六级英语阅读理解

Passage1 A new study from the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tufts University shows that today's youth vote in larger numbers than previous generations, and a 2008 study from the Center for American Progress adds that increasing numbers of young voters and activists support traditionally liberal causes. But there's no easy way to see what those figures mean in real life. During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama assembled a racially and ideologically diverse coalition with his message of hope and change; as the reality of life under a new administration settles in, some of those supporters might become disillusioned. As the nation moves further into the Obama presidency, will politically engaged young people continue to support the president and his agenda, or will they gradually drift away?     The writers of Generation O (short for Obama), a new Newsweek blog that seeks to chronicle the lives of a group of young Obama supporters, want to answer that question. For the next three months, Michelle Kremer and 11 other Obama supporters, ages 19 to 34, will blog about life across mainstream America, with one twist: by tying all of their ideas and experiences to the new president and his administration, the bloggers will try to start a conversation about what it means to be young and politically active in America today. Malena Amusa, a 24-year-old writer and dancer from St. Louis sees the project as a way to preserve history as it happens. Amusa, who is traveling to India this spring to finish a book, then to Senegal to teach English, has ongoing conversations with her friends about how the Obama presidency has changed their daily lives and hopes to put some of those ideas, along with her global perspective, into her posts. She's excited because, as she puts it, "I don't have to wait [until] 15 years from  now" to make sense of the world.     Henry Flores, a political-science professor at St. Mary's University, credits this younger generation's political strength to their embrace of technology. "[The Internet] exposes them to more thinking," he says, "and groups that are like-minded in different parts of the country start to come together." That's exactly what the Generation O bloggers are hoping to do. The result could be a group of young people that, like their boomer (二战后生育高峰期出生的美国人) parents, grows up with a strong sense of purpose and sheds the image of apathy (冷漠) they've inherited from Generation X (60 年代后期和70 年代出生的美国人). It's no small challenge for a blog run by a group of ordinary—if ambitious—young people, but the members of Generation O are up to the task.。 57. What is the finding of a new study by CIRCLE?     A) More young voters are going to the polls than before.     B) The young generation supports traditionally liberal causes.     C) Young voters played a decisive role in Obama's election.     D) Young people in America are now more diverse ideologically. 58. What is a main concern of the writers of Generation O?     A) How Obama is going to live up to young people's expectations.     B) Whether America is going to change during Obama's presidency.     C) Whether young people will continue to support Obama's policy.     D) How Obama's agenda is going to affect the life of Americans. 59. What will the Generation O bloggers write about in their posts?     A) Their own interpretation of American politics.     B) Policy changes to take place in Obama's administration.     C) Obama's presidency viewed from a global perspective.     D) Their lives in relation to Obama's presidency. 60. What accounts for the younger generation's political strength according to Professor Henry Flores?     A) Their embrace of radical ideas.     B) Their desire to change America.     C) Their utilization of the Internet.     D) Their strong sense of responsibility. 61. What can we infer from the passage about Generation X?     A) They are politically conservative.     B) They reject conventional values.     C) They dare to take up challenges.     D) They are indifferent to politics.    Passage 2        Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave up the dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I wasn't surprised when this didn't make the news here in the United States—we're now the only wealthy country without such a policy.     The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical Leave Act, passed in 1993. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks' unpaid leave for care of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought it bitterly, describing it as "government-run personnel management" and a "dangerous precedent". In fact, every step of the way, as (usually) Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the law, business groups have been strongly opposed.     As Yale law professor Anne Alstott argues, justifying parental support depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents, she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives: there is "no exit" when it comes to children. "Society expects—and needs—parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual, emotional and moral capabilities. And society expects—and needs—parents to persist in their roles for 18 years, or longer if needed."     While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not providing care. What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state, for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children' welfare, yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parenting as a personal choice for which there is no collective responsibility is not merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those benefits because they accrue (不断积累) to the whole of society as today's children become tomorrow's productive citizenry (公民). In fact, by some estimates, the value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money (including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these investments generate huge social benefits—as they clearly do—the benefits of providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer. 52. What do we learn about paid family leave from the first paragraph?     