1. Passage Twenty-TwoThough some people have suggested that women should return to housework in order to leave more jobs for men， the idea has been rejected by both women and men in public opinion polls (民意测验).Lately some union officials have suggested that too many women are employed in type of work more suitable for men and that women should step aside to make way for unemployed young men.They argue that women—especially women in their childbearing years actually delay economic development and result in lower productivity， poor quality and inefficiency.To solve the problem， they have suggested that the working women stay at home while their husbands or brothers were given double wages.They argue that under these circumstances， families would retain their same level of income， and women could run the house and raise children much better.The suggestion has been rejected by 9 out of 10 people polled.A hundred persons in a big city were questioned last summer.Out of 50 women， 46 said they were unwilling to leave their jobs， no matter what the situation was.The other 4 said they would like to return home if their jobs could be taken by their sons or daughters.Of 50 men polled， only 6 said they would like to see their wives give up their jobs， if it meant higher wages for themselves.Some other people have suggested another way called “phased employment theory”.The theory suggests that a woman worker take leave from her job when she is seven months pregnant (妊娠)and stay off the job until her baby reaches the age of 3.It suggests that women on leave receive 75 percent of their normal salary and be allowed to return to work after the 3-year period.This will benefit children， women， their families and the society.Some of those polled， both women and men， felt the idea is a good one.It definitely seems to be more acceptable than the suggestion that women return to home forever.Some union officials have suggested that women should return home because ().

33.Every policeman and fireman ()on the alert， especially during public holidays.

A. 　have been

B. 　is

C. 　are

D. 　were

5. Passage FourteenFor a long time， people have disagreed about whether golf is a sport or a game.On one side of the argument， people say that golf meets the dictionary definition of a sport， because it is a physical， athletic activity.They add that golf is recognized as a sport by sporting goods companies， athletic groups， fans， and the media.Also， golf’s inclusion in the Olympics in 2016 is more proof that it is a sport.On the other side， people say that golf is a game， not a sport.They say golf is not a very physical activity and can be played well by people who are overweight or injured.Also， golf was only recently added to the Olympics.For more than 100 years it was not included in the Olympic Games.For many， the Olympic Games serve as a measurement for whether an activity should be called a sport.Golf was first included in the Olympics in 1900.However， it was removed shortly thereafter because of a lack of participation and conflict with other golf events.Through the years， there were several attempts to bring golf back to the Olympics.It wasn’t until the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro， Brazil that golf returned.Some say the return of golf does not prove that it is a sport.Rather， it only proves that the Olympics wanted to benefit from the star power of famous golfers like Tiger Woods.The disagreement continues today.Those who think golf is a sport point to pro-golfers like Woods， who are strong and fit.Those who disagree point to golfers like John Daly.He is a successful pro-golfer who once had health problems.So is golf a sport? The answer depends on who you ask——and whether that person owns a set of golf clubs.The author seems to suggest in the last paragraph that ().

4. Passage Thirty-ThreeWe all know that DNA has the ability to identify individuals but， because it is inherited， there are also regions of the DNA strand which can relate an individual to his or her family (immediate and extended)， tribal group and even an entire population.Molecular Genealogy (宗谱学)can use this unique identification provided by the genetic markers to link people together into family trees.Pedigrees (家谱)based on such genetic markers can mean a breakthrough for family trees where information is incomplete or missing due to adoption， illegitimacy or lack of records.There are many communities and populations which have lost precious records due to tragic events such as the fire in the Irish courts during Civil War in 1921 or American slaves for whom many records were never kept in the first place.The main objective of the Molecular Genealogy Research Group is to build a database containing over 100，000 DNA samples from individuals all over the world.These individuals will have provided a pedigree chart of at least four generations and a small blood sample.Once the database has enough samples to represent the world genetic make-up， it will eventually help in solving many issues regarding genealogies that could not be done by relying only on traditional written records.Theoretically， any individual will someday be able to trace his or her family origins through this database.In the meantime， as the database is being created， molecular genealogy can already verify possible or suspected relationships between individuals.“For example， if two men sharing the same last name believe that they are related， but no written record proves this relationship， we can verify this possibility by collecting a sample of DNA from both and looking for common markers (in this case we can look primarily at the Y chromosome (染色体)，” explains Ugo Perego， a member of the BYU Molecular Genealogy research team.If two men suspected for some reason they have a common ancestor， ().

