【单选题】Alittleunderamillionyearsago,thebrinywatersoftheBalticSeabeganfloodingintothecoldNorthAtlantic:geologistsarestilldebatingwhetherthefloodwasgradualorcreatedacataclysm.（）
(A)whetherthefloodwasgradualorcreatedacataclysm
(B)ifthefloodwasgradualorcreatedacataclysm
(C)aboutwhetherthefloodwasgradualorcataclysmic
(D)whetherthefloodwasgradualorcataclysmic
(E)whetherthefloodwasgradualoritcreatedacataclysm
(A)whetherthefloodwasgradualorcreatedacataclysm
(B)ifthefloodwasgradualorcreatedacataclysm
(C)aboutwhetherthefloodwasgradualorcataclysmic
(D)whetherthefloodwasgradualorcataclysmic
(E)whetherthefloodwasgradualoritcreatedacataclysm
【单选题】For any 3 given numbers, which of the following is always equivalent to adding the 3 numbers together and then dividing the sum by 3
Ⅰ. Ordering the 3 numbers numerically, from highest to lowest, and then selecting the middle number.
Ⅱ.Dividing each of the numbers by 3 and then adding the results together.
Ⅲ. Multiplying each number by 6, adding the resulting products together, and then dividing the sum by 9.
A、Ⅰ only
B、Ⅱ only
C、Ⅰ and Ⅱ only
D、Ⅱ and Ⅲ only
E、None of the above
Ⅰ. Ordering the 3 numbers numerically, from highest to lowest, and then selecting the middle number.
Ⅱ.Dividing each of the numbers by 3 and then adding the results together.
Ⅲ. Multiplying each number by 6, adding the resulting products together, and then dividing the sum by 9.
A、Ⅰ only
B、Ⅱ only
C、Ⅰ and Ⅱ only
D、Ⅱ and Ⅲ only
E、None of the above
【单选题】thE Following DAtA suFFiCiEnCy proBlEms Consist oF A quEstion AnD two stAtEmEnts, lABElED (1) AnD (2), in whiCh CErtAin DAtA ArE givEn. you hAvE to DECiDE whEthEr thE DAtA givEn in thE stAtEmEnts ArE suFFiCiEnt For AnswEring thE quEstion. using thE DAtA givEn in thE stAtEmEnts plus your knowlEDgE oF mAthEmAtiCs AnD EvEryDAy FACts (suCh As thE numBEr oF DAys in july or thE mEAning oF CountErCloCkwisE), you must inDiCAtE whEthEr
A、stAtEmEnt (1)AlonE、is suFFiCiEnt, But stAtEmEnt (2) AlonE is not suFFiCiEnt.
B、stAtEmEnt (2)AlonE、is suFFiCiEnt, But stAtEmEnt (1) AlonE is not suFFiCiEnt.
C、Both stAtEmEnts togEthEr ArE suFFiCiEnt, But nEithEr stAtEmEntAlonE、is suFFiCiEnt.
D、EACh stAtEmEntAlonE、is suFFiCiEnt.
ｅ. stAtEmEnts (1) AnD (2) togEthEr ArE not suFFiCiEnt.
is intEgEr y＞0
(1) -(2+y)＞0
(2) (2+y)2＞0
A、stAtEmEnt (1)AlonE、is suFFiCiEnt, But stAtEmEnt (2) AlonE is not suFFiCiEnt.
B、stAtEmEnt (2)AlonE、is suFFiCiEnt, But stAtEmEnt (1) AlonE is not suFFiCiEnt.
C、Both stAtEmEnts togEthEr ArE suFFiCiEnt, But nEithEr stAtEmEntAlonE、is suFFiCiEnt.
D、EACh stAtEmEntAlonE、is suFFiCiEnt.
ｅ. stAtEmEnts (1) AnD (2) togEthEr ArE not suFFiCiEnt.
is intEgEr y＞0
(1) -(2+y)＞0
(2) (2+y)2＞0
【单选题】The following questions present a sentence, part of which or all of which is underlineD、Beneath the sentence, you will find five ways of phrasing the underlined part. The first of these repeats the original; the other four are different. If you think the original is best, choose the first answer; otherwise choose one of the others.
