Alongside the revolution in color, another revolution was occurring in the use of space. Ever since the Renaissance, European artists had treated the outside edges of paintings as window frames. The four sides of a frame bounded an imaginary cube of space--a three dimensional world-in which figures and background were presented. From about 1880 on, Paul Cezanne(1839-1906) explored a new way of expressing the experience of seeing. He sought to create painting with perfectly designed compositions, true both to the subject matter and to his own perceptions. He also wanted to include and build upon tradition. 

This paragraph shows that Cezanne's paintings （）.

阅读下文，并回答问题。

(1) If Ron Scott was in any doubt about the effect of being unhappy at work, he needed only to ask his family. The usually easy-going, good-humored husband and father of three had become an irritable man who was working his way through "a minimum six beers a night. Some nights I'd have wine as well”. Any little thing that went wrong at home got under his skin. "I'd go off. My son wouldn't put his school bags away and I'd be yelling at him or I’d be yelling at the girls for something.”
(2) It wasn't work itself that was getting to Ron, far from it. He's always worked and doesn't like to be idle. At 16 he left school and applied for a job at a nearby steelworks. He had wanted to become a carpenter but instead was offered an apprenticeship as a fitter and machinist—the same job that his father had had. "I didn’t enjoy metalwork at school, but I said, ‘Yeah, that'll do.’” He shrugged off the disappointment and made the best of things, working hard during his four-year apprenticeship and for three years after that, until a restructure made his position redundant.
(3) He bought a car with the small payout he received, gave himself seven weeks’ holiday, then started a new job as a mechanical engineer for a major international airline. This involved a commute of an hour or so each way, but that was manageable. The new role, fixing military then civilian aircraft engines, was satisfying. "It was interesting and I liked learning a new job. It was good.”
(4) Eighteen months into the new position at the airline, Ron married Sharon and 18 months after that their first child was born. He was working his way up the ladder, getting pay-rises as he went, and the conditions suited family life—rather than the 24/7 shifts of the steelworks, he was able to work five days a week on day-shift.
(5)As his children reached school age, Ron volunteered to help out at their sporting activities especially at junior lifesaving, where his sense of fun and endless patience made him a firm favorite with kids and parents. He was by now an engine marshal, an administrative role that involves supervising the acquisition of parts and the repair and assembly of huge jet engines.
(6) "I loved it,” he says, explaining with a self-deprecatory chuckle that despite having been a fitter and engineer all those years, "I’m not very patient when it comes to putting things together. If it doesn't go right I get annoyed. So it was good just being able to chill a little bit more.”
(7) Life was good, but 15 years into the job, things started to change.
(8) First Ron's team was moved to a much smaller building where they were cramped amid the engine parts. Characteristically, he made the best of it, but he wasn't enjoying work as he once had. Then, without consultation, he was put back on a rolling shift roster. "I hated it because of all the things I was missing out on, "he says, "I was coaching my son Harry's soccer team and was involved at the surf club but I had to stop all that because I was back on shift work.”
(9) Rumors began to circulate about redundancies. Ron told Sharon that if they were offered he was considering applying. "She was pretty happy because I was coming home so cranky". Over the next few weeks they discussed the kinds of things Ron might move on to. One idea just wouldn't leave him alone. "I said, ‘How about I go and teach swimming? I love water. I love kids. I could probably do that.’”
(10)After 20 years with the airline Ron took voluntary redundancy, received a five-figure payout and walked away without a second glance. He completed swimming-teacher training, and then arranged to volunteer at a swim school to build up his practical experience. Soon the school was employing him for a shift a week, and his hours built up from there.
(11) Coming from a job where the results were immediate and obvious took some adjustment for Ron. "It was different from what I thought it would be, he says, "I thought it was going to be so easy. But you're trying to teach the kids something and half the time they’re looking at you and you don’t even know if they’re listening. Then weeks or months later they will put it into action and you'll realize that they were listening all along." Ron's easy manner with both children and parents soon paid off and he became a full-time employee at the swim school.
(12) The 40 hours he works a week takes in weekends and split shifts, to cover morning and afternoon children’s classes. He has "no body hair left because of the warm water and chlorine”. He earns around 25% less than he did in engineering. And, at 49, he says he has never been happier.
(13) “I’ve had a drop in pay, but I’ve cut back on expenses, too. I'm driving half the distance to work so don’t have to pay as much for petrol. I don’t drink nearly as much. I go walking in my lunch break and I've lost 20 kilos. I love going to work. The whole family is a lot happier.”
(14) He admits it was scary, making such big leap when there was the mortgage to pay and teenagers to clothe and feed but in the end he feels it is a simple choice. "If you're in a job you don’t like, get out. Money's not everything. You might have to stop doing a few things, but you do adjust. If you don't like it, change—find something you're going to be happy with.” 

What is your opinion on changing jobs?

