组卷题库 > 高中英语试卷库

湖南省永州市2018届高三下学期英语第三次模拟考试试题

作者UID:7189882
日期: 2024-10-04
高考模拟
完形填空
阅读理解
阅读理解

    As the weather costs you a loss on trains and flights, we look at your rights.

Cancelled trains

    On a single ticket, a passenger will usually receive 25% of the fare if the train is delayed by 15 minutes. If the delay reaches 30 minutes, the compensation(补偿金)rises to 50%, and if it's over an hour you should be able to reclaim the whole cost. Clear arrangements vary according to train operators(运营商).

    If you were due to travel, to say Aberdeen from London, your train is cancelled and you decide not to travel, you can get a full compensation. If you had a non-cancelable ticket with one operator, and failed to make that train because the connecting train was delayed, you can take the next available train.

Flights

    If your flight is cancelled because of the snow you have the right to s full compensation of the ticket, or to be rerouted home on a later flight.

    But you will have no right to get a delay or cancellation compensation under EU rules, because the snow is an extraordinary circumstance beyond the airline's control. If you don't take the compensation and choose to be rerouted, and it means you are stuck at the airport overnight, it's the airline's duty to pay for a reasonably priced hotel room and meals.

    The airline has to reroute you at the earliest opportunity, or at the passenger's free time, you are supposed to take the availability of seats.

    If you choose to be rerouted or if your departure is delayed by more than two hours, airlines also have to provide assistance such as food. The airlines keep this quiet and getting the money out of the low-cost operators can be a hard job. Keep evidence of cancellations, all receipts, and use your mobile to video any offer to pay by airline staff.

阅读理解

    A few weeks ago, I called an Uber to take me to the Boston airport for a flight home for the holidays. As I slid into the back seat of the car, the warm intonations(语调)of the driver's accent washed over me in a familiar way.

    I learned that he was a recent West African immigrant with a few young children, working hard to provide for his family. I could relate: I am the daughter of two Ethiopian immigrants who made their share of sacrifices to ensure my success. I told him I was on a college break and headed home to visit my parents. That's how he found out I go to Harvard. An approving eye glinted(闪烁)at me in the rearview window, and quickly, we crossed the boundaries of rider and driver. I became his daughter, all grown up – the product of his sacrifice.

And then came the fateful question: "What do you study?" I answered "history and literature" and the pride in his voice faded, as I knew it might. I didn't even get to add "and African-American studies" before he cut in, his voice thick with disappointment. "All that work to get into Harvard, and you study history?"

    Here I was, his daughter,squanderingthe biggest opportunity of her life. He went on to deliver the age-old lecture that all immigrant kids know. We are to become doctors (or lawyers, if our parents are being generous) – to make money and send money back home. The unspoken demand, made across generations, which my Uber driver laid out plainly, is simple: Fulfill your role in the narrative(故事)of upward mobility so your children can do the same.

I used to feel anxious and backed into a corner by the questioning, but now as a junior in college, I'm grateful for their support more than anything. This holiday season, I've promised myself I won't get annoyed at their inquiries. I won't defensively respond with "but I plan to go to law school!" when I get unrequested advice. I'll just smile and nod, and enjoy the warmth of the occasion.

阅读理解

    As self-driving cars come closer to being common on American roads, much of the rhetoric(说辞)promoting them has to do with safety. About 40,000 people die on U.S. roads every year, and driver errors are linked to more than 90 percent of crashes. But many of the biggest advocates of autonomous(自动的)vehicles aren't car companies looking to improve the safety of their existing products. Huge support for itself-driving technologies is coming from Silicon Valley giants like Google and Apple.

    Those of us who have studied the relationship between technology and society tend to look more carefully at the motivations behind any technologically push. In this case, it's clear that in addition to addressing safety concerns, Silicon Valley firms have a strong incentive(动机)to create a new venue for increasing the use of their digital devices. Every minute people spend on their mobile phones provides data—and often money—to tech companies.

    At present, digital devices and driving are in conflict: There are serious, often fatal, consequences when drivers use smartphones to talk or to text. Regulators and safety advocates look to resolve dial conflict by banning phone use while driving – as has happened in almost every state. But the tech companies are taking a different approach. The obvious answer for Silicon Valley is creating an automobile in which continuous cellphone use no longer poses a threat to anyone.

