D
One of the main challenges facing many countries is how to maintain their identity in the face of globalization and the growing multi-language trend. “One of the main reasons for economic failure in many African countries is the fact that, with a few important exceptions, mother-tongue education is not practiced in any of the independent African states.” said Neville Alexander, Director of the Project for the Study of Alternative Education in South Africa at the University of Cape Town.
In response to the spread of English and the increased multi-language trends arising from immigration, many countries have introduced language laws in the laws in the last decade. In some, the use of languages other than the national language is banned in public spaces such as advertising posters. One of the first such legal provisions was the 1994 “Toubon law” in France, but the idea has been copied in many countries since then. Such efforts to govern language use are often dismissed as futile by language experts, who are well aware of the difficulty in controlling fashions in speech and know from research that language switching among bilinguals is a natural process.
It is especially difficult for native speakers of English to understand the desire to maintain the “purity” of a language by law. Since the time of Shakespeare, English has continually absorbed foreign words into its own language. English is one of the most mixed and rapidly changing languages in the world, but there has not been a barrier to acquiring prestige and power. Another reason for the failure of many native English speakers to understand the role of state regulation is that it has never been the Anglo-Saxon way of doing things. English has never had a state-controlled authority for the language, similar, for example, to the Academic Francaise in France.
The need to protect national languages is, for most western Europeans, a recent phenomenon—especially the need to ensure that English does not unnecessarily take over too many fields. Public communication, education and new modes of communication promoted by technology, may be key fields to defend.
【小题1】Neville Alexander believes that         .

President Clinton’s decision on Apr.8 to send Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji packing without an agreement on China’s entry into the World Trade Organization seemed to be a massive miscalculation. The President took a drubbing from much of the press, which had breathlessly reported that a deal was in the bag. The Cabinet and Whit House still appeared divided, and business leaders were characterized as furious over the lost opportunity. Zhu charged that Clinton lacked “the courage” to reach an accord. And when Clinton later telephoned the angry Zhu to pledge a renewed effort at negotiations, the gesture was widely portrayed as a flip-flop.

In fact, Clinton made the right decision in holding out for a better WTO deal. A lot more horse trading is needed before a final agreement can be reached. And without the Administration’s goal of a “bullet-proof agreement” that business lobbyists can enthusiastically sell to a Republican Congress, the whole process will end up in partisan acrimony that could harm relations with China for years.

THE HARD PART. Many business lobbyists, while disappointed that the deal was not closed, agree that better terms can still be had. And Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin, National Economic Council Director Gene B. Sperling, Commerce Secretary William M. Daley, and top trade negotiator Charlene Barshefsky all advised Clinton that while the Chinese had made a remarkable number of concessions, “we’re not there yet,” according to senior officials.

Negotiating with Zhu over the remaining issues may be the easy part. Although Clinton can signal U.S. approval for China’s entry into the WTO himself, he needs Congress to grant Beijing permanent most-favored-nation status as part of a broad trade accord. And the temptation for meddling on Capital Hill may prove over-whelming. Zhu had barely landed before Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss) declared himself skeptical that China deserved entry into the WTO. And Senators Jesse A. Helms (R-N.C.) and Emest F. Hollings (D-S. C.) promised to introduce a bill requiring congressional approval of any deal.

The hidden message from these three textile-state Southerners: Get more protection for the U. S. clothing industry. Hoping to smooth the way, the Administration tried, but failed, to budge Zhu on textiles. Also left in the lurch: Wall Street, Hollywood, and Detroit. Zhu refused to open up much of the lucrative Chinese securities market and insisted on “cultural” restrictions on American movies and music. He also blocked efforts to allow U. S. auto makers to provide fleet financing.

BIG JOB. Already, business lobbyists are blanketing Capitol Hill to presale any eventual agreement, but what they’ve heard so far isn’t encouraging. Republicans, including Lott, say that “the time just isn’t right” for the deal. Translation: We’re determined to make it look as if Clinton has capitulated to the Chinese and is ignoring human, religious, and labor rights violations; the theft of nuclear-weapons technology; and the sale of missile parts to America’s enemies. Beijing’s fierce critics within the Democratic Party, such as Senator Paul D. Wellstone of Minnesota and House Minority leader Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, won’t help, either.

Just how tough the lobbying job on Capitol Hill will be become clear on Apr. 20, when Rubin lectured 19chief executives on the need to discipline their Republican allies. With business and the White House still trading charges over who is responsible for the defeat of fast-track trade negotiating legislation in 1997, working together won’t be easy. And Republicans—with a wink—say that they’ll eventually embrace China’s entry into the WTO as a favor to Corporate America. Though not long before they torture Clinton. But Zhu is out on a limb, and if Congress overdoes the criticism, he may be forced by domestic critics to renege. Business must make this much dear to both its GOP allies and the Whit House: This historic deal is too important to risk losing to any more partisan squabbling

1.    The main idea of this passage is

[A]. The Contradiction between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.

[B]. On China’s entry into WTO.

[C]. Clinton was right.

[D]. Business Lobbyists Control Capitol Hill.

2.    What does the sentence “Also left in the lurch: Wall Street, Hollywood, Detroit” convey?

[A]. Premier Zhu rejected their requirements.

[B]. The three places overdid criticism.

[C]. They wanted more protection.

[D]. They are in trouble.

3.    What was the attitude of the Republican Party toward China’s entry into the WTO?

[A]. Contradictory.              [B].Appreciative.

