“割下来的手就不再是人手”这句话体现了___

唯物辩证法认为发展的实质是___

区分新事物和旧事物的标志在于看它们___

质量互变规律揭示了___

质和事物的存在是___

在实际工作中，要注意掌握分寸，防止“过”或“不及”，其关键在于___

区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___

量变的复杂性是指___

量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___

量变中的局部性部分质变是___

揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___

“肯定和否定相互渗透，在一定意义上，肯定就是否定。”这是一种___

事物的否定方面是指___

作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___

辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___

否定之否定规律___

事物发展的周期性体现了___

直线论的错误在于只看到___

循环论的错误在于___

对立统一规律揭示了___

唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___

辩证法所说的矛盾是指___

矛盾的基本属性是___

依据是___

矛盾问题的精髓是___

题的方法都是___

“任何个别（无论怎样）都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___

在唯物辩证法看来，水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___

“是就是是，不是就是不是，除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___

真象和假象的区别在于___

有的哲学家说，在大风扬起的尘土中，每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___

“或然率”是指___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

Tom is a book lover. ______ likes reading very much. A. He B. She C. You D. It

—May I listen to the music here, Mr. White? —Sorry, you’d better it like that． A. not to do B. not do to C. dont do D. not do

3.—Did you have a good time at Lauras birthday party? — Yes, indeed. Its several years ________ I enjoyed myself so much. A. when B. before C. since D. that

4. —___________ is the Summer Palace from here? About three kilometers away. You can take the No. 35 bus. A. How long B. How far C. How often D. How much

5. I was looking for a birthday gift for my mother, but I couldnt find ______ suitable. A. anything B. something C. nothing D. everything

6. A friend of my ____ and I are going to visit_______ next week． A. father; Browns B. father's; Browns C. father; the Browns D. father's; the Browns

7. She ______ very hard since she came to our school. A. studies B. has studied C. is studying D. studied

8. — Who will send you to the new school, your mom or your dad? — _______. Ill go there by myself. A. Both B. Either C. Neither D. None

9.—Well do what we can ____English well this term． —It’s high time for you to work hard． A. study　 B．to study　 C. be studied　　 D. be studying

10. —I’m going to Flower Bookstore. Could you tell me ______? — Sorry, I don’t know. I’m new here. A. where it is B. where was it C. where is it D. where it was

11. How do you like the dishes, Eric? — Fantastic! Nothing tastes ________. A. nice B. better C. terrible D. worse

12. ______ Lin Feng has to work late, she always wears a smile on her face. A. Because B. If C. Until D. Though

13.You can save money _______ you buy cheaper things. A. before B. unless C. if D. until

14. We will have a _________ holiday after the exam． A. two-month B. two month’s C. two month D. two-months

15. —We will build an underground in Xuzhou before 2015． — Wow, _______! Will it pass our place? A. what an excited news B. how excited the news is C. what exciting news D. how exciting

16. — Emily, here’s a dictionary．I hope it will help you in some way． — Thank you．It’s ________ what I need． A. almost B. still C. only D. just

17. —Oh．I’m hungry．Mum, can I have the hamburger on the plate? —No．It tastes ． A. terribly B. terrible C. good D. well

18. —We can invite our teachers to the farewell party next Saturday. —Yes, ______? I’ll call them at once. A. what for B. what C. why not D. why

19.You can ________ ask the old man to move away to any other place because he has lived ________ here for at least sixty years． A. hardly; alone B. hard; alone C. hardly; lonely D. hardly; lonely

20.—I’m going back to see my grandparents this weekend． —________． A. It’s very nice of you B. You’d better hurry C. Say goodbye to them D. Give my best wishes to them

21.—Why not take ____ umbrella with the sign “Made in China”? It is useful. —What _______ good advice it is! 　　 A. an; a B. a; a C. an; \ D. \; a

22. —Do you know the boy________ is sitting next to Peter? — Yes. He is Peter’s friend. They are celebrating his ________ birthday. A. who; ninth B. that; ninth C. /; ninth D. which; ninth

23. It was dark, ______ I couldnt see what was happening. A. or B. though C. but D. so

24.—You can use MSN to talk with Vivien on the Internet. —I know. But can you tell me ________? A. what I can use it B. when I can use it C. why can I use it D. how can I use it

25. _______ are you going to the School Uniform Exhibition, Amy ? To learn about different styles of school uniform. A. What B. Where C. Which D. Why

( ) 26. Where does the writer of "The little Prince" come from? A．England． B．France． C．America． D．China．

( ) 27. What does the prince do after the fox tells him a secret? A．He cares more about a flower and a sheep． B．He meets many more strange adults on other planets． C．He realizes his love for the rose and he goes back to his planet． 　 D．He discovers interesting things such as a snake, other roses and a fox

( ) 28. What does "The little Prince" mainly talk about? It' s about _________． A．the adult world B．the planet B -612 C．a rose and a fox D．the adventure of a young prince

( ) 29. What is the writer's main purpose（目的）in writing this passage？ 　　 A．To tell the readers his life story． 　　 B．To tell people what kind of person his father was． 　　 C．To tell the readers what present he got from his father． 　　 D． To let people know how poor he was．

( ) 30. Why did the father not ask his son not to do this and do that？ 　　 A．Because he felt quite confident of his son． 　　 B．Because he was born from a poor family． 　　 C．Because he was a man of few words． 　　 D．Because he didn't want to be much too strict with his son．

( ) 31. What would someone learn from this passage？ 　　 A．How to live by oneself． B．How to stand on one's own feet． 　　 C．What a good father should do． D．What the self-important is like．

( ) 32. What may be the proper Chinese for the underlined part in the passage？ 　　 A．闲暇时光 B．学费 C．精神空虚 D．经济不足

( ) 33. Why did Natalie Smith pay for the six cars behind her? A. She had seven tickets. B. She hoped to please others. C. She knew the car drivers well. D. She wanted to show kindness.

( ) 34. Judy Foreman copied down the phrase because she ___ . A. thought it was beautifully written B. wanted to know what it really meant C. decided to write it on a warehouse wall D. wanted her husband to put it up in the classroom

( ) 35. Who came up with the phrase according to the passage? A. Judy Foreman. B. Natalie Smith. C. Anne Herbert D. Alice Johnson.

( ) 36. What can we infer from the last paragraph? A. People should practice random kindness to those in need. B. People who receive kindness are likely to offer it to others. C. People should practice random kindness to strangers they meet. D. People who receive kindness are likely to pay it back to the giver.

( ) 37.The greatest river for navigation is ___________. A. the Nile B. the Amazon C. the Mekong D. the Mississippi

( ) 38. From a dam, people can use the water for ___________. A. keeping the rivers clean B. only making electricity C. irrigation and making electricity D. washing clothes

( ) 39. The water in the river is polluted because of _____________. A. people's drinking water too much B. people's swimming in the river too much C. chemicals and other materials D. people's building a dam across a river

( ) 40. The best title of the passage is ___________. A. Rivers in Cities B. The importance of Rivers C. Transportation D. Natural Resources