问答题Practice 2 位于浦东陆家嘴金融贸易区的中华第一高楼——金茂大厦，是新世纪上海的标志性建筑。金茂大厦拥有一流的设计，既蕴含了中国传统文化，又有哥特式建筑的影响，合二为一的现代建筑令人叹为观止。大厦内拥有国际一流的智能办公区、全球最高的超豪华五星级酒店——金茂君悦酒店、高档购物中心及功能齐全的会展中心。金茂大厦地理位置优越且交通便捷，紧邻越江隧道出入口。金茂大厦88层观光厅，面积为1520平方米，高度340. 1米，是目前国内最高最大的观光厅，可以观赏到无与伦比的上海全景。登高远眺，大上海的景观尽收眼底，浦江两岸高楼林立，黄浦江上百舸争流，美不胜收。
问答题
Practice 2 位于浦东陆家嘴金融贸易区的中华第一高楼——金茂大厦，是新世纪上海的标志性建筑。金茂大厦拥有一流的设计，既蕴含了中国传统文化，又有哥特式建筑的影响，合二为一的现代建筑令人叹为观止。大厦内拥有国际一流的智能办公区、全球最高的超豪华五星级酒店——金茂君悦酒店、高档购物中心及功能齐全的会展中心。金茂大厦地理位置优越且交通便捷，紧邻越江隧道出入口。金茂大厦88层观光厅，面积为1520平方米，高度340. 1米，是目前国内最高最大的观光厅，可以观赏到无与伦比的上海全景。登高远眺，大上海的景观尽收眼底，浦江两岸高楼林立，黄浦江上百舸争流，美不胜收。
参考解析
解析：
暂无解析
相关考题：
问答题Practice 1 The three sacred words “duty”, “honor” and “country” reverently dictate what you should be, what you can be, and what you will be. They urge you to build courage when courage seems to fail, to regain faith when there seems to be little cause for faith, to create hope when hope becomes abandoned. I am convinced that these words teach you to be proud and unbending in honest failure, but humble and gentle in success; not to substitute words for action; not to seek the path of comfort, but to face the stress of difficulty and challenge; to learn to stand up in the storm, but to have com- passion on those who fall; to have a heart that is clean, a goal that is high; to learn to laugh, yet never forget how to weep, to reach into the future, yet never neglect the past; to be serious, yet never take yourself too seriously; to be modest so that you will remember the simplicity of true greatness, the open mind of true wisdom, the meekness of true strength. In short, these words teach you to be both a militant fighter and a gentleman. (Douglas MacArthur: Farewell Speech to West Point)
问答题Passage 8 Some people might want a “double tall skinny hazelnut decaf latte”, but Howard Schultz is not one of them. The chairman and “chief global strategist” of the Starbucks coffee chain prefers a Sumatra roast with no milk, no sugar and poured from a French press—the kind of pure coffee, in fact, favoured by those coffee snobs who sneer at Starbucks, not just for its bewildering variety of choice and flavours (55,000 different drinks, by the company’s count), but for its very ubiquity—over 10,500 locations around the world, increasing at a rate of five a day, and often within sight of each other. Starbucks knows it cannot ignore its critics. Anti-globaiisation protesters have occasionally trashed its coffee shops; posh neighbourhoods in San Francisco and London have resisted the opening of new branches; and the company is a favourite target of internet critics, on sites like www.ihatestarbucks.com. Mr. Schultz is watchful, but relaxed: “We have to be extremely mindful and sensitive of the public’s view of things... Thus far, we’ve done a pretty good job.” Certainly, as reviled icons of American capitalism go, Starbucks is distinctly second division compared with big leaguers like, say, McDonald’s. The reason, argues Mr. Schultz, is that the company has retained a “passion” for coffee and a “sense of humanity”. Starbucks buys expensive beans and pays its growers—be they in Guatemala or Ethiopia—an average of 23% above the market price. A similar benevolence applies to company employees. Where other corporations seek to unload the burden of employee benefits, Starbucks gives all American employees working at least 20 hours a week a package that includes stock options (“Bean Stock”) and comprehensive health insurance. For Mr. Schultz, raised in a Brooklyn public-housing project, this health insurance—which now costs Starbucks more each year than coffee—is a moral obligation. At the age of seven, he came home to find his father, a lorry-driver, in a plaster cast, having slipped and broken an ankle. No insurance, no compensation and now no job. Hence what amounts to a personal crusade. Most of America’s corporate chiefs steer clear of the sensitive topic of health-care reform. Not Mr. Schultz. He makes speeches, lobbies politicians and has even hosted a commercial-free hour of television, arguing for reform of a system that he thinks is simultaneously socially unjust and a burden on corporate America. Meanwhile the company pays its workers’ premiums, even as each year they rise by double-digit percentages. The goal has always been “to build the sort of company that my father was never able to work