阅读下文，然后回答问题。    

      (1) A rift is growing between government and higher education, with debates over funding, missions and accountability.
      (2) In that context, it is all the more worth watching Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, who assumes the presidency of Purdue University on January 14. Other governors have become college presidents. Some, like Tom Kean, have been very successful. However, Daniels—who brings to the job an unusual blend of leadership experiences in government at the state and national level, public policy, business, and now academe—is coming to office at a time of unusual tension.
      (3) Governors increasingly characterize the rising costs of higher education and its limited access as unsustainable. Many find it imperative that universities increase their productivity, affordability, access, graduation rates, and accountability. In contrast, university presidents say that quality, not cost, is the real issue in an era in which excellence in higher education is more urgent than ever before in history. The question, academic leaders say, should not be the price of college, but who pays, criticizing government for disinvesting in higher education. Bottom line: Between the governors and the presidents, there is increasingly little if any common ground other than recognizing the importance of higher education. They have entirely different views of the problem, no agreement on responsibility, and nothing in the way of a shared solution.
      (4) In his first public action as president of Purdue, Daniels has bridged the chasm with a salary package that incorporates the goals of both the governors and the presidents. He did this in two ways. The first was conciliatory, eliminating the red flag that sets off both government and the academy: He rejected presidential salary inflation. His salary package is smaller than his predecessor’s, placing him tenth among the 12 Big Ten university presidents in terms of salary. There is no deferred compensation.
      (5) Second, and more importantly in terms of national models, is that Governor Daniels asked for a salary based upon achieving his goals for the university. The package is divided into two buckets—base salary and bonus. The bonus is tied to graduation rates, affordability, student achievement, philanthropic support, faculty excellence, and strategic program initiatives. In establishing this bonus system, Daniels married traditional notions of academic quality—as measured by excellence in faculty, programs and resources—with an equal emphasis on effective outcomes and price controls: graduation rates, affordability, and student achievement.
      (6) In so doing, Daniels has demonstrated his belief that there is common ground to be found between the university and government. The choice is not quality or effectiveness, not excellence or affordability; the future of higher education is not a zero-sum game in which one side wins and the other loses. Rather, he believes it is possible to balance the seemingly conflicting goals of government and higher education.
       (7) Daniels is not the first president to have his salary tied to achieving institutional goals, but he is probably the most visible. Moreover, although Daniels is renouncing involvement in partisan politics as he enters the Purdue presidency, he is a former Republican governor and party leader known as a frugal fiscal conservative. Historically, the divisions have been greater between Republicans and the academy than has been the case with Democrats. In a very real sense, what Daniels has chosen to do is somewhat akin to Nixon going to China. He has undertaken an experiment to be closely watched. If successful, he will have established a potential model for the country.
      (8) Typically, presidents reserve such powerful statements for their inaugural addresses. Though such addresses are sincere in intent—I can vouch for that, as someone who has given two and listened to many more—they are generally aspirational; they articulate hopes and dreams for what an institution can become. Daniels has already done something very different. He is putting himself on the line in a very public fashion. Year after year his salary will be determined by his success. And perhaps even more importantly, his success or failure will be public when his board announces the size and rationale for his bonus.
      (9) It’s a bold step—and Governor Daniels should be applauded for taking it.

How can universities improve education quality? 

Practically unknown in his lifetime, van Gogh's art became extremely influential soon after his death in 1890. One of the first artists to be affected by his style was a Norwegian artist named Edward Munch(1863-1944), who discovered van Gogh's use of color in Paris. In The Dance of Life, Munch used strong, simple line and intense color to explore the unexpressed sexual stresses and conflicts that Sigmund Freud's studies were bringing to light. In Germany the tendency to use color for its power to express psychological forces continued in the work of artists known as the German Expressionists. 

From this paragraph we learn that Edward Munch （）.

The revolution in art that took place near the turn of the twentieth century is reverberating still. After nearly a hundred years, these masters of modern art continue to inspire their audiences with their passion and vision. 

The word "reverberating" in this paragraph means （）.

Answer the following essay question after the text in English within 80-100 words.

(1) The professor glanced hastily around the room as he entered, then he looked suspiciously over at the blackboard. While removing his overcoat he read the scrawl that the previous class had left, and judging it unnecessary clutter, he daintily lifted the eraser and waved it back and forth in front of the class, until the board was clear. He checked his watch. It wasn't yet time to start class, so the teacher started to pace back and forth, nervously stroking the lock of hair that covered his bald spot. This man had obviously been sitting in a stuffy office in front of a computer screen for too long. Math professors should get out in the sun more. I noticed his pale skin and the many nicks he’d gotten shaving his overly-sensitive face.

(2) Finally it was time to start. He began by presenting an example: you want to house a football team with 20 white players and 20 black players. What is the probability that all of the pairs of roommates will be of the same color? “A hundred percent”, I said. Okay. I know it was a poor attempt at humor, but I could have sworn no one had heard me. Not one person flinched, sighed, moaned, or giggled. Nothing. They didn’t even turn their heads to see what jerk said that.

(3) “Okay, either everybody in this class is dead, or I am” I thought. I pinched myself. No, it wasn’t me. I watched everyone else copy down what the teacher had written on the board. So they were at least animate. The professor was doing a good job of dealing with the dilemma and posed questions at which a few members of the group guessed. I wondered why he was being paid to talk to corpses.

