birthdays and knitted him hats and sweaters for Christmas. 8 I began to tell him what I wanted, giving9instructions, but got nowhere.

    Last year when the snowstorm 10our town and he was on business, I used his present road scraper(铲土机)to11both our drive and our neighbors, thinking how12earnings would have been. Gary had wisely chosen not the thing I 13, but the thing that he knew I would need.

    I 14began to understand the difference between a present and a gift. A present is just a thing. But a gift is broader and often cannot be 15, It is a small act of kindness, the 16 to bend to another's needs, the sacrifice of time and effort. 17 is a gift. Any expression of it, freely given, is a (n)18 from the heart that is immeasurably better than a present.

    My insistence on presents must have seemed to Gary a lack of 19 for the gifts he had be giving all along, but he never stopped giving them.

    Gary will be home this Christmas, but I don't 20 a present. I already have the greatest gift.

    Tiny microbes(微生物)are at the heart of a new agricultural technique to manage harmful greenhouse gas. Scientists have discovered how microbes can be used to turn carbon dioxide into soil­enriching limestone(石灰石), with the help of a type of tree that grows in tropical areas, such as West Africa.

    Researchers have found that when the Iroko tree is grown in dry, acidic soil and treated with a combination of natural fungi(霉菌)and other bacteria, not only does the tree grow well, it also produces the mineral limestone in the soil around its root.

    The Iroko tree makes a mineral by combining Ca from the earth with CO₂ from the atmosphere The bacteria then create the conditions under which this mineral turns into limestone. The discovery offers a new way to lock carbon into the soil, keeping it out of the atmosphere. In addition to storing carbon in the trees leaves and in the form of limestone, the mineral in the soil makes it more suitable for agriculture.

    The discovery could lead to reforestation(重新造林) projects in tropical countries, and help reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in the developing world. It has already been used in West Africa and is being tested in Bolivia, Haiti and India.

    The findings were made in a three­year project involving researchers from the Universities of Edinburgh, Granada, Lausanne and Delft University of Technology. The project examined several microbiological methods of locking CO₂ as limestone, and the Iroko­bacteria way showed best results. Work was funded by the European Commission under the Future&Emerging Technologies(FET)scheme.

    Dr. Bryne Ngwenya of the University of Edinburgh's School of GeoSciences, who led the research, said: "By taking advantage of this natural limestone­producing process, we have a low­tech, safe, readily employed and easily operating way to lock carbon out of the atmosphere, while improving farming conditions in tropical countries."

    When Richard had tried to jump off the cable car, his backpack had been caught in the chair, which then dragged him back down the hill. In the process, the backpack belt twisted around his neck, making him breathless. Now Richard's body was swinging four feet above the snow. The cable car operator had quickly stopped it, and the friends kicked off their skis and ran toward the scene. They made a human pyramid to try to reach Richard, but the unconscious man was too far off the ground. With the clock ticking, Wilson ran to the ladder of a nearby lift tower. Scared skiers watched as he struggled the 25 feet. After he reached the top, Wilson's first challenge was to climb onto the two­inch steel cable that held the chairs. He handled the balance and height bravely, but he knew he could not walk on the cable. Therefore, he calmed down and sat over it and then used his hands to pull himself to Richard quickly. Wilson's greatest fear wasn't that he'd fall, but that he wouldn't reach Richard. "This was life or death," he said.

    When he reached Richards chair, Wilson swung a leg over the cable and attempted to drop down onto it. But as he did that, his jacket caught on the movable footrest, which was in the up position. The footrest began to slide down, with Wilson attached. But before that could happen, he managed to free himself and reached Richard.

    Fortunately, the ski patrol (if) had gathered below and performed emergency treatment on Richard, who had been hanging for about five minutes, then skied him down to an ambulance.

    That night, Richard called from the hospital to express his thanks to Wilson, his other friends and the workers at the Arapahoe Basin Ski Area.

    Have you ever fallen for a novel and been amazed not to find it on lists of great books? Or walked around a sculpture known as a classic, struggling to see why it is famous? If so, you've probably thought about the question a psychologist, James Cutting, asked himself: How does a work of art come to be considered great?

    The direct answer is that some works of art are just great: of inner superior quality. The paintings that win prime spots in galleries, get taught in classes are the ones that have proved their artistic value over time. If you can't see they're superior, that's your problem. But some social scientists have been asking questions of it, raising the possibility that artistic canons(名作目录)are little more than old historical accidents.

    Cutting, a professor at Cornell University, wondered if a psychological pattern known as the "mere­exposure effect" played a role in deciding which paintings rise to the top of the cultural league. Cutting designed an experiment to test his hunch(直觉). Over a lecture course he regularly showed undergraduates works of impressionism for two seconds at a time. Some of the paintings canonical, included in art­history books. Others were lesser known but of comparable quality were exposed four times as often. Afterwards, the students preferred them to the canonical works, while a control group liked the canonical ones best. Cuttings students had grown to like those paintings more simply because they had seen them more.