These questions test correctness and effectiveness of expression. In choosing your answer, follow the requirements of standard writtenEnglish; that is, pay attention to grammar, choice of words, and sentence construction.Choose the answer that produces the most effective sentence; this answer should be clear and exact, without awkwardness, ambiguity, redundancy, or grammatical error.
Hip dysplasia is more common among German shepherds than dogs of other breeds.
A、than
B、than is so of
C、compared to
D、in comparison with
E、than among
These questions test correctness and effectiveness of expression. In choosing your answer, follow the requirements of standard writtenEnglish; that is, pay attention to grammar, choice of words, and sentence construction.Choose the answer that produces the most effective sentence; this answer should be clear and exact, without awkwardness, ambiguity, redundancy, or grammatical error.
Hip dysplasia is more common among German shepherds than dogs of other breeds.
A、than
B、than is so of
C、compared to
D、in comparison with
E、than among
【分析解答题】Read the argument and the instructions that follow it, and then make any notes that will help you plan your response. Write your response on a separate sheet of paper. If possible, type your essay on a word processor.
An economist addressed the following statement to a group of economists and policy makers:
Our federal government often employs subsidies and trade measures to protect the well-being of certain traditional industries, such as steel production and agriculture, because these industries have been seen as vital to the nation’s interests. In recent decades, however, the nation’s economy has grown far more from the development of newer, information-oriented industries such as pharmaceuticals, computer technology, and mediA、These newer industries promise more growth in personal income and tax revenue than do the older industries, and they are generally less harmful to the environment. It is wrong, therefore, for the federal government to protect and subsidize traditional industries such as steel and agriculture, when such protectionist practices may delay workers in these traditional industries from moving to newer sectors of the economy that can offer greater benefits to workers and to the nation as a whole.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion, be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative examples or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
An economist addressed the following statement to a group of economists and policy makers:
Our federal government often employs subsidies and trade measures to protect the well-being of certain traditional industries, such as steel production and agriculture, because these industries have been seen as vital to the nation’s interests. In recent decades, however, the nation’s economy has grown far more from the development of newer, information-oriented industries such as pharmaceuticals, computer technology, and mediA、These newer industries promise more growth in personal income and tax revenue than do the older industries, and they are generally less harmful to the environment. It is wrong, therefore, for the federal government to protect and subsidize traditional industries such as steel and agriculture, when such protectionist practices may delay workers in these traditional industries from moving to newer sectors of the economy that can offer greater benefits to workers and to the nation as a whole.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion, be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative examples or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
【单选题】In a sample of 800 high school students in which all students are either freshmen, sophomores, juniors, or seniors, 22 percent are juniors and 74 percent are not sophomores. If there are 160 seniors, how many more freshmen than sophomores are there among the sample of students
A、42
B、48
C、56
D、208
E、256
A、42
B、48
C、56
D、208
E、256
【单选题】The questions in this group are based on the content of a passage.After reading the passage, choose the best answer to each question.Answer all questions following the passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Pretty much everybody agrees that clean air is a good thing, rightEvidently not so. Since the 1960s, when people started talking about clean air in the first place, theAmerican energy industry, which includes coal companies, oil companies, and utility companies, has dragged its heels on every initiative to improve the quality of the air we breathe.Even after theCleanAirAct of 1970 and its amendments in 1977 and 1990 made it clear that controlling air pollution is a national priority, these companies have found tricks and loopholes to avoid compliance.
Perhaps the most egregious loophole is the one that allows older power plants to disregard limits on sulfux dioxide emissions until they undergo a major renovation, at which point they have to comply. Sulfur dioxide from coal-burning power plants is the primary cause of acid rain in NorthAmericA、TheCleanAirAct states that when coal-burning power plants upgrade their equipment, they must then comply with sulfur dioxide limitations by either installing scrubbing equipment that cleans the emissions or using fuel with lower sulfur content. The law tied the timing of compliance to major renovations in order to give power plants a grace period in which to comply. Many power plants, however, have exploited a loophole in this law by instituting a series of "minor" renovations that, in effect, upgrade their equipment without requiring them to comply with theCleanAirAct. Some plants have cheated the system by undergoing "minor" renovations for decades.
