I woke up one morning last week to read a story about an athlete who had seemed to have
everything.
US track star Marion Jones owned a trophy (奖杯) case filled with medals. She had worldwide
fame. She held the high honor of being the first female track and field athlete to win five medals at an
Olympics- the 2000 Sydney Games.
But last Friday, the 31-year-old track star tearfully confessed that she had lied to fans, sports
official and US federal agents about taking steroids.
The five Olympic medals in her trophy case? Gone. Meaningless. The worldwide fame? Exchanged
for infamy. The honor of being the first female track and field athlete to win five medals at an
Olympics? Forgotten, wiped off the record books.
"It is with a great amount of shame that I stand before you and tell you that I have betrayed your
trust." Jones confessed.
She"d posed for pictures with fans. She"d attended parties and talked about her accomplishments.
But for years she"d slept - or tried to sleep - knowing that much of what she had done was built on a lie.
Now, finally, she"d decided to tell the truth.
"If she had trusted her own natural gifts and allied them to self-sacrifice and hard work, I sincerely
believe that she could have been an honest champion at the Sydney Games." IAAF President Lamine
Diack said over the weekend. "Instead, Mario Jones will be remembered as one of the biggest frauds
in sporting history."
Sadly, she won"t be the last. There are still others lurking(潜伏) behind their trophies. They too
appear to have everything. They"re superstars, the envy of every young person who has played a
sport. But for how long? And at what cost? Every time they look at their trophies and medals they
remember that the awards really belong to someone else.
( ) 1. A. think ( ) 2. A. money ( ) 3. A. unhappy ( ) 4. A. exchanged ( ) 5. A. proving ( ) 6. A. replied ( ) 7. A. simple ( ) 8. A. special ( ) 9. A. Therefore ( )10. A. meeting with ( )11. A. nature ( )12. A. relief ( )13. A. relatives ( )14. A. Besides ( )15. A. strong ( )16. A. told ( )17. A. raise ( )18. A. friends ( )19. A. visit ( )20. A. richer | B. produce B. advice B. unhelpful B. solved B. recording B. learned B. weak B. lively B. However B. dealing with B. plan B. secret B. classmates B. And B. strange B. gave B. protect B. teachers B. support B. harder | C. explain C. love C. unknown C. found C. analyzing C. chatted C. lazy C. brilliant C. Indeed C. talking with C. wish C. pity C. parents C. However C. different C. added C. shape C. travelers C. wisdom C. rougher | D. explore D. agreement D. unpopular D. shared D. guessing D. listened D. blind D. humorous D. Anyhow D. fighting with D. major D. fault D. families D. For D. unique D. saved D. enjoy D. leaders D. knowledge D. clearer |
阅读理解。 | |||
I was wondering when it would happen. As everyone who lives in London and other cities around Britain will know, urban foxes are now commonplace. I recently saw one in the middle of the day, wandering along a street in Pimlico. Twenty years ago, that sight would have stopped the traffic. Now, it is barely worth a remark. Foxes are large animals, as big as many dogs. Of course, as in the terrifying incident at Homerton, one would attack a baby sooner or later. Actually, this has already happened. In 2002, at Dartford in Kent, a fox bit a 14-week-old boy in the living room of the family home while his mother was sleeping. The last government preferred to ignore the incident; it was, after all trying to ban foxhunting at the time. It could see that some folk love urban foxes, perhaps having the same affection for wildlife as the people I have seen in London parks feeding rats along with squirrels and ducks. The foxites even include animal scientists, who would seem to have persuaded Bristol City Council (whose advisory Living with Urban Foxes has been adopted by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health) that foxes never attack humans. But then they also deny that country foxes target lambs, when every hill farmer I know would tell them differently. A lamb is much the same size as a baby. It is no more difficult to get into a house than into a hen cage. According to Living with Urban Foxes, “the fox population is stable”, and has not significantly increased. Is this true? When I first lived in London in the late 1970s, urban foxes had an almost mythical status. They were like yetis. You never saw one; you weren’t sure they really existed. Now, they are part of the scene. I wouldn’t be surprised to find one. Friends in the suburbs are plagued(困扰)with them. A study in Bristol showed that an astonishing 8 percent of pets caged in gardens are killed by foxes each year. Surely, if foxes are now harming babies, it is time for something to be done about them, yet this is not as straightforward as it might seem. While country residents refer to foxes as harmful animals, that is not how they are officially classified; this means that local authorities do not have a statutory obligation(法定的义务)to control them. It would be an easy thing for this government to change the legislation. | |||
1.What is the author’s purpose in writing the passage? | |||
A. To urge the government to control urban foxes. B. To show how to provide food for urban foxes. C. To protect urban foxes from traffic accidents. D. To prove urban foxes are not dangerous as expected. | |||
2.The underlined word “foxites” in Paragraph 3 probably refers to those who ______. | |||
A. hate urban foxes B. love urban foxes C. support foxhunting D. oppose foxhunting | |||
3.What is the author’s attitude toward Living with Urban Foxes? | |||
A. Support. B. Praise. C. Disbelief. D. Tolerance. | |||
4.What kind of people is the author worried about most? | |||
A. Farmers. B. Students. C. Drivers. D. Babies. |