题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
安装简答题APP，拍照搜题省时又省心！
更多“Stephen: I want to send this p…”相关的问题
A．Do you want it guaranteed
B．Do you want it insured
C．Do you want it preserved
D．Do you want it ensured
A．Do you want it guaranteed
B．Do you want it insured
C．Do you want it preserved
D．Do you want it ensured
听力原文： Some children are natural-born bosses. They have a strong need to make decisions, manage their environment, and lead rather than follow. Stephen Jackson, a Year One student, "operates under the theory of what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine," says his mother. "The other day I bought two new Star Wars light sabers. Later, I saw Stephen with the two new ones while his brother was using the beat-up ones."
"Examine the extended family, and you'll probably find a bossy grandparent, aunt, uncle or cousin in every generation. It's an inheritable trait," says Russell Barkley, a professor at the Medical University of South Carolina. Other children who may not be particularly bossy can gradually gain dominance when they sense their parents are weak, hesitant, or in disagreement with each other.
Whether its inborn nature or developed character at work, too much control in the hands at the young isn't healthy for children or the family, Fear is at the root of a lot of bossy behavior, says family psychologist John Taylor. "Children", he says in his book. From Defiance to Cooperation, "have secret feelings of weakness" and "a desire to feel safe." It's the parents' role to provide that protection.
When a "boss child" doesn't learn limits at home, the stage is set for a host of troubles outside the family. The overly willful and unbending child may have trouble obeying teachers or coaches, for example, or trouble keeping friends. It can be pretty lonely as the top dog if no one likes your bossy ways.
"I see more and more parents giving up their power," says Barkley, who bas studied bossy behavior. for more than 30 years. "They bend too far because they don't want to be as strict as their own parents were. But they also feel less confident about their parenting skills. Their kids, in turn, feel more anxious."
(33)
A．They make good decisions.
B．They lack care from others.
C．They have little sense of fear.
D．They show self-centeredness.
His feeling for both sides of the Atlantic came naturally. He was born on the Isle of Wight in 1869, and emigrated to Canada as a six-year-01d. On his retirement from McGill, influential English friends urged him to return to live in the land of his birth. He refused, saying, "I' d hate to be so far away from the United States. It's second nature, part of Our lives, to be near them. Every Sunday morning we read the New York funny papers. All week we hear about politics in Alabama and Louisiana, and whether they caught the bandits who stole the vault of the National Bank — well, you know American news. There's no other like it."
In the eight years of his retirement, Stephen produced the work he believed most likely to endure. It was far removed from the kind of wit which had made him famous. He described his history, Montreal: Seaport and City, as "the best job I've done." Unlike most historical works it bubbles with the author' s laughter. In his foreword, after thanking two former colleagues for checking the manuscript, he added that any errors which remained obviously must be theirs. "Acknowledging these debts," he concluded, "I also feel that I owe a good deal of this book to my own industry and effort."
Midway through World War II, I asked Stephen if he would write a foreword for a book I had written on the Canadian navy and its gallant role in convoy escort. He agreed. Some time later he handed me more than 20,000 words, in which he had told the whole fascinating background story of Canada's lifelong relationship to the sea. His research was staggering to a reporter who had simply described events and engagements to which he had been an eyewitness.
"I got interested in the subject," he explained. "If you don't like it, throw it away and I'll write something shorter."
Not a word was changed. To my joy, the book appeared under our joint by-lines. Soon after, throat cancer took Stephen from the thousands of Old McGillers who loved him.
Leacock loved human beings for their little vanities and pretensions — and laughed at his own. The fictional town of Mariposa of his famous "Sunshine Sketches" is obviously Orillia,
Ontario, where Leacock built a summer home and developed a farm, which, he said, "used to lose a few dollars a year, but by dint of hard work and modernization, I have contrived to' turn that into a loss of thousands." The citizens of Orillia had tittle difficulty in self-identification when the book reached town, but they soon realized that Leacock had ribbed his own idiosyncrasies more sharply than he had pinpointed theirs. Today's Orillians speak of him with the awe giyen to any community's adopted son, though it was he who adopted Mariposa-OriUia.
