试题

试题 试卷

logo

题型:阅读理解 题类:常考题 难易度:困难

浙江省宁波市六校2017-2018学年高二下学期英语期末联考试卷(音频暂未更新)

阅读下列短文,从每题所给的A、B、C和D四个选项中,选出最佳选项。

    The quality of our seafood has been in the news a lot lately. A new study has found that people who eat seafood are also eating plastic — 11,000 pieces of microplastic per year to be exact.

    Researchers at the University of Ghent in Belgium found that seafood eaters are consuming plastic at a concerning rate.

    “Per serving of mussels (贻贝), which contains about 300 grams of mussel meat, you get 300 pieces of plastic inside your body,” researchers wrote. Researchers don't yet know the implications of eating microplastic, but they worry that it could have negative consequences on our health.

    While we don't know what microplastic does yet to humans, we do know what it does to sea animals. In earlier studies, scientists have found that when fish eat microplastics, it prevents their growth and changes their feeding patterns. In fact, fish will stop eating natural sources of nutrients, and only go for plastic.

    When you're done using plastic, a small portion (部分) may be recycled. However, more than likely it's in a landfill or making its way towards the ocean. Once rubbish hits the water, sea creatures may mistake it for food. This often leads to poisoning or death. If they get caught for human's food, the plastic may very well make its way back to you — on your dinner plate.

    According to a study published in Science magazine, eight million tons of plastic go into our waterways every year. The problem is so serious that scientists say that by 2050 the weight of plastic in our oceans will outweigh fish. And just because it's out of sight, it doesn't mean it should be out of mind.

    There's no immediate way to prevent microplastic from ending up in your body. However, you can help reduce the amount of plastic reaching rivers, lakes and oceans in the first place. You can make a difference with your choices every day. Even small changes will add up. While your dinner may contain microplastic, you can help prevent the future generations from having that same problem.

(1)、What does the underlined word “implications” probably mean?
A、Logical reasons. B、Possible effects. C、Real functions. D、Potential benefits.
(2)、What do we learn about microplastics in the oceans?
A、Fish tend to be addicted to them. B、They don't affect fish's eating habits. C、They make fish grow quickly. D、Fish are sick and tired of them.
(3)、What's the writer's purpose of writing the last paragraph?
A、To offer us a brief summary. B、To send us a gentle reminder. C、To give us a final warning. D、To appeal to us for action
举一反三
阅读理解
    You've probably heard such reports. The number of college students majoring in the humanities (人文学科) is decreasing quickly. The news has caused a flood of high-minded essays criticizing the development as a symbol of American decline.
    The bright side is this: The destruction of the humanities by the humanities is, finally, coming to an end. No more will literature, as part of an academic curriculum, put out the light of literature. No longer will the reading of, say, “King Lear” or D.H. Lawrence's “Women in Love” result in the annoying stuff of multiple-choice quizzes, exam essays and homework assignments.
    The discouraging fact is that for every college professor who made Shakespeare or Lawrence come alive for the lucky few, there were countless others who made the reading of literary masterpieces seem like two hours in the dentist's chair.
    The remarkably insignificant fact that, a half-century ago, 14% of the undergraduate population majored in the humanities (mostly in literature, but also in art, philosophy, history, classics and religion) as opposed to 7% today has given rise to serious reflections on the nature and purpose of an education in the liberal arts.
    Such reflections always come to the same conclusion: We are told that the lack of a formal education, mostly in literature, leads to numerous harmful personal conditions, such as the inability to think critically, to write clearly, to be curious about other people and places, to engage with great literature after graduation, to recognize truth, beauty and goodness.
    These serious anxieties are grand, admirably virtuous and virtuously admirable.   They are also a mere fantasy.
    The college teaching of literature is a relatively recent phenomenon. Literature did not even become part of the university curriculum until the end of the 19th century. Before that, what came to be called the humanities consisted of learning Greek and Latin, while the Bible was studied in church as the necessary other half of a full education. No one ever thought of teaching novels, stories, poems or plays in a formal course of study. They were part of the leisure of everyday life.
    It was only after World War II that the study of literature as a type of wisdom, relevant to actual, contemporary life, put down widespread institutional roots. Soldiers returning home in 1945 longed to make sense of their lives after what they had witnessed and survived. The abundant economy afforded them the opportunity and the time to do so. Majoring in English hit its peak, yet it was this very popularity of literature in the university that spelled its doom, as the academicization of literary art was accelerated.
    Literature changed my life long before I began to study it in college. Books took me far from myself into experiences that had nothing to do with my life, yet spoke to my life. But once in the college classroom, this precious, alternate life inside me got thrown back into that dimension of my existence that bored me. Homer, Chekhov and Yeats were reduced to right and wrong answers, clear-cut themes and clever interpretations. If there is anything to worry about, it should be the disappearance of what used to be an important part of every high-school education: the literature survey course, where books were not academically taught but thoroughly introduced—an experience unaffected by stupid commentary and useless testing.
    The literary classics are places of quiet, useless stillness in a world that despises (鄙视) any activity that is not profitable or productive. Literature is too sacred to be taught. It needs only to be read.
    Soon, if all goes well and literature at last disappears from the undergraduate curriculum—my fingers are crossed—increasing numbers of people will be able to say that reading the literary masterworks of the past outside the college classroom, simply in the course of living, was, in fact, their college classroom.
阅读理解