for.” By this he means a company that “remains small even as it gets big”, treating its workers as individuals. Starbucks is not alone in its emphasis on “social responsibility”, but the other firms Mr. Schultz cites off the top of his head—Timberland, Patagonia, Whole Foods—are much smaller than Starbucks, which has 100,000 employees and 35m customers. Indeed, size has been an issue from the beginning. Starbucks was created in 1971 in Seattle’s Pike Place Market by three hippie-ish coffee enthusiasts. Mr. Schultz joined the company only in1982. Inspired by a visit to Milan in 1983, he had envisaged a chain of coffee bars where customers would chat over their espressos and cappuccinos. Following his dream, Mr. Schultz set up a company he called “Il Giornale”, which grew to a modest three coffee bars. Then, somehow scraping together $ 3.8m (“I didn’t have a dime to my name”), he bought Starbucks from its founders in 1987. Reality long ago surpassed the dream. Since Starbucks went public in 1992, its stock has soared by some 6,400%. The company is now in 37 different countries. No doubt the coffee snobs will blanch at the prospect. Yet they miss three points. The first is that, thanks to Starbucks, today’s Americans are no longer condemned to drink the insipid, over- percolated brew that their parents endured. The second, less recognised, is that because Starbucks has created a mass taste for good coffee, small, family-owned coffee houses have also prospered (and no one has ever accused Starbucks, with its $ 4 lattes, of undercutting the competition). The most important point, however, is that Mr. Schultz’s Starbucks cultivates a relationship with its Customers. Its stores sell carefully selected CD-compilations, such as Ray Charles’s “Genius Loves Company”. Later this year the company will promote a new film, “Akeelah and the Bee”, and will take a share of the profits. There are plans to promote books: Customers can even pay with their Starbucks “Duetto” Visa card. Short of some health scare that would bracket coffee with nicotine, there is no obvious reason why Starbucks should trip up, however ambitious its plans and however misconceived the occasional project. Mr. Schultz says: “I think we have the licence from our customers to do more.” The key is that each Starbucks coffee house should remain “a third place”, between home and work, fulfilling the same role as those Italian coffee houses that so inspired him 23 years ago. 1. What does the author mean by “Starbucks is distinctly second division compared with big leaguers like, say, McDonald’s”? According to Mr. Shultz, what is the reason for that? 2. What is Mr. Schultz’s “personal crusade”? What made him so devoted to it? 3. What does Mr. Shultz mean by “I think we have the license from our customers to do more”? (Para.10). Give some examples.
问答题Practice 1 Our feverish planet badly needs a cure. It was probably always too much to believe that human beings would be responsible stewards of the planet. Yet make a mess we have. If droughts and wildfires, floods and crop failures, collapsing climate-sensitive species and the images of drowning polar bears didn’t quiet most of the remaining global-warming doubters, the hurricane-driven destruction of New Orleans did. This past year was the hottest on record in the US. The deceptively normal average temperature this winter masked record-breaking highs in December and record-breaking lows in February. That’s the sign not of a planet keeping an even strain but of one thrashing through the alternating chills and night sweats of a serious illness. A crisis of this magnitude clearly calls for action that is both bottom-up and top-down. Though there is some debate about how much difference individuals can make, there is little question that the most powerful players— government and industry—have to take the lead. Still, individuals too can move the carbon needle. Cleaning up the wreckage left by our 250-year industrial bacchanal will require fundamental changes in a society hooked on its fossil fuels. Beneath the grass-roots action, larger tectonic plates are shifting. Science is attacking the problem more aggressively than ever. So is industry. So are architects and lawmakers and urban planners. The world is awakened to the problem in a way it never has been before.