Stephen Leacock was so honestly simple that to many men he seemed to be a mass of complexities. To the world he remains the man of laughter. His greatest achievement, however, was that he taught thousands of young men and women to want to know. By example he proved one simple fact to all of us who attended his classes, certainly to that numerous crew who came to enjoy his friendship — that the right ofoutspoken dissent is the free man's most precious heritage. Such men do not often pass this way.
Why was Leacock dubbed as a "pro-American British imperialist"？______
A．Because he was a Briton who adored American politics.
B．Because he liked to read American newspapers.
C．Because he lectured on the importance of friendship between U.S. arid Britain.
D．Because he chose to live close to America.
His feeling for both sides of the Atlantic came naturally. He was born on the Isle of Wight in 1869, and emigrated to Canada as a six-year-old. On his retirement from McGill, influential English friends urged him to return to live in the land of his birth. He refused, saying, "I'd hate to be so far away from the United States. It's second nature, part of our lives, to Joe near them. Every Sunday morning we read the New York funny papers. All week we hear about politics in Alabama and Louisiana, and whether they caught the bandits who stole the vault of the National Bank--well, you know American news. There's no other like it."
In the eight years of his retirement; Stephen produced the work he believed most likely to endure. It was far removed from the kind of wit which had made him famous. He described his history, Montreal: Seaport and City, as "the best job I've done." Unlike most historical works it bubbles with the author's laughter. In his foreword, after thanking two former colleagues for checking the manuscript, he added that any errors which remained obviously must be theirs. "Acknowledging these debts," he concluded, "I also feel that I owe a good deal of this book to my own industry and effort."
Midway through World War II, I asked Stephen if he would write a foreword for a book I had written on the Canadian navy and its gallant role in convoy escort. He agreed. Some time later he handed me more than 20,000 words, in which he had told the whole fascinating background story of Canada's lifelong relationship to the sea. His research was staggering to a reporter who had simply described events and engagements to which he had been an eyewitness.
"I got interested in the subject," he explained. "If you don't like it, throw it away and I'll write something shorter,"
Not a word was changed. To my joy, the book appeared under our joint bylines. Soon after, throat cancer took Stephen from the thousands of Old McGillers who loved him.
Leacock loved human beings for their little vanities and pretensions—and laughed at his own. The fictional town of Mariposa of his famous "Sunshine Sketches" is obviously Orillia, Ontario, where Leacock built a summer home and developed a farm, which, he said, "used to lose a few dollars a year, but by dint of hard work and modernization, I have contrived to turn that into a loss of thousands." The citizens of Orillia had little difficulty in self identification when the book reached town, but they soon realized that Leacock had ribbed his own idiosyncrasies more sharply than he had pinpointed theirs. Today’s Orillians speak of him with the awe given to any community's adopted son, though it was he who adopted Mariposa-Orillia.
Stephen Leacock was so honestly simple that to many men he seemed to be a mass of complexities. To the world he remains the man of laughter. His greatest achievement, however, was that he taught thousands of young men and women who want to know. By example he proved one simple fact to all of us who attended his classes, certainly to that numerous crew who came to enjoy his friendship—that the right of outspoken dissent is the free man's most precious heritage. Such men do not often pass this way.
Why was Leacock dubbed as a "pro-American British imperialist"？
A．Because he was a Briton who adored American politics.
B．Because he liked to read American newspapers.
C．Because he lectured on the importance of friendship between U.S. and Britain.
D．Because he chose to live close to America.
His feeling for both sides of the Atlantic came naturally. He was born on the Isle of Wight in 1869, and emigrated to Canada as a six-year-old. On his retirement from McGill, influential English friends urged him to return to live in the land of his birth. He refused, saying, "I'd hate to be so far away from the United States. It's second nature, part of our lives, to be near them. Every Sunday morning we read the New York funny papers. All week we hear about politics in Alabama and Louisiana, and whether they caught the bandits who stole the vault of the National Bank —well, you know American news. There's no other like it."