(4) Yes, something was definitely wrong here. This man was talking to 30 dead people who were diligently copying down his every word. Now the only reason I could see for the lack of response, by his audience was that they didn't share my interest in probability. That seemed reasonable but I couldn’t imagine why anyone would take a 400-level math course unless he was a math major, or at least a math minor. No, these people were interested in the topic.

(5) Maybe they all understood exactly what he was saying and didn't have to ask any questions. I still couldn’t explain the blank stares and the silence, as heavy as the silence of parting lovers, whenever the professor asked a question. The room was too big for the quiet and I felt awkward there. Everyone seemed to want to leave, but there he was, the man up there with the chalk holding the whole class silent and holding all of us hostage.

(6) All of these tortured faces were looking straight ahead and they were taking it all down, just like it was, so that they could go back to their little cells and look it over and over again until they had it memorized. And if they couldn't understand it, they would ask someone else in the class who would invariably say, “I don’t know. I’m not sure I understand that part either.”

(7) Nobody ever goes to a teacher’s office hours, either. I’ve gone to see my teachers, and there’s never anyone else there. The professor sets up time when he can sit and wait for students to talk to him and no one shows up, week after week. It’s nice because teachers are human, too, and they need time alone. I guess that zombies don’t leave their cells unless they have class. I looked over at the people next to me. How did they get that way in the first place?

(8) What in the world was I doing in this ridiculous class, writing down a description of the teacher’s clothing? I was listening to the words, and I even had some vague comprehension of what he was discussing, but I really couldn’t explain my attendance. But what I really couldn’t explain was the professor’s presence. He seemed to have a good sense of humor about the fact that we were all sitting there dead, but I don’t know how he could face us that way. I kept wanting to get up and shout at the class myself, say, “Hey, what are you doing here? Aren’t you paying for this? Didn’t you come here to learn? I couldn’t face these zombies as boldly as this man was. He didn’t scream or despair. He just kept on talking. And I kept on thinking: This is an institution of higher learning.” 

 Are you enthusiastic about the pursuit of knowledge? Why or why not?  

If Ron Scott was in any doubt about the effect of being unhappy at work, he needed only to ask his family. The usually easy-going, good-humored husband and father of three had become an irritable man who was working his way through "a minimum six beers a night. Some nights I'd have wine as well”. Any little thing that went wrong at home got under his skin. "I'd go off. My son wouldn't put his school bags away and I'd be yelling at him or I’d be yelling at the girls for something.”

According to this paragraph, Ron was drinking beer or wine at night because （） .

Why nature should conform to theories we find beautiful is far from obvious. The most incomprehensible thing about the universe, as Einstein said, is that it’s comprehensible. We’re a long way from understanding everything, but we do understand a great deal about how nature behaves. Generation after generation, we puzzle out formulas, test them, and find, to an astonishing degree, that nature agrees. An architect draws designs on flimsy paper, and her buildings stand up through earthquakes. We launch a satellite into orbit and use it to bounce messages from continent to continent. The machine on which I write these words embodies hundreds of insights into the workings of the material world, insights that are confirmed by every burst of letters on the screen, and I stare at that screen through lenses that obey the laws of optics first worked out in detail by Isaac Newton.

According to this paragraph, which of the following views does the author hold? （）

It seems to me that there has recently been an epidemic of auto macho—a competition perceived and expressed in driving. People fight it out over parking spaces. A toll booth becomes a signal for elbowing fenders. And beetle-eyed drivers hunch over their steering wheels, squeezing the rims, glowering, preparing the excuse of not having seen you as they muscle you off the road. Approaching a highway on an entrance ramp recently, I was strong-armed by a trailer truck so immense that its driver all but blew me away by blasting his horn. The behemoth was just inches from my hopelessly mismatched vehicle when I fled for the safety of the shoulder.

The word "behemoth" in Paragraph 5 means something（）.

Read the following passage carefully and answer the following essay question in English within 80～1 00 words．Write your answers on the Answer Sheet.

Do you argue for or against capital punishment? List three of your arguments．

Answer the following essay question in English within 80-100 words. Write your answer on the Answer Sheet. (10 points) 

In what sense is friendship essential to everyone? 

Question: How do you perceive beauty? 