[C]. Disapproving.              [D]. Detestful.

4.    Who plays the leading part in the deal in America?

[A]. White House .              [B]. Republicans.

[C]. The Democratic Party.        [D]. Businessmen.

5.    It can be inferred from the passage that

[A]. America will make concessions.

[B]. America will hold out for a better WTO

[C]. Clinton has the right to signal U. S. approval for China’s entry.

[D]. Democratic party approve China’s entry into the WTO.

Sustainable development is applied to just about everything from energy to clean water and economic growth, and as a result it has become difficult to question either the basic assumptions behind it or the way the concept is put to use. This is especially true in agriculture, where sustainable development is often taken as the measure of progress without a proper appreciation of historical and cultural perspectives.
　　To start with, it is important to remember that the nature of agriculture has changed markedly throughout history, and will continue to do so. Medieval agriculture in northern Europe fed, clothed and sheltered a mainly rural society with a much lower population density than it is today. It had minimal effect on biodiversity, and any pollution it caused was typically localized. In terms of energy use and the nutrients captured in the product it was relatively inefficient.
　　Contrast this with farming since the start of the industrial revolution. Competition from overseas led farmers to specialize and increase yields. Throughout this period food became cheaper, safer and more reliable. However, these changes have also led to habitat loss and to reducing biodiversity.
　　All this means that agriculture in the 21st century will have to be very different from how it was in the 20th. This will require thorough thinking. For example, we need to move away from the idea that traditional practices are certainly more sustainable than new ones. We also need to abandon the notion that agriculture can be “zero impact”. The key will be to abandon the rather simple and static(稳定的)measures of sustainability, which centre on the need to maintain production without increasing damage. Instead we need a more dynamic interpretation, one that looks at the pros and cons of all the various way land is used. There are many different ways to measure agricultural performance besides food yield: energy use, environmental costs, water purity, carbon footprint and biodiversity. It is clear, for example, that the carbon of transporting tomatoes from Spain to the UK is less than that of producing them in the UK with additional heating and lighting. But we do not know whether lower carbon footprints will always be better for biodiversity.
　　What is important is recognizing that sustainable agriculture is not just about sustainable food production.
【小题1】How do people often measure progress in agriculture?

In today’s Internet age, online games can be a change from the pressure of school and work. However, they can also cause problems and unhealthy addictions. This is most clearly seen in the example of South Korea. This country has the world’s highest percentage of high – speed Internet services. It has also a high number of game players who are addicted to online games.
In 2004, a young man died after playing online games almost nonstop for 86 hours. A 12 – year – old boy stole $ 16,000 from his father to continue online games which he could not get away from. Such problems are spreading to other parts of Asia as well. In 2005, it was reported that about 80 percent of China’s 13.8 million online game players were under 25. And many of these were said to be addicted. Such numbers point toward a growing problem among Chinese youth.
Dr. Sue – Huei Chen, a psychologist , discovered some signs of at – risk people. Such people often go online to escape from their problems. And they usually have no friendship or good social skills. They feel the need to spend more and more time online, so they may be absent from school or family. And they become upset if anyone tries to limit their online game playing.
【小题1】The passage is mainly about          .

Since the beginning of the year, smog has covered parts of North China. In January, Beijing saw only five days without smog. The rising PM 2.5 readings terrified many people, and some health experts said that whenever the smog gets serious, hospitals receive more patients suffering acute respiratory（呼吸系统）and heart diseases.

Later, news of polluted underground water in some provinces scared people who wondered whether the water they drink is safe.

So the need to emphasize environmental protection while developing the economy is heard everywhere.

Smog especially is a common concern. Like a popular online post said, air may be the only thing that is equal for everyone, despite your income or vocation. People with higher incomes are able to drink only bottled spring water and eat only organic food by paying higher prices, but they breathe the same air as everyone else.

At a meeting on Monday, many Representatives have expressed their concerns about the air quality, too. One talked about his experience in Beijing. “After taking a taxi from the capital airport to my hotel, which took about an hour, I washed my nose and found the inside of my nose was black. We should ask ourselves this question: Why do we want to develop? It's for living a better life. Dirty air is definitely not a better life," he said.

China needs to develop its economy and invest(投资) in high-tech. Every Chinese wants a strong country. But without blue sky, clean water and safe food, the achievements in the economy will become meaningless. Space technologies are not to be developed for building a base on Mars so that one day all human beings can migrate to the red planet because they have destroyed Earth.

What the public wants is a strong and beautiful China. Former president Hu Jintao spoke at the 18th Party Congress last November saying that great efforts must be made to promote ecological progress and build a beautiful China. The words have shown the central government's resolution to address the environment issue.

1.The effect of smog doesn’t include.

A．the rising of PM 2.5 readings

B．more people suffering diseases

C．the increase of people’s income

D．patients increased in hospital

2.Why smog has become a common concern?

A．Because people have to pay higher prices.

B．Because nobody can avoid it.

C．Because we have to develop industry.

D．Because a popular online-post discussed it.

3.The underlined word “they” in paragraph 6 refers to.

A．human beings             B．other plants

C．space technologies    D．industrial development

4.From the last two paragraphs we can infer that.

A．high-tech can completely solve the problem of pollution

B．space technologies should be developed in a large scale

C．we can move to the Mars after the earth has been destroyed

D．we must protect the environment while developing economy