In the eight years of his retirement, Stephen produced the work he believed most likely to endure. It was far removed from the kind of wit which had made him famous. He described his history, Montreal: Seaport and City, as "the best job I've done." Unlike most historical works it bubbles with the author's laughter. In his foreword, after thanking two former colleagues for checking the manuscript, he added that any errors which remained obviously must be theirs. "Acknowledging these debts," he concluded, "I also feel that I owe a good deal of this book to my own industry and effort."
Midway through World War Ⅱ, I asked Stephen if he would write a foreword for a book I had written on the Canadian navy and its gallant role in convoy escort. He agreed. Some time later he handed me more than 20,000 words, in which he had told the whole fascinating background story of Canada's lifelong relationship to the sea. His research was staggering to a reporter who had simply described events and engagements to which he had been an eyewitness.
"I got interested in the subject," he explained. "If you don't like it, throw it away and I'll write something shorter."
Not a word was changed. To my joy, the book appeared under our joint by-lines. Soon after, throat cancer took Stephen from the thousands of Old McGillers who loved him.
Leacock loved human beings for their little vanities and pretensions —and laughed at his own. The fictional town of Mariposa of his famous "Sunshine Sketches" is obviously Orillia, Ontario, where Leacock built a summer home and developed a farm, which, he said, "used to lose a few dollars a year, but by dint of hard work and modernization, I have contrived to turn that into a loss of thousands." The citizens of Oriilia had little difficulty in self-identification when the book reached town, but they soon realized that Leacock had ribbed his own idiosyncrasies more sharply than he had pinpointed theirs. Today% Orillians speak of him with the awe given to any community's adopted son, though it was he who adopted Mariposa-Orillia.
Stephen Leacock was so honestly simple that to many men he seemed to be a mass of complexities. To the world he remains the man of laughter. His greatest achievement, however, was that he taught thousands of young men and women who want to know. By example he proved one simple fact to all of us who attended his classes, certainly to that numerous crew who came to enjoy his friendship —that the right of outspoken dissent is the free man's most precious heritage. Such men do not often pass this way.
Why was Leacock dubbed as a "pro-American British imperialist"？
A．Because he was a Briton who adored American politics.
B．Because he liked to read American newspapers.
C．Because he lectured on the importance of friendship between U.S. and Britain.
D．Because he chose to live close to America.
I.Stephen does not need to account for the furniture purchase since it is for his personal use.
II.Stephen has imputed income because of the nature of the furniture purchase.
()
A、Only statement I is correct
B、Only statement II is correct
C、Both statements are correct
D、Neither statement is correct
To: Cathy_Douglas@yahoo.com
From: Stephen3725 @ hotmail. com
Date: 5 December 2009
Subject: Notification of My Resignation
Dear Ms. Douglas.
I am writing to inform. you of my intention to resign from G & S Holdings.
I have appreciated very much my four years' working for the company. The training has been excellent and I have gained valuable experience working within an efficient and professional team environment. In particular, I have appreciated your personal guidance during these first years of my career.
I feel now that it is time to further develop my knowledge and skills base in a different environment.
I would like to leave, if possible, in a month's time on Saturday, 2 January. This will allow me to complete my current workload. I hope that this suggested arrangement is acceptable to the company.
Once again, thank you for your support.
Yours Sincerely,
Stephen Feenney
What is the main idea of Stephen's e-mail？
A．Saying farewell to his colleagues in G&S Holdings
B．Conveying his gratitude to the manager
C．Asking his manager for a leave due to illness
D．Informing his manager of the resignation
Meyer hands me a recent issue of Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews with an article by Carl Woese, an eminent microbiologist at the University of Illinois. In it, Woese decries the failure of reductionist biology—the tendency to look at systems as merely the stun of their parts—to keep up with the developments of molecular biology. Meyer says the conclusion of Woese's argument is that the Darwinian emperor has no clothes.
It's a page out of the antievolution playbook: using evolutionary biology's own literature against it, selectively quoting from the likes of Stephen Jay Gould to illustrate natural selection's downfalls. The institute marshals journal articles discussing evolution to provide policymakers with evidence of the raging controversy surrounding the issue.