Read the following passage carefully and complete the succeeding three items.
(1)The family is only one of the variety of agencies of socialization. By socialization we mean the process by which cultural, social and moral values and beliefs are transmitted from one generation to the next. In other words, through the socialization process we learn the basic facts necessary for the performance of a variety of social roles in the society in which we grow up. 
(2)The socialization function of the family is a generalized one, and is aimed at preparing us for membership of the kinship group and the community. The way in which the process operates will depend largely upon the views taken by the parents of what their children ought to be like when they are grown up. This, in turn, will depend on the environment of the home and the community in which it is established. For example, an agricultural village family is likely to be living in a very different setting from a professional family in the city. 
(3)In the rural community emphasis will be placed upon values such as group solidarity and the belief in the natural superiority of the male. The family will transmit these values to the children in order to prepare them for their future roles as adults. Thus the child will grow up placing greater value upon the family as a unit than upon himself as an individual; more emphasis upon a segregation of the roles of husband and wife than upon equality, and so on. 
(4) In the case of the city family educated to professional standards, the process is likely to take a different form. The child is more likely to be taught the values necessary for success in a world dominated by individual achievement. He will be taught that hard work is necessary to bring about academic success, which is the forerunner to occupational success. To make the best of occupational success he will be taught the value of having an educated wife who can share in this, either by working at her own trained profession to contribute to the material status of his marriage or by entertaining his friends and colleagues and maintaining his home to level of high social standing 
(5)But the family cannot hope to socialize the child in every aspect of life and this is where the other agencies come in. Of these, school is perhaps the most important. The family is concerned with socializing its members into the group while the school is concerned with socializing its pupils into the wider society. School is very closely linked with our participation in the economic system, in other words, there is a very close link between school and the occupation we take up in adult life. 
(6)The peer group also operates as an agency of socialization. In the peer group we associate with others who are approximately of our own age and social status. Peer group associations can be particularly influential at college and university level and are often carried through to adult working life. This means that the peer group takes over in influence where the family and school leave off. 
(7) No matter how strong the family influence it cannot hope to provide all the necessary material for socialization into an occupational citizenship because it will not have all the technical and social knowledge necessary to cope with all situations in life. This is very obvious in areas where rapid change is a characteristic feature of life, as in the developing world where technological and industrial advances have shifted populations from their traditional communities, and the strict moral and religious values of the family or tribe are no longer accepted as the natural norms. 
(8)For these reasons, and many others, there are those who say that the day of the family as it has been traditionally known is now over: that the institution of the family as the only "natural" basic unit of society is in the process of breaking up because of rapidly changing economic conditions as well as the reluctance of the younger generation to accept the strict religious and social morality of the past. But the family itself has undergone considerable changes over the years and there is no doubt that it will have to face more changes in the future. Thus, although the family may not continue to exist in precisely the form the traditionalists would like, there is no reason to think that it will become obsolete.

阅读下文，然后回答问题。    

      (1) A rift is growing between government and higher education, with debates over funding, missions and accountability.
      (2) In that context, it is all the more worth watching Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, who assumes the presidency of Purdue University on January 14. Other governors have become college presidents. Some, like Tom Kean, have been very successful. However, Daniels—who brings to the job an unusual blend of leadership experiences in government at the state and national level, public policy, business, and now academe—is coming to office at a time of unusual tension.
      (3) Governors increasingly characterize the rising costs of higher education and its limited access as unsustainable. Many find it imperative that universities increase their productivity, affordability, access, graduation rates, and accountability. In contrast, university presidents say that quality, not cost, is the real issue in an era in which excellence in higher education is more urgent than ever before in history. The question, academic leaders say, should not be the price of college, but who pays, criticizing government for disinvesting in higher education. Bottom line: Between the governors and the presidents, there is increasingly little if any common ground other than recognizing the importance of higher education. They have entirely different views of the problem, no agreement on responsibility, and nothing in the way of a shared solution.
      (4) In his first public action as president of Purdue, Daniels has bridged the chasm with a salary package that incorporates the goals of both the governors and the presidents. He did this in two ways. The first was conciliatory, eliminating the red flag that sets off both government and the academy: He rejected presidential salary inflation. His salary package is smaller than his predecessor’s, placing him tenth among the 12 Big Ten university presidents in terms of salary. There is no deferred compensation.
      (5) Second, and more importantly in terms of national models, is that Governor Daniels asked for a salary based upon achieving his goals for the university. The package is divided into two buckets—base salary and bonus. The bonus is tied to graduation rates, affordability, student achievement, philanthropic support, faculty excellence, and strategic program initiatives. In establishing this bonus system, Daniels married traditional notions of academic quality—as measured by excellence in faculty, programs and resources—with an equal emphasis on effective outcomes and price controls: graduation rates, affordability, and student achievement.
      (6) In so doing, Daniels has demonstrated his belief that there is common ground to be found between the university and government. The choice is not quality or effectiveness, not excellence or affordability; the future of higher education is not a zero-sum game in which one side wins and the other loses. Rather, he believes it is possible to balance the seemingly conflicting goals of government and higher education.
       (7) Daniels is not the first president to have his salary tied to achieving institutional goals, but he is probably the most visible. Moreover, although Daniels is renouncing involvement in partisan politics as he enters the Purdue presidency, he is a former Republican governor and party leader known as a frugal fiscal conservative. Historically, the divisions have been greater between Republicans and the academy than has been the case with Democrats. In a very real sense, what Daniels has chosen to do is somewhat akin to Nixon going to China. He has undertaken an experiment to be closely watched. If successful, he will have established a potential model for the country.
      (8) Typically, presidents reserve such powerful statements for their inaugural addresses. Though such addresses are sincere in intent—I can vouch for that, as someone who has given two and listened to many more—they are generally aspirational; they articulate hopes and dreams for what an institution can become. Daniels has already done something very different. He is putting himself on the line in a very public fashion. Year after year his salary will be determined by his success. And perhaps even more importantly, his success or failure will be public when his board announces the size and rationale for his bonus.
      (9) It’s a bold step—and Governor Daniels should be applauded for taking it.

How can universities improve education quality? 

