问题 填空题

16比19少(    ),27比21多(    ),26比(    )少4,29比(    )多8。

答案

3;6;30;21

单项选择题

1986年的诺贝尔经济学奖得主布坎南教授可以说是学术界的一位奇人。他以经济学的工具分析政治现象,一手开创了一门新的研究领域,大大地扩充了经济学的视野。他的为人处世也很特立独行,在报纸杂志上以老妪能解的笔调撰文载道,花很多时间和同事进行切磋琢磨。这和一般成名的经济学家离世索居,在象牙塔里经营学问大不相同。
布坎南曾在夏威夷大学做过一系列的专题演讲,其中有一次,他用一个亲身经验来阐释人类经济活动的本质:和大多数美国人一样,布坎南喜欢看美式足球,对每年一月的季后赛更是不能错过。可是,虽然每场比赛正式的时间只有六十分钟,一旦加上犯规、换场、中场休息、伤停、教练叫停等等,一场下来总要耗掉三个半小时到四个小时。他觉得在电视机前花这么长的时间很浪费,有点罪恶感。可是球赛实在好看,弃之不忍。最后他想出了一个有点阿Q的做法:他把后院里拾来的两大桶核桃搬到客厅里。一边看电视,一边敲核桃(大概也顺便吃几个)。看完一场比赛,他也弄完一小堆的核桃仁。
事实上,布坎南一边看、一边敲、一边还问自己:为什么长时间坐在电视机前会让他有罪恶感为什么西方资本主义社会强调工作而排斥休闲只要不干扰别人,游手好闲有什么不好诺贝尔奖得主毕竟不同凡响。经过一番“推敲”、“咀嚼”,布坎南悟出了一个道理:社会赞许工作,是因为工作不只是对个人有好处,对其他的人也好。我种菜,你养猪,然后我们经由交易,可以互蒙其利而皆大欢喜。这样要比你我自己既要养猪、又要种菜来得好。专业化的生产对自己、对别人、对大家,都好。相反地,如果一个人饱食终日、无所事事,那么他自己的得失之外,别人也享受不到他从事生产带来的“交易价值”。因此,布坎南觉得西方社会对“生产”、“工作”赋予了道德上正面的价值,直接间接地促进了资本主义的发展和社会的进步。
有人在溪边看到小鱼在水里力争上游而体会出一些生命的意义;布坎南看美式足球而悟出了人类经济活动的本质。有为者亦若是,下次我帮儿子喂奶换尿布时也不要再嘀咕抱怨,我可要好好地动动我的脑筋才是!
(节选自熊秉元《寻找心中的那把尺》,西南财经大学出版社,1997)

文中“推敲”、“咀嚼”二词加引号的作用是______。

A.强调比喻

B.说明道理

C.解释含义

D.引用例证

阅读理解

阅读理解。

     Does knowledge of a writer's private life help to explain his works? It's an age-old question, but it's

also one in which interest is aroused (激起) again by Antonia Fraser's book about her life with Harold

Pinter, Must You Go?. The book is obviously a personal account rather than a study of the plays. All the

same, I'd argue it throws a good deal of light on Pinter the dramatist (剧作家).

     I start from the belief that all information about a writer is helpful. In fact, one of the pleasures of

writing Pinter's biography was discovering that nearly all his plays were started by some strong personal

memory. This got me into trouble with some scholars. I remember Martin Esslin, a great Pinter scholar,

arguing that I had reduced the value of Pinter's Betrayal by linking it to the dramatist's seven-year-long

love affair with Joan Bake well. But, as I saw it, that was simply the play's origin. All I had done, I hoped, was to remind people that Pinter was a writer who would make use of his own life experience.

     That point can also be seen from Antonia's book. There's an interesting account of a dinner with Tom

Stoppard where Pinter says that he doesn't plan his characters' lives and then asks his fellow dramatist:

"Don't you find they take you over sometimes?", to which Stoppard firmly replies: "No." That says a lot.

One reason why The Homecoming is a great play is that Pinter allows his characters, almost unconsciously, to take over. Despite Stoppard's many strengths, he tends to keep his characters under a much tighter

control.

     Again, there's an eye-opening passage in Antonia's book where she recalls a moment in 1983 when

 Pinter refers back to his relationship with his former wife, Vivien: "While she was alive, if you think about

it, so much of my work was about unhappy frozen married relationships."

     In short-as Stoppard once wrote-information, in itself, about anything, is light. And modern biography, particularly in the hands of masters, has been helpful to literature by opening writers' lives to public eyes.

For that reason, among many others, I welcome Antonia Fraser's book.

1. What is TRUE about Antonia Fraser's book?

A. It is well received by the public.            

B. It carries Antonia's views about biography.

C. It is helpful to the study of Pinter's works.  

D. It includes serious studies of Pinter's works.

2.What do the author of this article and Martin Esslin disagree on?

A. The literary value of Pinter's Betrayal.

B. The literary value of the accounts of Pinter's life.

C. The truthfulness of the contents of Antonia's book.

D. The truthfulness of Pinter's love affair with Joan Bakewell.

3.What can we infer about Pinter and Stoppard?

A. They treat their characters in different ways.

B. Stoppard has more strengths than Pinter.

C. They often have dinners together.          

D. They often argue with each other.

4. This article is probably ______.

A .a feature story      

B. a book review      

C. a news report    

D. a biography