1、阅读理解 Volcanoes were more destructive in ancient history, not because they were bigger, but because the carbon dioxide they released wiped out life with greater ease. 　　Paul Wignall from the University of Leeds was investigating the link between volcanic eruptions and mass extinctions. Not all volcanic eruptions killed off large numbers of animals, but all the mass extinctions over the past 300 million years coincided with huge formations of volcanic rock. To his surprise, the older the massive volcanic eruptions were, the more damage they seemed to do. He calculated the "killing efficiency" for these volcanoes by comparing the proportion of life they killed off with the volume of lava that they produced. He found that size for size, older eruptions were at least 10 times as effective at wiping out life as their more recent rivals. 　　The Permian extinction, for example, which happened 250 million years ago, is marked by floods of volcanic rock in Siberia that cover an area roughly the size of western Europe. Those volcanoes are thought to have pumped out about 10 giga-tonnes of carbon as carbon dioxide. The global warming that followed wiped out 80 per cent of all marine genera at the time, and it took 5 million years for the planet to recover. Yet 60 million years ago, there was another huge amount of volcanic activity and global warming but no mass extinction. Some animals did disappear but things returned to normal within ten thousands of years. "The most recent ones hardly have an effect at all," Wignall says. He ignored the extinction which wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, because many scientists believe it was primarily caused by the impact of an asteroid. He thinks that older volcanoes had more killing power because more recent life forms were better adapted to dealing with increased levels of CO2. 　　Vincent Courtillot, director of the Paris Geophysical. Institute in France, says that Wignall’s idea is provocative. But he says it is incredibly hard to do these sorts of calculations. He points out that the killing power of volcanic eruptions depends on how long they lasted. And it is impossible to tell whether the huge blasts lasted for thousands or millions of years. He also adds that it is difficult to estimate how much lava prehistoric volcanoes produced, and that lava volume may not necessarily correspond to carbon dioxide emissions. 问：Why did older volcanic eruptions do more damage than more recent ones?（ ） 单选题 2分

2、Volcanoes were more destructive in ancient history, not because they were bigger, but because the carbon dioxide they released wiped out life with greater ease. 　　Paul Wignall from the University of Leeds was investigating the link between volcanic eruptions and mass extinctions. Not all volcanic eruptions killed off large numbers of animals, but all the mass extinctions over the past 300 million years coincided with huge formations of volcanic rock. To his surprise, the older the massive volcanic eruptions were, the more damage they seemed to do. He calculated the "killing efficiency" for these volcanoes by comparing the proportion of life they killed off with the volume of lava that they produced. He found that size for size, older eruptions were at least 10 times as effective at wiping out life as their more recent rivals. 　　The Permian extinction, for example, which happened 250 million years ago, is marked by floods of volcanic rock in Siberia that cover an area roughly the size of western Europe. Those volcanoes are thought to have pumped out about 10 giga-tonnes of carbon as carbon dioxide. The global warming that followed wiped out 80 per cent of all marine genera at the time, and it took 5 million years for the planet to recover. Yet 60 million years ago, there was another huge amount of volcanic activity and global warming but no mass extinction. Some animals did disappear but things returned to normal within ten thousands of years. "The most recent ones hardly have an effect at all," Wignall says. He ignored the extinction which wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, because many scientists believe it was primarily caused by the impact of an asteroid. He thinks that older volcanoes had more killing power because more recent life forms were better adapted to dealing with increased levels of CO2. 　　Vincent Courtillot, director of the Paris Geophysical. Institute in France, says that Wignall’s idea is provocative. But he says it is incredibly hard to do these sorts of calculations. He points out that the killing power of volcanic eruptions depends on how long they lasted. And it is impossible to tell whether the huge blasts lasted for thousands or millions of years. He also adds that it is difficult to estimate how much lava prehistoric volcanoes produced, and that lava volume may not necessarily correspond to carbon dioxide emissions. 问：How did Wignall calculate the killing power of those older volcanic eruptions?（ ） 单选题 2分