17.The computer revolution may well change society as ()as did the Industrial Revolution.

A. 　certainly

B. 　insignificantly

C. 　fundamentally

D. 　comparatively

4. Passage Thirty-FiveTelevision has changed the lifestyle of people in every industrialized country in the world.In the United States， where sociologists have studied the effects， some interesting observations have been made.Television， although not essential， has become an important part of most people’s lives.It alters people’s ways of seeing the world; in many ways， it supports and sustains (维持)modern life.Television has become a baby-sitter， an introducer of conversations， the major transmitter of culture and a keeper of tradition.Yet when what can be seen on TV in one day is critically analyzed， it becomes evident that television is not a teacher but a sustainer; the poor quality of programming does not elevate (提高)people into greater understanding， but rather maintains and encourages the life as it exists.The primary reason for the lack of quality in American television is related to both the history of TV programming development and the economics of TV.Television in America began with the radio.Radio companies and their sponsors first experimented with television.Therefore， the close relationship which the advertisers had with radio programs became the system for American TV.Sponsors not only paid money for time within programs， but many actually produced the programs.Thus， in American society， television is primarily concerned with reflecting and attracting society rather than experimenting with new ideas.Advertisers want to attract the largest viewing audience possible.To do so requires that the programs be entertaining rather than educational， attractive rather than challenging.Television in America today remains， to a large extent， with the same organization and standards as it had thirty years ago.The hope for further development and true achievement toward improving society will require a change in the entire system.The author believes that television in the United States has become important to most people because ().

7.Our son doesn＇t know what to()at the university; he can＇t make up his mind about his
future.

A. 　take in

B. 　take up

C. 　take over

D. 　take after

32. Questions 31 to 35 are based on the following passage.The United States is facing a housing crisis: Affordable housing is inadequate， while luxury homes abound (充裕)， and homelessness remains a persistent problem.Despite this， popular culture and the housing industry market happiness as living with both more space and more amenities (便利设施).Big houses are advertized as a reward for hard work and diligence， turning housing from a basic necessity into a luxury.This is reflected in our homes.The average single-family home built in the United States before 1970 was less than 1，500 square feet in size.By 2016， the average size of a new， single-family home was 2，422 square feet.What’s more， homes built in the 2000s were more likely than earlier models to have more of all types of spaces: bedrooms， bathrooms， living rooms， dining rooms， recreation rooms and garages.There are consequences of living big.As middle-class houses have grown larger， two things have happened.First， large houses take time to maintain， so cleaners and other low-wage service workers are required to keep these houses in order.Second， once-public spaces， where people from diverse backgrounds used to come together， have increasingly become privatized， leading to a reduction in the number of public facilities available to all， and a reduced quality of life for many.Take swimming pools.While in 1950， only 2，500 U.S.families owned pools， by 1999 this number was 4 million.At the same time， public municipal pools were often closed， leaving low-income people nowhere to swim.The trend for bigger housing thus poses ethical questions.Should Americans accept a system in which the middle and upper classes enjoy a luxurious lifestyle， using the low-wage labor of others? Are we willing to accept a system in which an increase in amenities purchased by the affluent means a reduction in amenities for the poor?I believe neither is acceptable.We must change the way we think: living well does not need to mean having more private spaces; instead， it could mean having more public spaces.A better goal than building bigger houses for some is to create more publicly accessible spaces and amenities for all.What is one of the consequences of living big?

A. 　Many Americans’ quality of life has become lower.

B. 　People from diverse backgrounds no longer socialize.

C. 　People no longer have access to public swimming pools.

D. 　Many Americans’ private life has been negatively affected.

16.The sale usually takes place outside the house， with the audience ()on benches， chairs or boxes.

A. 　having seated

B. 　seating

C. 　seated

D. 　having been seated

37.Doesn’t Alice show a great deal of anxiety ()her exams?

A. 　at

B. 　to

C. 　about

D. 　in

31.If I ()harder at school， I would be sitting in a comfortable office now.

A. 　worked

B. 　were to work

C. 　had worked

D. 　were working