（1）Mounting social and academic pressures mean that higher education can be a challenge for any student. A study found that 80％ of those studying in higher education reported symptoms of stress or anxiety, while one university survey found that nine in 10 students experienced stress.
（2）Uncertainty around Brexit and rising living costs mean that many students don’t feel confident about finding a job. Alex, an international relations and politics student at the University of Leicester, says he’s constantly worried about graduate life. “There’s that fear of having to adjust back to life back home. I always think, what sector do I want to work in? How am I going to get started? Is my CV up to scratch?” While his institution offers career guidance, his plans weigh on his mind.
（3）Hannah Smith, a psychotherapist and the higher education lead at The Student Room, says students are increasingly questioning whether university is worth the cost. “The pressure to be successful and get a lucrative job role after graduation is high. Students worry that it won’t work out and they won’t achieve the success or personal return on investment." She recommends speaking to student advisers about hardship funding. “The majority of universities also offer bursaries(助学金), grants and scholarships—and many go unclaimed.”
（4） Leaving the structures of home and family for the first time can often exacerbate mental health problems. A 2019 poll of almost 38,000 UK students found that psychological illnesses are on the rise in higher education institutes, with a third stating they suffer from loneliness. “Spending all day and night studying in the library will certainly help you feel more in control of your personal success,” says Smith, “but book time in to do things you enjoy with people you like spending time with. Join in with student meets and societies. You don’t have to commit indefinitely, just dip in and out and try new things in order to grow your social circle.”
（5）For many students, a poor work-life balance is a huge contributing factor to mental health issues and stress. Smith advises sticking to a schedule with space for recreational activities. “Give yourself permission to create a routine which gets the best out of you. Often when we’re feeling the burn we stop doing things that make us feel good, like working out and cooking balanced meals.”
（6） Minority students can experience a different level of isolation. Much has been written about how higher education can marginalise black students, with figures from the Office for Students recently reporting that white students are more likely to be awarded first class or upper second class degrees than black students.
（7）Sexism within STEM subjects, meanwhile, has been reported at all levels of academia. Grace Arena, a master’s student in prosthetics and sculpture at Buckinghamshire New University, says she’s picked up on gender biases from her tutors, almost all of whom are male. “I definitely feel there’s a gap in understanding between male tutors and female students and that can be quite difficult. It’s always in the back of your mind that you’re being taught by men, you’re going to be applying for jobs with men, the workshops are run by men... The prospect of being one of the best in the field, without having females in the industry already to look up to, is really quite hard.”
（8） Rianna Walcott, 24, is a PhD candidate at King’s College London in digital humanities, and co-author of the book The Colour Of Madness. While studying, Walcott co-founded Project Myopia to promote inclusivity and run workshops around the minority experience in academia. “There needs to be more support for students right now—and especially minority students,” she says. “If we want the culture to change, students and staff need to take a stand.”
（9）Stress isn’t only rising among undergraduates. A report commissioned by the Higher Education Policy Institute revealed that staff referrals to counselling and occupational health services have soared over recent years. The culture of academia is unstructured and performance-driven, often lending itself to overwork. For master’s and PhD students who also teach, the lines between work and leisure-time are often blurred.
（10）“Stress is unavoidable because you can’t clock out,” says Walcott. “If you don’t get a grant, you have to be able to support yourself in your PhD. Then there’s a lot of invisible stuff you need to do to become employable; you have to be involved in conferences, teaching, networking. Your responsibilities increase the older you get in academia, but of course you’re still living as student with not nearly enough to actually live on.” 

Answer the following essay question in English within 80-100 words. 