A) America is now the only developed country without the policy.     B) It has now become a hot topic in the United States.     C) It came as a surprise when Australia adopted the policy.     D) Its meaning was clarified when it was established in Australia. 53. What has prevented the passing of work-family balance laws in the United States?     A) The incompetence of the Democrats.     B) The existing Family and Medical Leave Act.     C) The lack of a precedent in American history.     D) The opposition from business circles. 54. What is Professor Anne Alstott's argument for parental support?     A) The cost of raising children in the U. S. has been growing.     B) Good parenting benefits society.     C) The U. S. should keep up with other developed countries.     D) Children need continuous care. 55. What does the author think of America's large body of family laws governing children's welfare?     A) They fail to ensure children's healthy growth     B) The fail to provide enough support for parents     C) They emphasize parents' legal responsibilities.     D) They impose the care of children on parents. 56. Why does the author object to classifying parenting as a personal choice?     A) It is regarded as a legal obligation.     B) It relies largely on social support.     C) It generates huge social benefits.     D) It is basically a social undertaking. Crippling health care bills, long emergency-room waits and the 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 cost. The U.S. takes the opposite approach by emphasizing the specialist 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 fragmentation of care results in a corresponding rise in cost 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 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 (最佳地) managing their diseases and practicing evidence-based medicine. Make primary care more attractive to medical students by forgiving student loans for those who choose primary care as a career and reconciling the marked difference between specialist and primary care physician salaries. We’re at a point where primary care is needed more than ever. Within a few years, the first wave of the 76 million Baby Boomers will become eligible for Medicare. Patients older than 85, who need chronic care most, will rise by 50% this decade. Who will be there to treat them? 57. The author’s chief concern about the current U.S. health care system is __________. A) the inadequate training of physicians B) the declining number of doctors C) the shrinking primary care resources D) the ever-rising health care costs 58. We learn from the passage that people tend to believe that __________. A) the more costly the medicine, the more effective the cure B) seeing more doctors may result in more diagnostic errors C) visiting doctors on a regular basis ensures good health D) the more doctors taking care of a patient, the better 59. Faced with the government threats to cut reimbursements indiscriminately, primary care physicians have to __________ . A) increase their income by working overtime B) improve their expertise and service C) make various deals with specialists D) see more patients at the expense of quality 60. Why do many new medical graduates refuse to choose primary care as their career? A) They find the need for primary care declining. B) The current system works against primary care. C) Primary care physicians command less respect. D) They think working in emergency rooms tedious. 61. What suggestion does the author give in order to provide better health care? A) Bridge the salary gap between specialists and primary care physicians. B) Extend primary care to patients with chronic diseases. C) Recruit more medical students by offering them loans. D) Reduce the tuition of students who choose primary care as their major. Passage 4 You hear the refrain all the time: the U.S. economy looks good statistically, but it doesn’t feel good. Why doesn’t ever-greater wealth promote ever-greater happiness? It is a question that dates at least to the appearance in 1958 of The Affluent (富裕的) Society by John Kenneth Galbraith, who died recently at 97. The Affluent Society is a modern classic because it helped define a new moment in the human condition. For most of history, “hunger, sickness, and cold” threatened nearly everyone, Galbraith wrote. “Poverty was found everywhere in that world. Obviously it is not of ours.” After World War II, the dread of another Great Depression gave way to an economic boom. In the 1930s unemployment had averaged 18.2 percent; in the 1950s it was 4.5 percent. To Galbraith, materialism had gone mad and would breed discontent. Through advertising, companies conditioned consumers to buy things they didn’t really want or need. Because so much spending was artificial, it would be unfulfilling. Meanwhile, government spending that would make everyone better off was being cut down because people instinctively—and wrongly—labeled government only as “a necessary evil.” It’s often said that only the rich are getting ahead; everyone else is standing still or falling behind. Well, there are many undeserving rich—overpaid chief executives, for instance. But over any meaningful period, most people’s incomes are increasing. From 1995 to 2004, inflation-adjusted average family income rose 14.3 percent, to $43,200. people feel “squeezed” because