3、Volcanoes were more destructive in ancient history, not because they were bigger, but because the carbon dioxide they released wiped out life with greater ease. 　　Paul Wignall from the University of Leeds was investigating the link between volcanic eruptions and mass extinctions. Not all volcanic eruptions killed off large numbers of animals, but all the mass extinctions over the past 300 million years coincided with huge formations of volcanic rock. To his surprise, the older the massive volcanic eruptions were, the more damage they seemed to do. He calculated the "killing efficiency" for these volcanoes by comparing the proportion of life they killed off with the volume of lava that they produced. He found that size for size, older eruptions were at least 10 times as effective at wiping out life as their more recent rivals. 　　The Permian extinction, for example, which happened 250 million years ago, is marked by floods of volcanic rock in Siberia that cover an area roughly the size of western Europe. Those volcanoes are thought to have pumped out about 10 giga-tonnes of carbon as carbon dioxide. The global warming that followed wiped out 80 per cent of all marine genera at the time, and it took 5 million years for the planet to recover. Yet 60 million years ago, there was another huge amount of volcanic activity and global warming but no mass extinction. Some animals did disappear but things returned to normal within ten thousands of years. "The most recent ones hardly have an effect at all," Wignall says. He ignored the extinction which wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, because many scientists believe it was primarily caused by the impact of an asteroid. He thinks that older volcanoes had more killing power because more recent life forms were better adapted to dealing with increased levels of CO2. 　　Vincent Courtillot, director of the Paris Geophysical. Institute in France, says that Wignall’s idea is provocative. But he says it is incredibly hard to do these sorts of calculations. He points out that the killing power of volcanic eruptions depends on how long they lasted. And it is impossible to tell whether the huge blasts lasted for thousands or millions of years. He also adds that it is difficult to estimate how much lava prehistoric volcanoes produced, and that lava volume may not necessarily correspond to carbon dioxide emissions. 问：When did dinosaurs become extinct?（ ） 单选题 2分

4、Volcanoes were more destructive in ancient history, not because they were bigger, but because the carbon dioxide they released wiped out life with greater ease. 　　Paul Wignall from the University of Leeds was investigating the link between volcanic eruptions and mass extinctions. Not all volcanic eruptions killed off large numbers of animals, but all the mass extinctions over the past 300 million years coincided with huge formations of volcanic rock. To his surprise, the older the massive volcanic eruptions were, the more damage they seemed to do. He calculated the "killing efficiency" for these volcanoes by comparing the proportion of life they killed off with the volume of lava that they produced. He found that size for size, older eruptions were at least 10 times as effective at wiping out life as their more recent rivals. 　　The Permian extinction, for example, which happened 250 million years ago, is marked by floods of volcanic rock in Siberia that cover an area roughly the size of western Europe. Those volcanoes are thought to have pumped out about 10 giga-tonnes of carbon as carbon dioxide. The global warming that followed wiped out 80 per cent of all marine genera at the time, and it took 5 million years for the planet to recover. Yet 60 million years ago, there was another huge amount of volcanic activity and global warming but no mass extinction. Some animals did disappear but things returned to normal within ten thousands of years. "The most recent ones hardly have an effect at all," Wignall says. He ignored the extinction which wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, because many scientists believe it was primarily caused by the impact of an asteroid. He thinks that older volcanoes had more killing power because more recent life forms were better adapted to dealing with increased levels of CO2. 　　Vincent Courtillot, director of the Paris Geophysical. Institute in France, says that Wignall’s idea is provocative. But he says it is incredibly hard to do these sorts of calculations. He points out that the killing power of volcanic eruptions depends on how long they lasted. And it is impossible to tell whether the huge blasts lasted for thousands or millions of years. He also adds that it is difficult to estimate how much lava prehistoric volcanoes produced, and that lava volume may not necessarily correspond to carbon dioxide emissions. 问：What can be inferred from paragraph 3 concerning dinosaurs?（ ） 单选题 2分

5、Volcanoes were more destructive in ancient history, not because they were bigger, but because the carbon dioxide they released wiped out life with greater ease. 　　Paul Wignall from the University of Leeds was investigating the link between volcanic eruptions and mass extinctions. Not all volcanic eruptions killed off large numbers of animals, but all the mass extinctions over the past 300 million years coincided with huge formations of volcanic rock. To his surprise, the older the massive volcanic eruptions were, the more damage they seemed to do. He calculated the "killing efficiency" for these volcanoes by comparing the proportion of life they killed off with the volume of lava that they produced. He found that size for size, older eruptions were at least 10 times as effective at wiping out life as their more recent rivals. 　　The Permian extinction, for example, which happened 250 million years ago, is marked by floods of volcanic rock in Siberia that cover an area roughly the size of western Europe. Those volcanoes are thought to have pumped out about 10 giga-tonnes of carbon as carbon dioxide. The global warming that followed wiped out 80 per cent of all marine genera at the time, and it took 5 million years for the planet to recover. Yet 60 million years ago, there was another huge amount of volcanic activity and global warming but no mass extinction. Some animals did disappear but things returned to normal within ten thousands of years. "The most recent ones hardly have an effect at all," Wignall says. He ignored the extinction which wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, because many scientists believe it was primarily caused by the impact of an asteroid. He thinks that older volcanoes had more killing power because more recent life forms were better adapted to dealing with increased levels of CO2. 　　Vincent Courtillot, director of the Paris Geophysical. Institute in France, says that Wignall’s idea is provocative. But he says it is incredibly hard to do these sorts of calculations. He points out that the killing power of volcanic eruptions depends on how long they lasted. And it is impossible to tell whether the huge blasts lasted for thousands or millions of years. He also adds that it is difficult to estimate how much lava prehistoric volcanoes produced, and that lava volume may not necessarily correspond to carbon dioxide emissions. 问：What is the main thesis of the article?（ ） 单选题 2分