(1) Why do the Chinese dislike milk and milk products? Why do some nations trace descent through the father, others through the different instincts? Not because they were destined by God or Fate to different habits not because the weather is different in China and the United States. Sometimes keen common sense has an answer that is close to that of the anthropologist: "Because they were brought up that way." By "culture" anthropology means the total life way of a people, the social legacy the individual acquires from his group. Or culture can be regarded as that part of the environment that is the creation of man.
(2) This technical term has a wider meaning than the “culture” of history and literature. A humble cooking pot is as much a cultural product as is a Beethoven sonata. In ordinary speech a man of culture is a man who can speak languages other than his own, who is familiar with history, literature, philosophy, or the fine arts. In some circles that definition is still narrower. The cultured person is one who can talk about James Joyce, Scarlatti, and Picasso. To the anthropologist, however, to be human is to be cultured. The general abstract notion serves to remind us that we cannot explain acts solely in terms of the biological properties of the people concerned, their individual past experience, and the immediate situation. The past experience of other men in the form of culture enters into almost every event. Each specific culture constitutes a kind of blueprint for all of life's activities.
(3) One of the interesting things about human beings is that they try to understand themselves and their own behavior. While this has been particularly true of Europeans in recent times, there is no group which has not developed a scheme or schemes to explain man's actions. To the insistent human question “Why?” the most exciting illumination anthropology has to offer is that of the concept of culture. Its explanatory importance is comparable to categories such as evolution in biology, gravity in physics, disease in medicine. A good deal of human behavior can be understood, and indeed predicted, if we know a people's design for living. Many acts are neither accidental nor due to personal peculiarities nor caused by supernatural forces nor simply mysterious. Even those of us who pride ourselves on our individualism follow most of the limes a pattern not of our own making. We brush our teeth on arising. We put on pants – not a loincloth or a grass skirt. We eat three meals a day – not four or five or two. We sleep in a bed - not in a hammock or on a sheep pelt. I do not have to know the individual and his lift history to be able to predict these and countless other regularities, including many in the thinking process, of all Americans who are not locked up in jails or hospitals for the insane.
(4) To the American woman a system of plural wives seems “instinctively” hateful. She cannot understand how any woman can fail to be jealous and uncomfortable if she must share her husband with other women - She feels it “unnatural” to accept such a situation. On the other hand, a Koryak woman of Siberia, for example, would find it hard to understand how a woman could be so selfish and so undesirous of feminine companionship in the home as to wish to restrict her husband to one mate.
(5) Some years ago I met in New York City a young man who did not speak a word of English and was obviously bewildered by American ways. By “blood” he was an American, for his parents had gone from Indiana to China as missionaries. Orphaned in infancy, he was reared by a Chinese family in a remote village. All who met him found him more Chinese than American. The facts of his blue eyes and light hair were less impressive than a Chinese manner of walking, Chinese arm and hand movements, Chinese facial expression, and Chinese modes of thought. The biological heritage was American, but the cultural training had been Chinese. He returned to China.
(6) A highly intelligent teacher with long and successful experience in the public schools of Chicago was finishing her first year in an Indian school. When asked how her Navaho pupils compared in intelligence with Chicago youngsters, she replied, “Well, I just don't know. Sometimes the Indians seem just as bright. At other times they just act like dumb animals. The other night we had a dance in the high school. I saw a boy who is one of the best students in my English class standing off by himself. So I took him over to a pretty girl and told him to dance. But they just stood there with their heads down. They wouldn't even say anything." I inquired if she knew whether or not they were members of the same clan. “What difference would that make?”
(7) "How would you feel about getting into bed with your brother?" The teacher walked off in a fit of anger, but, actually, the two cases were quite comparable in principle. To the Indians the type of bodily contact involved in our social dancing has a directly sexual connotation. The incest taboos between members of the same clan are as severe as between true brothers and sisters. The shame of the Indians at the suggestion that a clan brother and sister should dance and the indignation of the white teacher at the idea that she should share a bed with an adult brother represents equally nonrational responses, culturally standardized unreason.

To what degree does a person's cultural heritage define his or her identity?

阅读文章，回答问题。

阅读文章，回答问题。

(1)Fifty years ago, baby boomers and their parents suffered through what was ubiquitously understood as "the generation gap", or the inability for different generations to speak clearly with one another.
(2)A new national poll of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 — the millennial generation — provides strong evidence of a new generation gap, this time with the boomers (born between 1946 and 1964)playing the role of uncomprehending parents. When Millennials say they are liberal, it means something very different than it did when Barack Obama was coming of age. When Millennials say they are socialists, they're not participating in ostalgie for the old German Democratic Republic. And their strong belief in economic fairness shouldn't be confused with the attitudes of the Occupy movement.
(3)The poll of Millennials was conducted by the Reason Foundation and the Rupe Foundation earlier this spring. It engaged nearly 2400 representative 18 to 29 year olds on a wide variety of topics.
(4)This new generation gap certainly helps to explain why Millennials are far less partisan than folks 30 and older. Just 22% of Millennials identify as Republican or Republican-leaning, compared with 40% of older voters. After splitting their votes for George E. Bush and Al Gore in 2000(each candidate got about 48%), Millennials have voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidates in the 2004, 2008, and 2012 elections. Forty-three percent of Millennials call themselves Democrats or leaning that way. Yet that's still a smaller percentage than it is for older Americans, 49% of whom are Democrats or lean Democrats. Most strikingly, 34% of Millennials call themselves true independents, meaning they don't lean toward either party. For older Americans, it’s just 10%.
(5)Millennials use language differently than Boomers and Gen Xers (born between 1965 and 1980). In the Reason-Rupe poll, about 62% of Millennials call themselves liberal. By that, they mean they favor gay marriage and pot legalization, but those views hold little or no implication for their views on government spending. To Millennials, being socially liberal is being liberal, period. For most older Americans, calling yourself a liberal means you want to increase the size, scope, and spending of the government (it may not even mean you support legal pot and marriage equality). Despite the strong liberal tilt among Millennials, 53% say they would support a candidate who was socially liberal and fiscally conservative (are you listening, major parties?).
(6)There are other areas where language doesn't track neatly with Boomer and Gen X definitions. Millennials have no first-hand memories of the Soviet Union or the Cold War. Forty-two percent say they prefer socialism as a means of organizing society but only 16% can define the term properly as government ownership of the means of production. In fact, when asked whether they want an economy managed by the free market or by the government, 64% want the former and just 32% want the latter. Scratch a Millennial “socialist” and you are likely to find a budding entrepreneur (55% saying they want to start their own business someday). Although they support a government-provided social safety net, two-thirds of Millennials agree that “government is usually inefficient and wasteful” and they are highly skeptical toward government with regards to privacy and nanny-state regulations about e-cigarettes, soda sizes, and the like.
(7)For all the attention lavished on the youthful, anti-capitalist Occupy movement a few years ago, it turns out that Millennials have strongly positive attitudes toward free markets (just don't call it capitalism). Not surprisingly, they define fairness in a way that is less about income disparity and more about getting your due. Almost six in ten believe you can get ahead with hard work and a similar number wants a society in which wealth is parceled out according to your achievement, not via the tax code or government redistribution of income. Even though 70% favor guaranteed health care, housing, and income, Millennials have no problem with unequal outcomes.
(8)Like most older Americans, too, Millennials are deeply worried about massive and growing federal budgets and debt, with 78% calling such things a major problem.
(9)It would be a real shame if we can't have the sorts of conversations we need to address and remedy such issues because different generations are talking past each other. Millennials are different than Boomers or Gen Xers: Culture comes first and politics second to them. They are less partisan and they are less hung up about things such as pot use, gay marriage, and immigration. But in many ways, they agree with older generations when it comes to the value and legitimacy of work, the role of government in helping the poor, and the inefficiency of government to do that.
(10)Everyone agrees that there are crises everywhere: Social Security and Medicare are going bust and the economy has been on life support for years. The best solutions will engage and involve Americans of all ages. The Reason-Rupe poll points to some places where generations are talking past each other and others where there is wide agreement. Giving its finding a close read might just help narrow today's generation gap so we can get on with improving all generations' prospects. 

