题目内容
2 Agricultural production in most poor countries accounts for up to 50% of GDP, compared to only 3% in rich countries. But most farmers in poor countries grow just enough for themselves and their families. Those who try exporting to the West find their goods whacked with huge tariffs or competing against cheaper subsidized goods. In 1999 the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development concluded that for each dollar developing countries receive in aid they lose up to ＄14 just because of trade barriers imposed on the export of their manufactured goods. It's not as if the developing world wants any favours, says Gerald Ssendawula, Uganda's Minister of Finance. "What we want is for the rich countries to let us compete."
3 Agriculture is one of the few areas in which the Third World can compete. Land and labour are cheap, and as farming methods develop, new technologies should improve output. This is no pie-in-the-sky speculation. The biggest success in Kenya's economy over the past decade has been the boom in exports of cut flowers and vegetables to Europe. But that may all change in 2008. when Kenya will be slightly too rich to qualify for the "least-developed country" status that allows African producers to avoid paying stiff European import duties on selected agricultural products. With trade barriers in place, the horticulture industry in Kenya will shrivel as quickly as a discarded rose. And while agriculture exports remain the great hope for poor countries, reducing trade barriers in other sectors also works: America's African Growth and Opportunity Act, which cuts duties on exports of everything from handicrafts to shoes, has proved a boon to Africa's manufacturers. The lesson: the Third World can prosper if the rich world gives it a fair go.
4 This is what makes Bush's decision to increase farm subsidies last month all the more depressing. Poor countries have long suspected that the rich world urges trade liberalization only so it can wangle its way into new markets. Such suspicions caused the Seattle trade talks to break down three years ago. But last November members of the World Trade Organization, meeting in Doha, Qatar, finally agreed to a new round of talks designed to open up global trade in agriculture and textiles. Rich countries assured poor countries, that their concerns were finally being addressed. Bush's handout last month makes a lie of America's commitment to those talks and his personal devotion to free trade.
By comparison, farmers ______ receive more government subsidies than others.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
According to the third paragraph, which might be one of the consequences of working longer
听力原文： The European Union has drafted a list of US products to be hit with import taxes in retaliation for tariffs the US has imposed on European steel. EU member governments will review the list before the EU submits it to the World Trade Organization which arbitrates international trade disputes. EU officials will not say which American products will be hit by the EU sanctions. But diplomats monitoring the most recent trans Atlantic trade dispute say they include textiles and steel products. Earlier this month, the Bush administration imposed tariffs of about 30% on some steel imports including European products. The EU has appealed to the WTO to get those duties verturned. But the WTO decision on the matter will take up to a year or more. EU officials say that under WTO rules, the EU has the right to impose retaliatory measures in June, but they say the US can avoid the EU's possible counter-measures if it pays more than 2 billion dollars in compensation to the EU for imposing the steel tariffs in the first place. The officials say Washington could also escape retaliation by lowering US import duties on other EU products. The Bush administration says it will not pay compensation.
The trade dispute between the European Union and the US was caused by ______.
1 The fox really exasperated them both. As soon as they had let the fowls out, in the early summer mornings, they had to take their guns and keep guard; and then again as soon as evening began to mellow, they must go once more. And he was so sly. He slid along in the deep grass; he was difficult as a serpent to see. And he seemed to circumvent the girls deliberately. Once or twice March had caught sight of the white tip of his brush, or the ruddy shadow of him in the deep grass, and she had let fire at him. But he made no account of this.
2 The trees on the wood-edge were a darkish, brownish green in the full light—for it was the end of August. Beyond, the naked, copper-like shafts and limbs of the pine trees shone in the air. Nearer the rough grass, with its long, brownish stalks all agleam, was full of light. The fowls were round about--the ducks were still swimming on the pond under the pine trees. March looked at it all, saw it all, and did not see it. She heard Banford speaking to the fowls in the distance--and she did not hear. What was she thinking about？ Heaven knows. Her consciousness was, as it were, held back.
3 She lowered her eyes, and suddenly saw the fox. He was looking up at her. His chin was pressed down, and his eyes were looking up. They met her eyes. And he knew her. She was spellbound--she knew he knew her. So he looked into her eyes, and her soul failed her. He knew her, he was not daunted.
