2（）

A.But
B.So
C.Though
D.While

正确

错误

Some of the concerns surrounding Turkey’s application to join the European Union, to be (1) on by the EU’s Council of Ministers on December 17th, are economic--in particular, the country’s relative poverty. Its GDP per head is less than a third of the average for the 15 pre-2004 members of the EU. (2) it is not far off that of Latvia--one of the ten new members which (3) on May 1st 2004, and it is much the same as (4) of two countries, Bulgaria and Romania, which this week concluded (5) talks with the EU that could make them full members on January 1st 2007.

(6) , the country’s recent economic progress has been, according to Donald Johnston, the secretary-general of the OECD, stunning. GDP in the second quarter of the year was 13.4% higher than a year earlier, a (7) of growth that no EU country comes close to (8) . Turkey’s (9) rate has just fallen into single figures for the first time since 1972, and this week the country (10) agreement with the IMF on a new three-year, $10 billion economic program that will help Turkey (11) inflation toward European levels, and enhance the economy’s resilience.

Resilience has not historically been the country’s economic strong point. (12) , throughout the 1990s growth oscillated like an electrocardiogram (13) a violent heart attack. This (14) has been one of the main reasons why the country has failed dismally to attract much-needed foreign direct investment. Its stock of such investment is lower now than it was in the 1980s, and annual (15) have scarcely ever reached $1 billion.

One deterrent to foreign investors is due to (16) on January 1st 2005. On that day, Turkey will take away the right of virtually every one of its citizens to call themselves a millionaire. Six zeros will be removed from the face value of the lira (里拉，土耳其货币单位); one unit of the local (17) will henceforth be worth what 1 million are now--ie, about ￡ 0.53 (0.53 欧元). Goods will have to be (18) in both the new and old lira for the whole of the year, (19) foreign bankers and (20) can begin to look forward to a time in Turkey when they will no longer have to juggle mentally with indeterminate strings of zeros.

Real policemen hardly recognize any resemblance between their lives and what they see on TV.

The first difference is that a policeman’s real life revolves found criminal law. He has to know exactly what actions are crimes and what evidence can be used to prove them in court. He has to know nearly as much law as a professional lawyer, and what is more, he has to apply it on his feet, in the dark and-rain, running down a street after someone he wants to talk to.

Little of his time is spent in chatting, he will spend most of his working life typing millions of words on thousands of forms about hundreds of sad, unimportant people who are guilty of stupid, petty crimes.

Most television crime drama is about finding the criminal: as soon as he’s arrested, the story is over. In real life, finding criminals is seldom much of a problem. Except in very serious cases like murders and terrorist attacks little effort is spent on searching.

Having made an arrest, a detective really starts to work. He has to prove his case in court and to do that he often has to gather a lot of difference evidence.

The third big difference between the drama detective and the real one is the unpleasant pressures, first, as members of a police force they always have to behave absolutely in accordance with the law~ secondly, as expensive public servants they have to get results. They can hardly ever do both. Most of the time some of them have to break the rules in small ways.

If the detective has to deceive the world, the world often deceives him. Hardly anyone he meets tells him the truth. And this separation the detective feels between himself and the rest of the world is deepened by the simple-mindedness--as he sees it--of citizens, social workers, doctors, law-makers, and judges, who, instead of eliminating crime punish the criminals less severely in the hope that this will make them reform. The result, detectives feel, is that nine-tenths of their work is recatching people who should have stayed behind bars. This makes them rather cynical.

Mourning the death of one of its own is perhaps the entertainment industry’s most time-honored traditions. After an agonizing and prolonged decline, the long-suffering Vertically Integrated Media Conglomerate passed away.

It’s an idea that was born when Time Inc. merged with Warner Communications Corp. in 1989, to form Time Warner. It endured as the industry’s prevailing business model for nearly a generation, spawning such clones and mongrel breeds as Viacom, News Corp and GE’s NBC Universal. The vertically integrated media conglomerate was—or was supposed to be—many amazing things, giving a handful of companies unprecedented power over the media—and the chance to earn outsized profits in the process. But its defining characteristic was its sheer size, earning it a fitting nickname. Big Media.

But the theory behind the strategy relied on more than size. Housed under one roof, a single Big Media entity would control the means of producing and distributing media content, from magazine and books to television shows and movies, from cartoons and theme parks to sports franchises and the cable networks that carry the games to recorded music labels and music publishers. In Time Warner’s prototype of the model, it would control everything from the first letter of a Time magazine story or Warner Books novel to the last alphabet of the credits at the end of a Warner Brothers flick or HBO series based on the magazine story or the book division’s fiction. For a time, Time Warner boasted a wide array of media assets.