阅读下文，并回答问题。   

      (1) When I started working from home some months ago, I had not anticipated the challenges involved.
      (2) The first was to tell people that I am working from home. I’ve had to explain my work arrangement to my neighbors, who wondered why I was raking leaves or shoveling snow in the mid-afternoon. I've described it to door-to-door canvassers, relatives, friends, the gas meter reader, the mail carrier and the parents of children in the kindergarten school yard.
      (3) The people who’ve had the most difficulty in understanding my new work setup are my family. My five-year-old twins, Claire and Alexander, keep asking, with some apprehension, “Daddy, why don’t you go to work?” My response, “But I am working, just from home” completely baffles them and they gaze at me with an expression unique to children: Daddy says the funniest things.”
      (4) The second challenge has been the additional demands, mostly from my wife. Her phone calls from her office invariably begin with the four words I’ve come to dread: “Since you’re at home ...” Her assumption, and that of others, is that since I’m at home between 9 and 5, I can easily take care of last-minute shopping, arrange for deliveries and drop-offs, orchestrate play dates for the twins, and respond to financial, medical, educational and home maintenance matters for our family.
      (5) The result is that by working from home I’ve taken on a host of new duties, in addition to those mandated by my employer. Over the past six months, our home has acquired a new roof - an upgraded electrical system and a long list of interior and exterior home improvements.
      (6) The third and most complex challenge is the expectations of my children. Claire and Alexander seem unable to grasp that having a stay-at-home dad is not the same as having a gainfully employed stay-at-home dad. Invariably they need to consult with me on any disagreement or matter that arises after returning home from their daily 2.5 hours of morning senior kindergarten.
      (7) I imagined that a few words of wisdom from me would quickly settle them back to their routine with our caregiver. However, I came to realize that resolving a dispute over the ownership of a particular pencil is akin to taking a case to the Supreme Court of Canada. It takes a lot of time, and any outcome can and will be appealed.
      (8) The fourth challenge, at first trivial but less so as time passed, is that my basement office, which was to be my sacrosanct work space, became a storage room. My real office (as everyone in my family calls it) at York University is a marvel of cleanliness and organization. My home office which I suppose everyone saw as not being real—is now a warren of not-quite discarded or returned items: boxes of old books and clothes, long-forgotten toys, diseased plants, sports equipment and sundry unused or defective home-repair materials.
      (9) Claire and Alexander see the space as an extension of their playroom, especially suited for hide-and-seek, with the added feature of expensive electronic equipment.
      (10) Over the months, I have met others working from home. We’ve crossed paths at the local coffee shop, seeking human contact after spending hours alone in our respective homes. From them, I learned different strategies.
      (11) One is to act as though you are still working at the “real” office. Those who practice this approach dress in business attire in the morning, carry briefcases and use their BlackBerrys at all times, making it quite clear to everyone in their vicinity that “I’m working, so don’t bother me.” I tried to ask them if this strategy was effective with family members, like young children, but they’ve never given me the opportunity for such idle chatter.
      (12) Although appealing, for me this strategy takes away one of the biggest advantages of working from home. Before starting this arrangement, I had imagined a host of benefits including increased productivity, more flexibility and fewer interruptions.
      (13) In reality, few advantages materialized other than being able to avoid commuting and spending less time on my personal appearance each morning. Therefore, I’m loath to switch from my old sweat pants and sneakers to a tie and suit, or to shave every day, in order to look like I’m working.
      (14) Another strategy is to begin any conversation with “I’m working from home. This ensures the listener, and everyone around, knows. I tried this, but found it had unintended consequences. The follow-up question is always, “What are you working on?” I reply that I am writing a scholarly book on retirement and pension policies in South Korea. This swiftly terminates any conversation and leaves me standing alone.
      (15) I’ll leave this approach for those writing—at home—the next blockbuster Hollywood screenplay.
      (16) The strategy I’ve settled on is what many others working at home also gravitate toward; namely, a vague and generic, “Well, you know, I’m doing some work at home. Any follow-up questions are skillfully deflected by witty observations about the weather, politics or sports. This leaves a mysterious aura around my activities.
      (17) Now that I'm preparing to return to my “real” office next week， the most important lesson I've learned is that when I'm next given the opportunity to work from home, I'll make sure no one knows I'm working ... from home. 