their rising incomes often don’t satisfy their rising wants—for bigger homes, more health care, more education, faster Internet connections. The other great frustration is that it has not eliminated insecurity. People regard job stability as part of their standard of living. As corporate layoffs increased, that part has eroded. More workers fear they’ve become “the disposable American,” as Louis Uchitelle puts it in his book by the same name. Because so much previous suffering and social conflict stemmed from poverty, the arrival of widespread affluence suggested utopian (乌托邦式的) possibilities. Up to a point, affluence succeeds. There is much les physical misery than before. People are better off. Unfortunately, affluence also creates new complaints and contradictions. Advanced societies need economic growth to satisfy the multiplying wants of their citizens. But the quest for growth lets loose new anxieties and economic conflicts that disturb the social order. Affluence liberates the individual, promising that everyone can choose a unique way to self-fulfillment. But the promise is so extravagant that it predestines many disappointments and sometimes inspires choices that have anti-social consequences, including family breakdown and obesity (肥胖症). Statistical indicators of happiness have not risen with incomes. Should we be surprised? Not really. We’ve simply reaffirmed an old truth: the pursuit of affluence does not always end with happiness. 52. What question does John Kenneth Galbraith raise in his book The Affluent Society? A) Why statistics don’t tell the truth about the economy. B) Why affluence doesn’t guarantee happiness. C) How happiness can be promoted today. D) What lies behind an economic boom. 53. According to Galbraith, people feel discontented because ________. A) public spending hasn’t been cut down as expected B) the government has proved to be a necessary evil C) they are in fear of another Great Depression D) materialism has run wild in modern society 54. Why do people feel squeezed when their average income rises considerably?A) Their material pursuits have gone far ahead of their earnings. B) Their purchasing power has dropped markedly with inflation. C) The distribution of wealth is uneven between the r5ich and the poor. D) Health care and educational cost have somehow gone out of control. 55. What does Louis Uchitelle mean by “the disposable American” (Line 3, Para. 5)? A) Those who see job stability as part of their living standard. B) People full of utopian ideas resulting from affluence. C) People who have little say in American politics. D) Workers who no longer have secure jobs 56. What has affluence brought to American society? A) Renewed economic security. B) A sense of self-fulfillment. C) New conflicts and complaints. D) Misery and anti-social behavior. Passage 5 The use of deferential (敬重的) language is symbolic of the Confucian ideal of the woman, which dominates conservative gender norms in Japan. This ideal presents a woman who withdraws quietly to the background, subordinating her life and needs to those of her family and its male head. She is a dutiful daughter, wife, and mother, master of the domestic arts. The typical refined Japanese woman excels in modesty and delicacy; she “treads softly (谨言慎行)in the world,” elevating feminine beauty and grace to an art form. Nowadays, it is commonly observed that young women are not conforming to the feminine linguistic (语言的) ideal. They are using fewer of the very deferential “women’s” forms, and even using the few strong forms that are know as “men’s.” This, of course, attracts considerable attention and has led to an outcry in the Japanese media against the defeminization of women’s language. Indeed, we didn’t hear about “men’s language” until people began to respond to girls’ appropriation of forms normally reserved for boys and men. There is considerable sentiment about the “corruption” of women’s language—which of course is viewed as part of the loss of feminine ideals and morality—and this sentiment is crystallized by nationwide opinion polls that are regularly carried out by the media. Yoshiko Matsumoto has argued that young women probably never used as many of the highly deferential forms as older women. This highly polite style is no doubt something that young women have been expected to “grow into”—after all, it is assign not simply of femininity, but of maturity and refinement, and its use could be taken to indicate a change in the nature of one’s social relations as well. One might well imagine little girls using exceedingly polite forms when playing house or imitating older women—in a fashion analogous to little girls’ use of a high-pitched voice to do “teacher talk” or “mother talk” in role play. The fact that young Japanese women are using less deferential language is a sure sign of change—of social change and of linguistic change. But it is most certainly not a sign of the “masculization” of girls. In some instances, it may be a sign that girls are making the same claim to authority as boys and men, but that is very different from saying that they are trying to be “masculine.” Katsue Reynolds has argued that girls nowadays are using more assertive language strategies in order to be able to compete with boys in schools and out. Social change also brings not simply different positions for women and girls, but different relations to life stages, and adolescent girls are participating in new subcultural forms. Thus what may, to an older speaker, seem like “masculine” speech may seem to an adolescent like “liberated” or “hip” speech. 57. The first paragraph describes in detail ________. A) the standards set for contemporary Japanese women B) the Confucian influence on gender norms in Japan C) the stereot