Woese scoffs at Meyer's claim when I call to ask him about the paper. "To say that my criticism of Darwinists says that evolutionists have no clothes," Woese says, "is like saying that Einstein is criticizing Newton, therefore Newtonian physics is wrong." Debates about evolution's mechanisms, he continues, don't amount to challenges to the theory. And intelligent design "is not science. It makes no predictions and doesn't offer any explanation whatsoever, except for God did it."
Of course Meyer happily acknowledges that Woese is an ardent evolutionist. The institute doesn't need to impress Woese or his peers; it can simply co-ocpt the vocabulary of science— "academic freedom," "scientific objectivity," "teach the controversy"—and redirect it to a public trying to reconcile what appear to be two contradictory scientific views. By appealing to a sense of fairness, ID finds a place at the political table, and by merely entering the debate it can claim victory. "We don't need to win every argument to be a success," Meyer says. "We're trying to validate a discussion that's been long suppressed."
This is precisely what happened in Ohio. "I'm not a PhD in biology," says board member Michael Cochran. "But when I have X number of PhD experts telling me this, and X number telling me the opposite, the answer is probably somewhere between the two."
An exasperated Krauss claims that a truly representative debate would have had 10,000 pro-evolution scientists against two Discovery executives. "What these people want is for there to be a debate," says Krauss. "People in the audience say, Hey, these people sound reasonable. They argue, 'People have different opinions, we should present those opinions in school.' That is nonsense. Some people have opinions that the Holocaust never happened, but we don't teach that in history."
Eventually, the Ohio board approved a standard mandation that students learn to "describe how scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory." Proclaiming victory, Johnson barnstormed Ohio churches soon after notifying congregations of a new, ID-friendly standard. In response, anxious board members added a clause stating that the standard "does not mandate the teaching or testing of intelligent design." Both sides claimed victory. A press release from IDNet trumpeted the mere inclusion of the phrase intelligent design, saying that "the implication of the statement is that the 'teaching of testing of intelligent design' is permitted." Some pro-evolution scientists, meanwhile, say there's nothing wrong with teaching students how to scrutinize theory. "I don't have a problem with that," says Patricia Princehouse, a professor at Case Western Reserve and an outspoken oppnen
A．the evidence for their theories is peer-reviewed
B．they were born in the age of steam engine
C．their theories are already out of date
D．they can not catch up with the information tecbnology
"I was very happy at school and had wonderful teaching. I passed the university entrance examination and was ready to go to university but with WWI I went into banking. I was paid 1 pound a week. Manchester University kept my place open for three years but I was enjoying the money and freedom. So I turned it down."
Mrs. Stephen is now in the second year of her Open University course and is finding it hard work. She underestimates her ability. "I'm feeling tired more frequently..I can't do more than an hour' s work at a time. The memory' s shocking. I' m supposed to be revising and I look up notes ! did earlier this year and think, ' Have you mad this before？' so I' m doing it very slowly—one credit a year, so it' 11 take six years."
"At the moment the greatest reward is simply the increase in knowledge'--and the discipline. I had an essay failed this week. The professor said I hadn't answered the question. I've been thinking about all week. I know I haven' t got the facility for essay construction. I just let myself to get excited. I feel more emotionally than I do mentally. I'm very ordinary really."
While claiming to be ordinary and lazy, Mrs. Stephen is still working hard daily at her assignments. Mrs. Stephen sees her studies as keeping her fit and independent. "Because of my life I' ve been self-sufficient. It' s not a very nice characteristic. It means I don' t care enough about people. I cannot say I find comfort in what I'm learning, so I'U be interested to see if there's a life ahead."
When Florence said "I' m more of a creature to polish my mind than polish my furniture", she meant that______.
A．she was tired of learning
B．she was thirsty for knowledge
C．she was more suitable for doing housework
D．she did not have enough time to keep the house clean
为了保护您的账号安全，请在“简答题”公众号进行验证，点击“官网服务”-“账号验证”后输入验证码“”完成验证，验证成功后方可继续查看答案！
微信搜一搜
简答题
微信搜一搜
简答题
如搜索结果不匹配，请 