    E-mail systems at thousands of companies and government offices around the world were attacked by a virus(病毒)called “Melissa” that disguises(伪装)itself as an “important message from a friend. In spite of a weekend of warnings,more than 50 000 computers at about 100 places around the world have been attacked by the virus,computer security experts said on Monday.

    The virus began to show up last Friday and spread rapidly on Monday by making computers fire off dozens of infected(被传染的)e-mails. Although the virus causes no serious damage to a computer,its effect was far reaching.

    To make matters worse,a similar virus called “Papa” was discovered on Monday. Papa is programmed to send out even more infected e-mails than Melissa.

    The Melissa virus comes in the form of an e-mail,usually containing the subject line“Important Message”. It appears to be from a friend. The body of the e-mail message says,“Here is that document you asked for...,don't show it to anyone else.” Attached(附)to the message is a document file.

    Once the user opens that file,the virus digs into the user's address book and sends infected documents to the first 50 addresses. E-mails from the Papa virus include an attached spreadsheet(电子数据文件)file. When the user opens that file,the virus sends 60 infected e-mails.

    The reason why this is spreading so fast is that you are getting it from people you know. You should never open documents or attachments from people you don't know. People who get an unexpected e-mail with the “important message” subject line should delete it immediately and not open the message.

阅读理解

    Chinese scientists recently have produced two monkeys with the same gene, Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua, using the same technique that gave us Dolly the sheep. These monkeys are not actually the first primates(灵长类)to be cloned. Another one named Tetra was produced in the late 1990s by embryo(胚胎)splitting, the division of an early-stage embryo into two or four separate cells to make clones. By contrast, they were each made by replacing an egg cell nucleus(原子核)with DNA from a differentiated body cell. This Dolly method, known as somatic cell nuclear transfer(SCNT), can create more clones and allows researchers greater control over the edits they make to the DNA.

    Success came from adopting several new techniques. These included a new type of microscopy to better view the cells during handling or using several materials that encourage cell reprogramming, which hadn't been tried before on primates. Still, the research process proved difficult, and many attempts by the team failed. Just two healthy baby monkeys born from more than 60 tested mothers. This leads to many researchers' pouring water on the idea that the team's results bring scientists closer to cloning humans. They thought this work is not a stepping stone to establishing methods for obtaining live born human clones. Instead, this clearly remains a very foolish thing to attempt, it would be far too inefficient, far too unsafe, and it is also pointless.

    But the scientists involved emphasize that this is not their goal. There is now no barrier for cloning primate species, thus cloning humans is closer to reality. However, their research purpose is entirely for producing non-human primate models for human diseases; they absolutely have no intention, and society will not permit this work to be extended to humans. Despite limitations, they treat this breakthrough a novel model system for scientists studying human biology and disease.

阅读理解

    To travel abroad, we often meet the problem of what to take and how to take it. Take as little as possible. Choose clothes for your use in different kinds of situations and when you have made your final choice, take half of it! It's always a big problem to take too many things, and anyway if necessary, you can buy what you need in America. Things like jeans, T-shirts and other clothes are good buys in the US. If you hunt around you can usually find something on sale.

    Whatever baggage you take, make sure it is easy to take. Getting on and off buses and trains, even just changing planes, can be a test if your bags are too heavy or too many. The best way is to take one holdall, like a suitcase or a backpack, and then a smaller bag. Even when you have to check in your holdall, at the airport or bus station, you can keep all your money and documents by your side. It is also a good idea to keep a change of clothing in your shoulder bag in case your suitcase or backpack gets lost by an airline or a bus company.

The means you choose to travel around the US will depend on your money, you time and something else. Since there are certain discounts available to travelers who buy their tickets outside the US, it is a good idea to make travel plans before you go. Also, when you buy your tickets outside the US, you save the eight percent sales tax. Travel is like everything else in America—you have to shop around for the best busy. Never be afraid to ask for the cheapest fare. The clerk seldom offers you the cheapest one.

阅读理解

    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 soil-enriching 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 three-year 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 Iroko-bacteria 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 limestone-producing process, we have a low-tech, safe, readily employed and easily operating way to lock carbon out of the atmosphere, while improving farming conditions in tropical countries?

返回首页

试题篮