No more. On April 29, in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes officially announced the death of Big Media. Having sliced off Warner Music Group a few years ago and Time Warner Cable this year, Bewkes notified the SEC that he intended to soon spin off AOL—its greatest expansionary effort to achieve media greatness, a move that proved lethal. And now, even the corporate namesake, the magazine company Time Inc., has a funereal atmosphere about it.

The entertainment industry is only the latest in which the idea of vertical integration failed to live up to its promise. Consider the experiences of the auto industry. Henry Ford was a huge believer in the concept. His River Rouge plant, which once built the Model A, had its own electricity plant and its own mill for turning iron ore into steel; the vast majority of the components that went into its cars were made onsite. Over time, however, this soup-to-nuts strategy came to be seen as inefficient, companies could obtain better prices and more flexibility by dealing with a competing band of outside suppliers. Over time, once vertically-integrated companies like Ford and General Motors have spun off their internal supply division to form standalone companies, in an attempt to try to create the flexible, leaner supply chains created by Honda and Toyota.

So what was Big Media’s legacy It’s bad form, of course, to speak ill of the departed, but the model has left mostly a negative mark on the media landscape and corporate America.

When Rupert Murdoch sees beams of light in the American advertising market, it is not necessarily time to reach for the sunglasses. Last October, when the impact of September 11th was only beginning to tell, the boss of NASCAR, a media group, had already identified " strong rays of sunshine". With ad sales still languishing, Mr. Murdoch declared last month that " there are some hints of a modest upswing in tile US advertising market". His early optimism turned out to be misplaced. Now, however, other industry observers are beginning to agree with him.

Advertising usually exaggerates the economic cycle, falling sharply and early in a downturn, and rebounding strongly once the economy has begun to recover. This is because most managers prefer to trim their ad budgets rather than their payrolls, and restore such spending only once they feel sure that things are looking up. Last year, America’s ad market shrank by 9. 8% , according to CMIR, a research firm. Although ad spending has not yet recovered across all media, some analysts now expect overall ad spending to start to grow in the third quarter.

The signs of improvement are patchy, however. Ad spending on radio and television seems to be inching up—advertising on American National Radio was up 2% in January on the same period last year, according to Aegis—while spending on magazines and newspapers is still weak. Even within any one market, there are huge differences; just pick up a copy of one of the now-slimline high-teeh magazines that once bulged with ads, and compare it with the hefty celebrity or women’s titles. Advertisers in some categories, such as the travel industry, are still reluctant to buy space or airtime, while others, such as the car and movie businesses, have been bolder. The winter Olympics, held last month in Salt Lake City, has also distorted the spending on broadcast advertising in the first quarter.

Nonetheless, there is an underlying pattern. One measure is the booking of ad spots for national brands on local television. By early March, according to Mr. Westerfield’s analysis, such bookings were growing fast across eight out of the top ten advertising sectors, led by the financial and motor industries. UBS Warburg now expects the " upfront" market, which starts in May when advertisers book advance ad spots on the TV networks for the new season in September, to be up 4% on last year. On some estimates, even online advertising could pick up by the end of the year.

The study of ecology is important for everyone who cares about our world. Air, water, and land -- we would not live without any of these. But what do we mean by land It is the earth beneath our feet, wherever we are. It is mountains and plains. It is wide fields for growing com and wheat. Or it may be an airfield or a parking lot or a highway or a whole city -- land covered with cement, asphalt, and buildings. Land is the solid part of the Earth.

Land is the soil plants grow in. That is the most important things about the land -- it is the place where green plants grow. Without green plants there would be not life on Earth. Green leaves make oxygen. All of us -- ants, elephants, people, every living creature -- must have oxygen to stay alive. We breathe in oxygen and our bodies use it. Carbon dioxide is formed in the process and we breathe it out. Leaves use carbon dioxide along with water to make food for plants. Then they give off oxygen.

This process has been going on for millions of years. It is part of the pattern of our natural life on Earth. This pattern had changed very little for millions of years before people arrived on Earth. People found ways to improve their lives by changing nature, by trying to make nature fit in with their way of life. Warm houses in winter, electric lights at night, factories to produce our food, our clothes, our gadgets(零用品) -- all this people have accomplished. And we learned to grow more food on the land than nature could grow without our help.

All this is good -- up to a point. But it has gone too far. We have produced too much and we have failed to see what this was doing to our world. We have not understood the ways in which all living things on Earth depend on one another. We ourselves have increased until the sheer numbers of people on Earth have upset the balance of nature.

