34.
Which of the following phrase best describes Richard as seen by the author?
[A] An aggressive king, too fond of war. [B] A brave king with minor faults. [C] A competent but cunning soldier. [D] A kind with great political skills.
[参考答案] B
[详细解答]
态度题。本题考查作者对Richard的评价。文章开篇中的heroic和the most fascinating，chivalry，admired等说明作者对Richard的整体评价是正面的。接下来，作者对Richard的性格，一生行为等进行概括，其中第二段第四句指出他缺乏外交手腕，并举例进行说明。作者在首段倒数第五句中提到Richard的勇敢“In all deeds of prowess”，可见[B]是作者对Richard的评价。[A]为负面评价，与全文基调不符。[C]中的cunning也带有贬义，排除。[D]与原文中的diplomatic ineptitude矛盾。
35.
The relationship between the first and second paragraphs is that _________.
[A] each presents one side of the picture. [B] the first generalizes the second gives examples.
[C] the second is the logical result of the first. [D] both present Richard's virtues and faults.
[参考答案] A
[详细解答]
篇章结构题。首段开篇对Richard进行了正面评价：骑士时代的象征；英勇事迹多；战功卓越。接着第二段首句用让步状语从句进行过渡：尽管他是一个与鲜血和武力打交道的人，Richard性格还是过于冲动，不是背信弃义、冷酷无情。之后作者提到了Richard在政治外交方面的表现：政治联盟建立在个人喜好的基础上；政治计划既不连贯也缺乏明确目的；缺乏外交手腕。可见首段是对Richard的肯定，第二段则指出他的不足之处，两段为对比关系，故[A]为答案。两者之间不是例证关系，也并非因果关系，排除[B]和[C]。首段只提到Richard
题 36 - 40
TEXT D
The miserable fate of Enron's employees will be a landmark in business history, one of those awful events that everyone agrees must never be allowed to happen again. This urge is understandable and noble: thousands have lost virtually all their retirement savings with the demise of Enron stock. But making sure it never happens again may not be possible, because the sudden impoverishment of those Enron workers represents something even larger than it seems. It's the latest turn in the unwinding of one of the most audacious promise of the 20th century.
The promise was assured economic security-even comfort- for essentially everyone in the developed world. With the explosion of wealth, that began in the 19th century it became possible to think about a possibility no one had dared to dream before. The fear at the center of daily living since caveman days- lack of food warmth, shelter- would at last lose its power to terrify. That remarkable promise became reality in many ways. Governments created welfare systems for anyone in need and separate programmes for the elderly (Social Security in the U.S.). Labour unions promised not only better pay for workers but also pensions for retirees. Giant corporations came into being and offered the possibility- in some cases the promise- of lifetime employment plus guaranteed pensions.? The cumulative effect was a fundamental change in how millions of people approached life itself, a reversal of attitude that most rank as one of the largest in human history. For millennia the average person's stance toward providing for himself had been. Ultimately I'm on my own. Now it became, Ultimately I'll be taken care of.
The early hints that this promise might be broken on a large scale came in the 1980s. U.S. business had become uncompetitive globally and began restructuring massively, with huge Layoffs. The trend accelerated in the 1990s as the bastions of corporate welfare faced reality. IBM ended it's no-layoff policy. AT&T fired thousands, many of whom found such a thing simply incomprehensible, and a few of whom killed themselves. The other supposed guarantors of our economic security were also in decline. Labour-union membership and power fell to their lowest levels in decades. President Clinton signed a historic bill scaling back welfare. Americans realized that Social Security won't provide social security for any of us.
A less visible but equally significant trend a affected pensions. To make costs easier to control, companies moved away from defined benefit pension plans, which obligate them to pay out specified amounts years in the future, to defined contribution plans, which specify only how much goes into the play today. The most common type of defined-contribution plan is the 401(k). the significance of The 401(k) is that it puts most of the responsibility for a person's economic fate back on the employee. Within limits the employee must decide how much goes into the plan each year and how it gets invested --the two factors that will determine how much it's worth when the employee retires.
Which brings us back to Enron? Those billions of dollars in vaporized retirement savings went in employees' 401(k) accounts. That is, the employees chose how much money to put into those accounts and then chose how to invest it. Enron matched a certain proportion of each employee's 401(k) contribution with company stock, so everyone was going to end up with some Enron in his or her portfolio; but that could be regarded as a freebie, since nothing compels a company to match