    In recent years, the amount of time adults spend on their mobile devices has grown rapidly. At the moment, it's around four hours a day for the average adult in the U.S. However, that rapid growth is likely to slow down as people run out of time that's available for them up to use their devices. Unless, of course, there'sa new block of timethat suddenly opens up. The average American now spends about 48 minutes in a car every day, a sizeable opportunity for increased cellphone use.

    Sop as the public conversation around autonomous cars highlights the safety advantages, don't forget the tech industry's powerful desire for more profits, which goes well beyond simply saving us from ourselves.

阅读理解

    The organic food has gained a lot of [popularity as they are being considered as healthier and tastier.  A fair number of people advocate a large-scale shift to organic farming from conventional agriculture. But this might not seem well-founded.

    Since the mid-19th century, conventional industrial agriculture has become incredibly efficient on a simple land to food basis. Conventional farming gets more and more crop per square foot of land, which can mean less wilderness needs to be transformed to farmland.

    To make farming more efficient, conventional agriculture uses a significant amount of synthetic fertilizer(合成肥料)each year, and all that nitrogen(氮)enables much faster plant growth. However, the cost is paid in vast polluted dead zones at the months of many of the world's rivers, because much of the nitrogen ends up running off the soil and into the oceans. This also makes conventional farming one of the major threats to the environment.

To weaken the environmental impact of agriculture, improve soil quality as well as produce healthier foods, some farmers have turned to organic farming. Environmentalists have also welcomed organic food as better for the planet than the food produced by agricultural corporations. Organic practices — refusing artificial fertilizers and chemical pesticides –are considered far more sustainable. Sales of organic food rose 7.7% in 2010, up to $26.7 billion—and people are making those purchases for their moral senses as much as their tongues.

    Yet a new meta-analysis in Nature does the math and comes to a hard conclusion: organic farming produces 25% fewer crops on average than conventional agriculture.

    In the Nature analysis, scientists performed an analysis of 66 studies comparing conventional and organic methods across 34 different crop species, from fruits to grains. They found that organic farming delivered a lower output for every crop type, though the difference varied widely. For crops like fruit trees, organic trailed(落后于)conventional agriculture by just 5%. Yet for major grain crops and vegetables – all of which provide the world's main calories – conventional agriculture outperformed organics by more than 25%.

    What that means is that while organic farming may be more sustainable than conventional agriculture, there are trade-offs(此消彼长)with each. So an ideal global agriculture system may borrow the best from both systems rather than upholding merely organic or conventional practices.

任务型阅读
任务型阅读

    People Are People

    Globalization has brought different cultures together in a way unimaginable one hundred years ago. Today, Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Africans, Anglos, and Hispanics may all work in the same offices, attend the same schools or live in the same neighborhoods And our society has lately emphasized(强调)the importance of diversity.

    Take the following old proverbs for example.  

    “Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.” Thomas Jefferson, American President

    “One falsehood spoils a thousand truths.” African proverb

    “Be honest to those who are honest, and be also to those who are not honest.” Lao Tzu, Chinese philosopher

    “A sacrifice is written off by a lie and the merit of devotion by an act of cheat.” Hindu saying

     These seems to be a sort of cultural unity.

    We don't wish to imply all cultures are the same. Cultural diversity is real, and people from different cultures view many situations in different ways. However, historically, different cultures seem to share many common values. They are justice, courage, patience, generosity, equality, mercy and kindness, respect for the elders, and many more. Lying and stealing appear to be wrong no matter where you go. Perhaps some cultures make room for extenuating(情有可原)circumstances more than others; perhaps cultures apply these virtues in different ways; and when values disagree, different cultures may place different levels of importance on them But both cultures may still value both.

    To us, it seems as if there is some sort of code of right and wrong that everyone everywhere seems to understand, regardless of culture. It is almost as if, behind all of the diversity, one finds a common understanding – a human culture, if you will – that goes beyond racial, social, and political boundaries.

A. All people seem to agree that we should tell the truth.

B. As cultures meet with each other, many differences stand out.

C. Each value supports many more sayings from different cultures.

D. We want to show, however, that there is more to these cultures than diversity.

E. These sayings from four separate cultures all support the same value – honesty.

F. It is almost as if, despite all our differences, we are all still the same – we are just people.

G. In other words, one culture may lean more toward justice and another culture more toward mercy.

短文改错
语法填空
书面表达
试卷列表
教育网站链接