4 She struggled, confusedly she came to herself, and saw him making off, with slow leaps over some fallen boughs, slow, impudent jumps. Then he glanced over his shoulder, and ran smoothly away. She saw his brush held smooth like a feather, she saw his white buttocks twinkle. And he was gone, softly, soft as the wind.
5 She put her gun to her shoulder, but even then pursed her mouth, knowing it was nonsense to pretend to fire. So she began to walk slowly after him, in the direction he had gone, slowly, pertinaciously. She expected to find him. In her heart she was determined to find him. What she would do when she saw him again she did not consider. But she was determined to find him. So she walked abstractedly about on the edge of the wood, with wide, vivid dark eyes, and a faint flush in her cheeks. She did not think. In strange mindlessness she walked hither and thither...
6 As soon as supper was over, she rose again to go out, without saying why.
7 She took her gun again and went to look for the fox. For he had lifted his eyes upon her, and his knowing look seemed to have entered her brain. She did not so much think of him. she was possessed by him. She saw his dark, shrewd, unabashed eye looking into her, knowing her. She felt him invisibly master her spirit. She knew the way he lowered his chin as he looked up, she knew his muzzle, the golden brown, and the greyish white. And again she saw him glance over his shoulder at her, half inviting, half contemptuous and cunning. So she went, with her great startled eyes glowing, her gun under her arm, along the wood edge. Meanwhile the night fell, and a great moon rose above the pine trees.
At the beginning of the story, the fox seems to be all EXCEPT ______.
SECTION B INTERVIEW
Directions: In this section you will hear everything ONCE ONLY. Listen carefully and then answer the questions that follow. Questions 1 to 5 are based on an interview. At the end of the interview you will be given 10 seconds to answer each of the following five questions.
Now listen to the interview.
听力原文： Language is used for doing things. People use it in everyday conversation for transacting business, planning meals and vacations, debating politics and gossiping. Teachers use it for instructing students, and comedians use it for amusing audiences. All these are instances of language use, that is, activities in which people do things with language.
As we can see, language use is really a form. of joint actions. What is a joint action？ I think it is an action that is carried out by a group of people doing things in coordination with each other. A simple example: think of two people waltzing, or playing a piano duet. When two dancers waltz, they each move around the ballroom in a special way. But waltzing is different from the sum of their individual actions. Can you imagine these two dancers doing the same steps but in separate rooms or at separate times. So Waltzing is, in fact, the joint action that merges as the two dancers do their individual steps in coordination as a couple. Similarly, doing things with language is also different form. the sum of a speaker's speaking and a listener's listening. It is the joint action that merges when speakers and listeners, or writers and readers, perform. their individual actions in coordination, as ensembles.
Therefore, we can say that language use incorporates both individual and social processes. Speakers and listeners, writers and readers, must carry out actions as individuals if they are to succeed in their use of language. But they must also work together as participants in a social unit I have called ensembles. In the example I mentioned just now, the two dancers perform. both individual actions, moving their bodies, arms and legs and joint actions coordinating these movements as they create the Waltz. In the past, language use has been studied as if it were entirely an individual process, and it has also been studied as if it were entirely a social process. For me, I suggest that it belongs to both. We cannot hope to understand language use without viewing it as a joint action built on individual actions.
In order to explain how all these actions work, I'd like to review briefly settings of language use. By settings, I mean scene in which the language use takes place, plus the medium which refers to whether language used is spoken or written. And in this talk, I'll focus on spoken settings. The spoken setting mentioned most often is conversation, either face to face, or on the telephone. Conversations may be devoted to gossip, business transactions or scientific matters, but they are all characterized by the free exchange of turns among the two or more participants. I'll call these personal settings. Then we have what I would call non-personal settings. A typical example is the monologue. In monologues, one person speaks with little or no opportunity for interruption or turns by the members of the audience. Monologues come in many varieties too, as when a professor lectures to a class or a student gives a presentation in a seminar. These people speak for themselves, uttering words they formulate themselves for the audience before them and the audience isn't expected to interrupt. In another kind of setting which is called institutional settings, the participants engage in speech exchanges that look like ordinary conversation, but they are limited by institutional rules. As examples, we can think of a government official holding a news conference, a lawyer cross-questioning a witness in court, or a professor directing a seminar discussion. In these settings, what i
微信支付 
支付宝支付