正确

错误

Some of the concerns surrounding Turkey’s application to join the European Union, to be (1) on by the EU’s Council of Ministers on December 17th, are economic--in particular, the country’s relative poverty. Its GDP per head is less than a third of the average for the 15 pre-2004 members of the EU. (2) it is not far off that of Latvia--one of the ten new members which (3) on May 1st 2004, and it is much the same as (4) of two countries, Bulgaria and Romania, which this week concluded (5) talks with the EU that could make them full members on January 1st 2007.

(6) , the country’s recent economic progress has been, according to Donald Johnston, the secretary-general of the OECD, stunning. GDP in the second quarter of the year was 13.4% higher than a year earlier, a (7) of growth that no EU country comes close to (8) . Turkey’s (9) rate has just fallen into single figures for the first time since 1972, and this week the country (10) agreement with the IMF on a new three-year, $10 billion economic program that will help Turkey (11) inflation toward European levels, and enhance the economy’s resilience.

Resilience has not historically been the country’s economic strong point. (12) , throughout the 1990s growth oscillated like an electrocardiogram (13) a violent heart attack. This (14) has been one of the main reasons why the country has failed dismally to attract much-needed foreign direct investment. Its stock of such investment is lower now than it was in the 1980s, and annual (15) have scarcely ever reached $1 billion.

One deterrent to foreign investors is due to (16) on January 1st 2005. On that day, Turkey will take away the right of virtually every one of its citizens to call themselves a millionaire. Six zeros will be removed from the face value of the lira (里拉，土耳其货币单位); one unit of the local (17) will henceforth be worth what 1 million are now--ie, about ￡ 0.53 (0.53 欧元). Goods will have to be (18) in both the new and old lira for the whole of the year, (19) foreign bankers and (20) can begin to look forward to a time in Turkey when they will no longer have to juggle mentally with indeterminate strings of zeros.

Real policemen hardly recognize any resemblance between their lives and what they see on TV.

The first difference is that a policeman’s real life revolves found criminal law. He has to know exactly what actions are crimes and what evidence can be used to prove them in court. He has to know nearly as much law as a professional lawyer, and what is more, he has to apply it on his feet, in the dark and-rain, running down a street after someone he wants to talk to.

Little of his time is spent in chatting, he will spend most of his working life typing millions of words on thousands of forms about hundreds of sad, unimportant people who are guilty of stupid, petty crimes.

Most television crime drama is about finding the criminal: as soon as he’s arrested, the story is over. In real life, finding criminals is seldom much of a problem. Except in very serious cases like murders and terrorist attacks little effort is spent on searching.

Having made an arrest, a detective really starts to work. He has to prove his case in court and to do that he often has to gather a lot of difference evidence.

The third big difference between the drama detective and the real one is the unpleasant pressures, first, as members of a police force they always have to behave absolutely in accordance with the law~ secondly, as expensive public servants they have to get results. They can hardly ever do both. Most of the time some of them have to break the rules in small ways.

If the detective has to deceive the world, the world often deceives him. Hardly anyone he meets tells him the truth. And this separation the detective feels between himself and the rest of the world is deepened by the simple-mindedness--as he sees it--of citizens, social workers, doctors, law-makers, and judges, who, instead of eliminating crime punish the criminals less severely in the hope that this will make them reform. The result, detectives feel, is that nine-tenths of their work is recatching people who should have stayed behind bars. This makes them rather cynical.

Mourning the death of one of its own is perhaps the entertainment industry’s most time-honored traditions. After an agonizing and prolonged decline, the long-suffering Vertically Integrated Media Conglomerate passed away.

It’s an idea that was born when Time Inc. merged with Warner Communications Corp. in 1989, to form Time Warner. It endured as the industry’s prevailing business model for nearly a generation, spawning such clones and mongrel breeds as Viacom, News Corp and GE’s NBC Universal. The vertically integrated media conglomerate was—or was supposed to be—many amazing things, giving a handful of companies unprecedented power over the media—and the chance to earn outsized profits in the process. But its defining characteristic was its sheer size, earning it a fitting nickname. Big Media.

But the theory behind the strategy relied on more than size. Housed under one roof, a single Big Media entity would control the means of producing and distributing media content, from magazine and books to television shows and movies, from cartoons and theme parks to sports franchises and the cable networks that carry the games to recorded music labels and music publishers. In Time Warner’s prototype of the model, it would control everything from the first letter of a Time magazine story or Warner Books novel to the last alphabet of the credits at the end of a Warner Brothers flick or HBO series based on the magazine story or the book division’s fiction. For a time, Time Warner boasted a wide array of media assets.