The power companies claim that they have to resort to these underhanded measures because the cost of compliance with theCleanAirAct is too high.And if everyone else is cheating the system, why should they have to install costly sulfur dioxide scrubbers
This cost argument falls apart upon scrutiny. Since 1977, more than 400 power plants across the country have managed to comply with the restrictions and are still making money. The sulfur dioxide scrubbing equipment has turned out to be far less expensive than the power industry naysayers claimed it would be. Many power plants have even complied with the emissions limits and reduced their operating costs by switching from high-sulfurAppalachian coal to the low-sulfur coal produced in western states such as Wyoming and Idaho. Western coal is not only cleaner than eastern coal, but also, because it is generally closer to the surface, as much as 30 percent less expensive to extract.
Clearly, the costs of compliance with theCleanAirAct can be justified, but if these companies were honest, such justifications would not have to be made. If they were honest, they would acknowledge the costs of not complying: the health costs of increased rates of asthma and lung cancer in high-emissions areas; the environmental costs of acid-scarred forests and lakes; the aesthetic costs of a haze of sulfur dioxide cutting visibility across the eastern United States to only half of what it was in pre-industrial times. When you look at the true costs you have to ask, is any cost too high for clean air
Which of the following best expresses the purpose of this passage
A、To explain how a loophole in theCleanAirAct allows power plants to avoid compliance with emissions restrictions
B、To raise awareness of the problems caused by sulfur dioxide emissions from coal- burning power plants
C、To argue against a specific implementation of theCleanAirAct that relates to greenhouse gas emissions
D、To argue that companies should not exploit a loophole in theCleanAirAct concerning an atmospheric pollutant
E、To advocate the passage of a newCleanAi
Pretty much everybody agrees that clean air is a good thing, rightEvidently not so. Since the 1960s, when people started talking about clean air in the first place, theAmerican energy industry, which includes coal companies, oil companies, and utility companies, has dragged its heels on every initiative to improve the quality of the air we breathe.Even after theCleanAirAct of 1970 and its amendments in 1977 and 1990 made it clear that controlling air pollution is a national priority, these companies have found tricks and loopholes to avoid compliance.
Perhaps the most egregious loophole is the one that allows older power plants to disregard limits on sulfux dioxide emissions until they undergo a major renovation, at which point they have to comply. Sulfur dioxide from coal-burning power plants is the primary cause of acid rain in NorthAmericA、TheCleanAirAct states that when coal-burning power plants upgrade their equipment, they must then comply with sulfur dioxide limitations by either installing scrubbing equipment that cleans the emissions or using fuel with lower sulfur content. The law tied the timing of compliance to major renovations in order to give power plants a grace period in which to comply. Many power plants, however, have exploited a loophole in this law by instituting a series of "minor" renovations that, in effect, upgrade their equipment without requiring them to comply with theCleanAirAct. Some plants have cheated the system by undergoing "minor" renovations for decades.
The power companies claim that they have to resort to these underhanded measures because the cost of compliance with theCleanAirAct is too high.And if everyone else is cheating the system, why should they have to install costly sulfur dioxide scrubbers
This cost argument falls apart upon scrutiny. Since 1977, more than 400 power plants across the country have managed to comply with the restrictions and are still making money. The sulfur dioxide scrubbing equipment has turned out to be far less expensive than the power industry naysayers claimed it would be. Many power plants have even complied with the emissions limits and reduced their operating costs by switching from high-sulfurAppalachian coal to the low-sulfur coal produced in western states such as Wyoming and Idaho. Western coal is not only cleaner than eastern coal, but also, because it is generally closer to the surface, as much as 30 percent less expensive to extract.
Clearly, the costs of compliance with theCleanAirAct can be justified, but if these companies were honest, such justifications would not have to be made. If they were honest, they would acknowledge the costs of not complying: the health costs of increased rates of asthma and lung cancer in high-emissions areas; the environmental costs of acid-scarred forests and lakes; the aesthetic costs of a haze of sulfur dioxide cutting visibility across the eastern United States to only half of what it was in pre-industrial times. When you look at the true costs you have to ask, is any cost too high for clean air
Which of the following best expresses the purpose of this passage
A、To explain how a loophole in theCleanAirAct allows power plants to avoid compliance with emissions restrictions
B、To raise awareness of the problems caused by sulfur dioxide emissions from coal- burning power plants
C、To argue against a specific implementation of theCleanAirAct that relates to greenhouse gas emissions
D、To argue that companies should not exploit a loophole in theCleanAirAct concerning an atmospheric pollutant
E、To advocate the passage of a newCleanAi
发布评论 查看全部评论