    Cutting believes his experiment casts light on how canons are formed. He reproduced works of impressionism today bought by five or six wealthy and influential collectors in the late 19th century. Their preferences given to certain works made them more likely to be hung in galleries and printed in collections. And the fame passed down the years. The more people were exposed to, the more they liked it, and the more they liked it, the more it appeared in books, on posters and in big exhibitions. Meanwhile, academics and critics added to their popularity. After all, it's not just the masses who tend to rate what they see more often more highly. Critics' praise is deeply mixed with publicity. "Scholars", Cutting argues, "are no different from the public in the effects of mere exposure."

    The process described by Cutting show a principle that the sociologist Duncan Watts calls "cumulative advantage": once a thing becomes popular, it will tend to become more popular still. A few years ago, Watts had a similar experience to Cutting's in another Paris museum. After queuing to see the "Mona Lisa" at the Louvre, he came away puzzled: why was it considered so superior to the three other Leonardos, to which nobody seemed to be paying the slightest attention?

    When Watts looked into the history of "the greatest painting of all time", he discovered that, for most of its life, the "Mona Lisa" remained in relative obscurity. In the 1850s, Leonardo da Vinci was considered no match for giants of Renaissance art like Titian and Raphael, whose works were worth almost ten times as much as the "Mona Lisa" It was only in the 20th century that "Mona Lisa rocketed to the number­one spot. What brought it there wasn't a scholarly re­evaluation, but a theft. In 1911 a worker at the Louvre walked out of the museum with the "Mona Lisa" hidden under his coat. Parisians were shocked at the theft of a painting to which, until then, they had paid little attention. When the museum reopened, people queued to see it. From then on, the "Mona Lisa "came to represent Western culture itself.

    The intrinsic (本质的) quality of a work of art is starting to seem like its least important attribute. But perhaps it's more significant than our social scientists admit. Firstly, a work needs a certain quality to reach the top of the pile. The "Mona Lisa" may not be a worthy world champion but it was in the Louvre in the first place, and not by accident. Secondly, some objects are simply better than others. Read "Hamlet" after reading even the greatest of Shakespeare's contemporaries, and the difference may strike you as unarguable.

    A study suggests that the exposure effect doesn't work the same way on everything, and points to a different conclusion about how canons are formed. Great art and mediocrity (平庸)can get confused, even by experts. But that's why we need to see, and read, as much as we can. The more were exposed to the good and the bad, the better we are at telling the difference.

Fighting the curse of presenteeism

    "It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?" Beyond a certain level, extra effort seems to be self­defeating. Studies suggest that, after 10 hours a week, employee productivity falls sharply.

    But that doesn't stop some managers from demanding that workers stay chained to their desk for long periods. Jack Ma, the founder of Alibaba, recently applauded the "996" model, where employees work from 9am to 9pm, six days a week, as a huge blessing". However, to modern office workers presenteeism is a curse.

    There will be days when you do not have much to do, just waiting for someone else to respond to a request. As the clock ticks past 5pm, there may be no purpose in staying at your desk. But you can see your boss hard at work and, more important, they can see you. So you make an effort to look busy.

    If bosses do not like to go home before their underlings (下属)and underlings fear leaving before their bosses, everyone is trapped. Staff may feel that they will not get a pay rise, or a promotion, if they are not seen to be putting in maximum effort. This is easily confused with long hours. Managers, who are often no good at judging employees5 performance, use time in the office as a measurement.

    But presenteeism has more serious consequences. As well as reducing productivity, this can increase medical expenses for the employer. According to a study, these costs can be six time: higher for employers than the costs of absenteeism among workers. To take one example, research found that Japanese employees with lower­back pain were three times more likely to turn up for work than in Britain. As a result, those workers were more likely to experience greater pain and to suffer from depression. What could be more discouraging than being in pain while feeling trapped at work?

    "None of this is to say that employers are not entitled to expect workers to be in the office for a small amount of time. Unavoidably there will be a need for some (preferably short)meetings. Dealing with colleagues face-­to­-face develops friendships, allows for a useful exchange of ideas and enables workers to have a better sense of their common needs.

    With portable smart phones and laptops, we can work at home as easily as in the office. Turning an office into a prison does nothing for the creativity that is increasingly demanded of office workers as routine tasks are automatic. To be productive you need presence of mind, not being present in the flesh.

【写作内容】

⒈用约30个单词概括上述信息的主要内容；

⒉用约120个单词发表你的观点，内容包括：

⑴什么原因导致了这些变化？（不少于两点）

⑵面对即将到来的"智能时代"你所做的准备（至少两点）

【写作要求】

⒈阐述观点或提供论据时，不能直接引用原文语句；

⒉作文中不得出现真是姓名和学校名称；

⒊不必写标题。

【评分标准】内容完整，语言规范，语篇连贯，词数适当。