No more. On April 29, in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes officially announced the death of Big Media. Having sliced off Warner Music Group a few years ago and Time Warner Cable this year, Bewkes notified the SEC that he intended to soon spin off AOL—its greatest expansionary effort to achieve media greatness, a move that proved lethal. And now, even the corporate namesake, the magazine company Time Inc., has a funereal atmosphere about it.

The entertainment industry is only the latest in which the idea of vertical integration failed to live up to its promise. Consider the experiences of the auto industry. Henry Ford was a huge believer in the concept. His River Rouge plant, which once built the Model A, had its own electricity plant and its own mill for turning iron ore into steel; the vast majority of the components that went into its cars were made onsite. Over time, however, this soup-to-nuts strategy came to be seen as inefficient, companies could obtain better prices and more flexibility by dealing with a competing band of outside suppliers. Over time, once vertically-integrated companies like Ford and General Motors have spun off their internal supply division to form standalone companies, in an attempt to try to create the flexible, leaner supply chains created by Honda and Toyota.

So what was Big Media’s legacy It’s bad form, of course, to speak ill of the departed, but the model has left mostly a negative mark on the media landscape and corporate America.

When Rupert Murdoch sees beams of light in the American advertising market, it is not necessarily time to reach for the sunglasses. Last October, when the impact of September 11th was only beginning to tell, the boss of NASCAR, a media group, had already identified " strong rays of sunshine". With ad sales still languishing, Mr. Murdoch declared last month that " there are some hints of a modest upswing in tile US advertising market". His early optimism turned out to be misplaced. Now, however, other industry observers are beginning to agree with him.

Advertising usually exaggerates the economic cycle, falling sharply and early in a downturn, and rebounding strongly once the economy has begun to recover. This is because most managers prefer to trim their ad budgets rather than their payrolls, and restore such spending only once they feel sure that things are looking up. Last year, America’s ad market shrank by 9. 8% , according to CMIR, a research firm. Although ad spending has not yet recovered across all media, some analysts now expect overall ad spending to start to grow in the third quarter.

The signs of improvement are patchy, however. Ad spending on radio and television seems to be inching up—advertising on American National Radio was up 2% in January on the same period last year, according to Aegis—while spending on magazines and newspapers is still weak. Even within any one market, there are huge differences; just pick up a copy of one of the now-slimline high-teeh magazines that once bulged with ads, and compare it with the hefty celebrity or women’s titles. Advertisers in some categories, such as the travel industry, are still reluctant to buy space or airtime, while others, such as the car and movie businesses, have been bolder. The winter Olympics, held last month in Salt Lake City, has also distorted the spending on broadcast advertising in the first quarter.

Nonetheless, there is an underlying pattern. One measure is the booking of ad spots for national brands on local television. By early March, according to Mr. Westerfield’s analysis, such bookings were growing fast across eight out of the top ten advertising sectors, led by the financial and motor industries. UBS Warburg now expects the " upfront" market, which starts in May when advertisers book advance ad spots on the TV networks for the new season in September, to be up 4% on last year. On some estimates, even online advertising could pick up by the end of the year.

The study of ecology is important for everyone who cares about our world. Air, water, and land -- we would not live without any of these. But what do we mean by land It is the earth beneath our feet, wherever we are. It is mountains and plains. It is wide fields for growing com and wheat. Or it may be an airfield or a parking lot or a highway or a whole city -- land covered with cement, asphalt, and buildings. Land is the solid part of the Earth.

Land is the soil plants grow in. That is the most important things about the land -- it is the place where green plants grow. Without green plants there would be not life on Earth. Green leaves make oxygen. All of us -- ants, elephants, people, every living creature -- must have oxygen to stay alive. We breathe in oxygen and our bodies use it. Carbon dioxide is formed in the process and we breathe it out. Leaves use carbon dioxide along with water to make food for plants. Then they give off oxygen.

This process has been going on for millions of years. It is part of the pattern of our natural life on Earth. This pattern had changed very little for millions of years before people arrived on Earth. People found ways to improve their lives by changing nature, by trying to make nature fit in with their way of life. Warm houses in winter, electric lights at night, factories to produce our food, our clothes, our gadgets(零用品) -- all this people have accomplished. And we learned to grow more food on the land than nature could grow without our help.

All this is good -- up to a point. But it has gone too far. We have produced too much and we have failed to see what this was doing to our world. We have not understood the ways in which all living things on Earth depend on one another. We ourselves have increased until the sheer numbers of people on Earth have upset the balance of nature.