6、Read the texts from a magazine in which five people voice their different opinions in response to an article on the issue of praising．For questions 6 to 10, match the name of each person to one of the statements(A to G) given below. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1． 6、Mike: 　　Praise often and sincerely－－it's as simple as that. Employees want to feel needed and appreciated. By offering sincere praise with examples about what they did right, you'll go far in creating an energetic team. Meanwhile, I don't agree with the assertion that "to focus on what needs improving isn't good management." In fact, it's the balance of praise along with constructive criticism that drives employees to work smarter and reach higher. 7、Frank: 　　This article makes a valid point that needs to be understood, especially for the new generation of workers, my generation. We don't see ourselves as parts in the machine to be put in the dark to work. My generation needs respect in return from our employer, we need to feel appreciated beyond just a pay check, it's the difference between being fulfilled at our career and being sad at our job. 8、Joyce: 　　One skill missing in today's workplace is the ability to build effective business relationships. At the core of that relationship is the need for consistent feedback. "How am I doing?" is a question that should be answered consistently. When you tell an employee once a year what is needed to improve, you have not done your job as a leader--build skills, provide feedback and help the employee grow and develop. 9、Ellen: 　　I don't see a problem with praising employees when it's truly deserved (insincere praise is an entirely different story). It's a cost-free "benefit", if you will, in that it allows employees to see that their efforts are both noticed and valued. In the work world there are always people available to tell that you are doing something wrong and far too few occasions when employees are told that they've done something right! 10、Diana: 　　Praise what the employee did. Be specific about why it was helpful. An employee who continually earns your praise also deserves your attention as to how else to reward their behavior. Meaningful praise encourages people beyond anything else. Written comments are available for later re-view. They give them confidence that they can "do it again." I never regretted praising an employee who deserved it but often kicked myself for missing an opportunity. 　　Now match the name of each person (1 to 5) to the appropriate statement. 　　Note: there are two extra statements． A、Praise combined with criticism is helpful．  B、Praise can bring about many kinds of desired behavior．  C、Employees may feel it hard to accept．insincere praise．  D、Let employees know exactly for what they are praised．  E、In my opinion, we are not generous enough to give praise．  F、Employees need helpful advice on a regular basis．  G、Money alone cannot guarantee a sense of career fulfillment for me． 简答题 10分

7、Love to your life “Everything happens for the best,” my mother said whenever I faced disappointment. “If you carry on, one day something good will happen. And you’ll realize that it wouldn’t have happened if not for that （11） disappointment.”  　　Mother was right, as I discovered after graduating from college in 1932, I had decided to try for a job in radio, then work my way up to sports announcer. I hitchhiked to Chicago and （12） on the door of every station--and got turned down every time.  　　In one studio, a kind lady told me that big stations couldn’t risk hiring an （13） person. "Go out in the sticks and find a small station that’ll give you a （14）," she said. I thumbed home to Dixon, Illinois.  　　While there were no radio－announcing jobs in Dixon, my father said Montgomery Ward had opened a store and wanted a local athlete to manage its sports department. Since Dixon was where I had played high school football, I applied. The job （15） just right for me.  　　But I wasn’t hired. My disappointment must have shown. “Everything happens for the best.” Mom reminded me. Dad offered me the car to （16） a job. I tried WOC Radio in Davenport, Iowa. The program director, a wonderful Scotsman named Peter Macarthur told me they had already （17） an announcer.  　　As I left his office, my frustration boiled over. I asked aloud, “How can a fellow get to be a sports announcer if he can’t get a job in a （18） station.” I was waiting for the elevator when I heard Macarthur calling, "What was you said about sports? Do you know anything about football?" Then he stood me before a microphone and asked me to （19） an imaginary game. At last, Peter told me I would be broadcasting Saturday’s game!  　　On my way home, as I have many times since, I thought of my mother’s （20）: “If you carry on, one day something good will happen. Something wouldn’t have happened if not for that previous disappointment.”  A. broadcast　　　　　　　　　　　 B. train　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 C. hired　　　　　　　　　　　　　 D. inexperienced E. important F. radio G. sounded　　　 H. previous I. words J. hunt　　 K. chance　　　　　 L. knocked M. contributes　　　　 N. surprisingly　　　　　 O. provides 简答题 20分