问题 单项选择题

手太阳经分布在()。

A.上肢内侧前缘

B.上肢外侧前缘

C.上肢内侧后缘

D.上肢外侧中线

E.上肢外侧后缘

答案

参考答案:E

阅读理解与欣赏

阅读《圆明园失梦》,回答下面问题。

圆明园失梦

作者:边芹

  ①儿子忽然提出要去圆明园。很多年没去了,最后一次去是十年前。

  ②当时废墟已被围了起来,建起了门脸儿,正式收费了。不知为什么,八十年代中期之后,北京很多机构都修起了大而无当、毫无美感、千篇一律的门脸儿,好像大就是美。圆明园也修了个门脸儿,自然是为了收费。但一下子把个与众不同的园子,完全改变了。记得那次去,不愿意去走那个修得堂而皇之的“公园大门”,为了不破坏大学时留下的印象,决定走园后穿林子的小路。林子依旧,小路依旧,正是夏季,荷塘青草,蜻蜓蜉蝣;薄暮后,只闻鸟声,不见人迹,凄美依旧。然而再往前走,走进被圈起来的圆明园,情景就不同了。静谧的福海,已变成了游湖,各种游船在上面穿梭往来。如果单单只是双桨小舟倒也不失其美,但为了赚钱,连小摩托艇也是马达声声。我们离开城市的喧嚣,是来寻找这新的热闹吗?

  ③圆明园的美在于它的野、荒、残;圆明园的意义在于它记载着我们的历史,我们的耻辱。你可以修一百个游乐城,但圆明园只有一个!

  ④这次带儿子去,我还是选择了那条林间小路。但一路走过去,已是满目疮痍。最触目惊心的是垃圾,到处是垃圾!荷塘已是荒草凄凄,水面漂浮着塑料袋、包装纸。有的地方垃圾堆成了小山,阵阵腐臭。“美”已无踪可寻。门票八元一张,但进入“园”内,一切均另要收费。高音喇叭在招揽游客去玩儿童赛车。到处建起了临时房子以售货。几处小废墟,大概是没有收益,倒真是荒废着,衰草丛生,雨水淤积。在如此庄严的废墟旁,出租古装照相,实在是很滑稽。我想,要不了多久,还会有更多的饭馆、商店如雨后春笋般涌现,沉默的废墟将在一片叫卖声中失去它的美,它的意义。

  ⑤为什么要修复圆明园?修复了,历史那沉痛的一页就能翻过吗?我们民族的耻辱就可以忘记吗?把历史留给历史吧。庞贝城能去修复吗?希腊人是否也应该把雅典的巴特农神殿修复?新可能是美,大可能是美,热闹可能是美,但旧、残、凄清不也是一种美吗?

  ⑥把圆明园“开发”成这样具有“商业价值”,这跟出卖文物去赚钱有什么两样?

  ⑦几日后,我回南京省亲。每日在家陪父母。母亲问我要不要出去玩。我想到城市里整天是喧嚣,到处是灰尘,便说只想到一处有树有水的清静所在走走。我母亲说现在这种地方很难寻。我问雨花台怎么样?小时候每年清明节都去的。母亲说,现在也围起来要六元一张门票了。

  ⑧我不想再来一次“圆明园失梦”了。我问母亲附近有什么地方可以走走。她说有一个很小的郑和公园。于是在一个欲雨不雨、闷热的下午,我们去了。

  ⑨这原是个以郑和纪念馆为主,有小桥、流水、假山的旧式花园。但不幸的是,它也被改造得向商业娱乐园发展。原来的一片松林被砍掉,铺了一大片白煞煞的水泥平台,说是辟成了舞场。

  ⑩再往里走,郑和的故居(现为展览馆)却是一片残败。大概是从无人来参观,里面灯都懒得打开,冷清异常。大概此屋已成为看管人的半个家。可一转进后花园,嘈杂喧闹扑面而来。原来,回廊上支起了十几张麻将桌。我们正在失去我们的梦。

1.请根据第2、第4自然段的内容,概括圆明园发生了什么变化?

 __________________________________________________

2.作者对把圆明园开发成这样持怎样的看法?对此你有何想法?

 __________________________________________________

3.文章最后一句“我们正在失去我们的梦”中的“梦”指的是什么?这句话的含义是什么?

 __________________________________________________

4. 文章的标题是“圆明园失梦”,除了写圆明园外,还写了雨花台和郑和公园,这样写是不是显得有点多余?为什么?

 __________________________________________________

单项选择题

An issue that many corporate executives ignore is the possibility that aggressive people seek reinforcement for their own destructive acts. Television violence, for instance, and the widespread public concern accompanying it have led to calls for strict controls on the depiction of violent programs.

In their decision making, some producers do not take responsibility for the equally important minority. Instead, they may gear their content toward the masses, who crave sexually explicit and violent action. Fortunately, this group has the ability to disseminate violent action rationally, realizing that in reality, people who commit acts of violence have to compensate for their actions by taking full responsibility for the harm they cause to others.

Not everyone can distinguish fact from fantasy. Studies show that in one week of content analysis of prime-time output on seven New York City channels, there were 3, 421 acts and threats of violence observed. Children’s fictional entertainment programs had three times the frequency of violent acts or threats recorded in adult programs.

Similarly, aggressive adults are seeking reinforcement for their own anti-social behavior from seeing attractive television characters behave in the same way. Behavioral evidence has indicated that the anti-social effects of violent television portrayals are pest and are most likely to occur among individuals who are already aggressive. The ethical question is, should television submit to mass appeal or take into consideration the effects on certain members of society, including children The consequences of televising violence are not only harmful to some viewers but concurrently affect the television stations in the form of loss of viewers and possibly gaining a bad reputation. Even though many associations have been condemning television violence, their efforts have had little effect on the large money-making corporations.

In his article, " Sex and Violence " , Joe Saltzman states, " If, as producers argue, violence is a part of the human condition, then so is responsibility. In real life, you just do not commit mayhem and then go on to the next scene. "

It is also necessary to realize that violence is part of our nature and of our life. Almost every day we are participants and observers of violence, whether it is natural violence, theatrical or fictional violence, sporting event violence, or political violence. To exclude all scenes of violence form television would be to falsify the picture of life. Television media can " encourage or aid " destructive behavior, not " cause " it. We hope that the decision makers will promote p moral, ethical values in their decision making or at least consider them, in order to help prevent our violent self-destructive behavior.

By saying " seek reinforcement for their own destructive acts " (Paragraph 1), the author means " () " .

A. find excuses to justify their violent behaviors

B. ask others to help with their aggressive actions

C. boost their confidence so as to commit more violence

D.compete with each other in committing violence