Why do you think some people choose to work from home?  

Read the following passage carefully and complete the succeeding three items.

(1)In 2004, when Danny Meyer opened a burger stand named Shake Shack in Madison Square Park, it didn’t look like the foundation of a global empire. There was just one location, and Meyer was known for high-end venues like Gramercy Tavern. But the lines became legendary, and in 2008 other outlets started appearing—first in New York, then in the rest of the country, then as far afield as Moscow and Dubai. Today, Shake Shack brings in at least a hundred million dollars a year and is planning an I.P.O. that could value the company at a billion dollars. That seems like a lot of burgers, but Meyer’s venture was perfectly timed to capitalize on a revolution in the fast-food business, the rise of restaurants known in the trade as “fast-casual”—places like Panera, Five Guys, and Chipotle.
(2)Unlike traditional fast-food restaurants, fast-casuals emphasize fresh, natural, and often locally sourced ingredients. (Chipotle, for instance, tries to use only antibiotic-free meat.) Perhaps as a result, their food tends to taste better. It’s also more expensive. The average McDonald’s customer spends around five dollars a visit; the average Chipotle check is more than twice that. Fast-casual restaurants first appeared in serious numbers in the nineteen-nineties, and though the industry is just a fraction of the size of the traditional fast-food business, it has grown remarkably quickly. Today, according to the food-service consulting firm Technomic, it accounts for thirty-four billion dollars in sales. Since Chipotle went public, in 2006, its stock price has risen more than fifteen hundred per cent.
(3)The rise of Chipotle and its peers isn’t just a business story. It’s a story about income distribution, changes in taste, and advances in technology. For most of the fast-food industry’s history, taste was a secondary consideration. Food was prepared according to a factory model, explicitly designed to maximize volume and reduce costs. Chains relied on frozen food and assembly-line production methods, and their ingredients came from industrial suppliers. They were able to serve enormous amounts of food quickly and cheaply, even if it wasn’t that healthy or tasty, and they enjoyed enormous success in the last quarter of the twentieth century. The number of outlets septupled between 1970 and 2000.
(4)But, even as the big chains thrived, other trends were emerging. Most of the gains from the economic boom of the eighties and nineties went to people at the top of the income distribution. That created a critical mass of affluent consumers. These people led increasingly busy work lives. They typically lived alone or in dual-income households, so they cooked less and ate out a lot. Michael Silverstein, a senior partner at the Boston Consulting Group and the co-author of the book “Trading Up,” has made a study of this kind of consumer. “These aren’t people with unlimited resources, but they have plenty of disposable income. One of the things they’re willing to spend money on is food away from home.” In the same period, affluent consumers developed a serious interest in food and became more discriminating in their tastes—a development often called “the American food revolution.” Wine consumption jumped fifty per cent between 1991 and 2005. After the U.S.D.A. started certifying food as organic, in 1990, sales of organic food rose steadily, and stores like Whole Foods expanded across the country.
(5)Traditional fast-food chains pretty much ignored these changes. They were still doing great business, and their industrial model made it hard to appeal to anyone who was concerned about natural ingredients and freshness. That created an opening for fast-casual restaurants. You had tens of millions of affluent consumers. They ate out a lot. They were comfortable with fast food, having grown up during its heyday, but they wanted something other than the typical factory-made burger. So, even as the fast-food giants focused on keeping prices down, places like Panera and Chipotle began charging higher prices. Their customers never flinched.

(6)It might seem that the success of fast-casual was simply a matter of producing the right product at the right time. But restaurants like Chipotle and Five Guys didn’t just respond to customer demand; they also shaped it. As Darren Tristano, an analyst at Technomic, put it, “Consumers didn’t really know what they wanted until they could get it.” The archetype of this model is Starbucks. In 1990, the idea of spending two dollars for a cup of coffee seemed absurd to most Americans. But Starbucks changed people’s idea of what coffee tasted like and how much enjoyment could be got from it. The number of gourmet-coffee drinkers nearly quintupled between 1993 and 1999, and many of them have now abandoned Starbucks for even fancier options.
(7)As Starbucks did for coffee, Chipotle and Shake Shack have changed people’s expectations of what fast food can be. The challenge for the old chains is that new expectations spread. Millennials, for instance, have become devoted fast food customers. So McDonald’s is now experimenting with greater customization, and has said that it would like to rely entirely on “sustainable beef.” The question is whether you can inject an emphasis on taste and freshness into a business built around cheapness and convenience. After decades in which fast-food chains perfected the “fast,” can they now improve the “food”?