单选题This report ______.Awas commissioned by the governmentBagrees new ways of workingCaims to find out how much the universities in the UK have been affected by the economy crisisDrepresents universities aiming to get more government funds on education
问答题Passage 1 Britain is still home to some of the world’s best scientists—but when it comes to giving them the money to turn their ideas into world-beating companies we are third-rate. True? “That’s gulf,” is the impatient response of Anne Glover, a leading venture capitalist. She believes this is the best time since the short-lived dot corn bubble for anyone looking to get their idea funded: “It’s never been better, except during the boom for a short nine-month period.” Not from the perspective of Noah Freedman, who has tried to get venture capital firms interested in Ionscope, a firm using world-leading science from Imperial College and Cambridge University. “I don’t think the situation has improved in the UK over the last decade,” he says. But Anne Glover, whose venture capital firm Amadeus Capital has backed businesses such as lastminute, corn, Cambridge Silicon Radio and Plastic Logic, points to the figures. Last year ￡lbn of venture capital money was invested in young firms in the UK—that’s more than a third of all the money invested across Europe. “We get beaten up all the time,” says Ms Glover, “but which other sector has as big a share of the European market?” And just as in other industries there are fashions in venture capital. What’s hot right now? Mobile technology, semi-conductors, and consumer internet firms, according to Amadeus—rather similar to what was getting funded during the last booming 2000. That ended with a bust which sawn many start-ups disappear and “was followed by several years in which venture capitalists seemed to have gone into hiding. But Anne Glover says they’ve come through the experience stronger. “The ones who have survived the boom and bust are experienced and well-funded and have similar global aspirations to the best entrepreneurs.” But Noah Freedman, an entrepreneur who was previously involved in Brainspark, an incubator for technology start-ups, says there is still a funding gap. Ionscope, which makes very high resolution microscopes, was not able to raise venture capital until it had sold its first products. “The bottom line is that in the UK, it may be easy to get venture capital money to fund growth of an established concept or business, but it is exceptionally difficult to get seed and start-up money for real innovation.” Anne Glover says the real problem is a lack of ambition, from both investors and entrepreneurs. “We maybe spread our money too thinly rather than concentrate on the best ideas. When we’ve got a world-leading company that’s the point where we need to finance it properly.” She says she spends more time trying to raise the ambitions of start-up firms rather than lower them. So what’s the lesson from those who have made it? Alex van Someren is one entrepreneur who did raise the money to create a successful global business. His Cambridge-based internet security company Ncipher raised venture capital money between 1996 and 2000, and then floated just in the nick of time before the stock market crash. He believes we are making progress: “Both investors and the people they invest in have become much more sophisticated.” He says the problem is not a lack of money or ideas. “There is plenty of both—but ideas are not the same as investable businesses.” But he says young companies are now more likely to turn to business angels—often people who have built their own firms—rather than venture capitalists: “Angels have done it themselves, so they bring more added value—and they’re willing to invest in businesses too small for venture funds to look at.” What Britain doesn’t have—despite attempts to brand Cambridge as Silicon Fen—is one area that can compete with Silicon Valley as a place which produces innovative businesses and the investors to fund them. But Anne Glover says we shouldn’t get hung up on the comparison: “You would find the same inferiority complex in Indiana or Wisconsin—Silicon Valley is unique. It’s difficult to raise venture capital anywhere in the world. Entrepreneurship is hard and don’t expect it to be easy.” The good news is that, when it comes to innovation, Britain has a growing number of entrepreneurs who have been there and done that. Many are now starting new firms or investing in other start-ups. Their only fear is that the latest boom in technology investment could melt away like the last one. 1. Briefly describe the last boom. 2. What advantages have the companies which survived last boom got? 3. What is the difference on capital choice for young companies between the last boom and this latest one? Why?
问答题Practice 2 ：社会生活