Text 1 Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century,perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers.Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews.To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II,at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared.In those far-off days,it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered.Theirs was a serious business,and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly,like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman,could be trusted to know what they were about.These men believed in journalism as a calling,and were proud to be published in the daily press.“So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,”Newman wrote,“that I am tempted to define‘journalism’as‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are.’”Unfortunately,these critics are virtually forgotten.Neville Cardus,who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975,is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket.During his lifetime,though,he was also one of England’s foremost classical-music critics,a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography（1947）became a best-seller.He was knighted in 1967,the first music critic to be so honored.Yet only one of his books is now in print,and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus’s criticism will enjoy a revival?The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death,and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized.Moreover,the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.22.Newspaper reviews in England before World War II were characterized byA.free themes.B.casual style.C.elaborate layout.D.radical viewpoints.
Text 1 Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century,perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers.Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews.To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II,at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared.In those far-off days,it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered.Theirs was a serious business,and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly,like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman,could be trusted to know what they were about.These men believed in journalism as a calling,and were proud to be published in the daily press.“So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,”Newman wrote,“that I am tempted to define‘journalism’as‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are.’”Unfortunately,these critics are virtually forgotten.Neville Cardus,who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975,is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket.During his lifetime,though,he was also one of England’s foremost classical-music critics,a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography（1947）became a best-seller.He was knighted in 1967,the first music critic to be so honored.Yet only one of his books is now in print,and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus’s criticism will enjoy a revival?The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death,and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized.Moreover,the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.22.Newspaper reviews in England before World War II were characterized by
A.free themes.
B.casual style.
C.elaborate layout.
D.radical viewpoints.
B.casual style.
C.elaborate layout.
D.radical viewpoints.
参考解析
解析：根据题干中的时间提示词：World War II我们可以定位到文章的第三段第一句话。原文中“unfocused”意思是：不集中的，散漫的，选项A中“free”的解释是unrestricted，所以两个词是同义词，属于同义替换。B项中“casual”的意思是：随便的；临时的；漠不关心的，这几个意思都是和文中的in detail and at length“详细的”，serious“严肃的”，calling“对做某项工作的强烈欲望或责任感”，proud“骄傲”相矛盾的，所以不选。C是强干扰项，“elaborate”可以替换原文中的“in detail”，但是“layout”（布局）无中生有，所以本题与原文不相符合。D项中“radical”是“激进的”，无中生有。
相关考题：
During project execution, the customer authorizes and funds a scope change which requires a major change in the schedule. The baseline schedule:A.Now becomes the new schedule, including the changes, and the original baseline is disregarded.B.Is still the original baseline but annotated to reflect that a change has taken place.C.Is amended to reflect the scope change, but the original baseline is still maintained for post-project review.D.Is meaningless since every schedule update changes the baseline (i.e., a rubber baseline.)E.Is the same since baseline schedules cannot change once the development phase is completed.
156 During project execution, the customer authorizes and funds a scope change which requires a major change in the schedule. The baseline schedule:A. Now becomes the new schedule, including the changes, and the original baseline is disregarded. B. Is still the original baseline but annotated to reflect that a change has taken place.C. Is amended to reflect the scope change, but the original baseline is still maintained for post-project review.D. Is meaningless since every schedule update changes the baseline (i.e., a rubber baseline.)E. Is the same since baseline schedules cannot change once the development phase is completed
In the past twenty years great changes have ________ in the small town. A.taken partB.taken sidesC.taken placeD.taken leave
He told me that great changes() in his home townsince 1982. A. took placeB. had taken placeC. were taken placeD. had been taken place
Perhaps the experiment _____ by this time tomorrow.A、has been doneB、will have been boneC、will doD、would have done
Great changes ______ in Shanghai since the beginning of the reform. and opening－up policy. A. took placeB. has taken placeC. has been taken placeD. have taken place
During the past ten years there have been dramatic changes in the international situation.A: permanentB: powerfulC: strikingD: practical
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.It is indicated in Paragraphs 1 and 2 that__A.arts criticism has disappeared from big-city newspapersB.English-language newspapers used to carry more arts reviewsC.high-quality newspapers retain a large body of readersD.young readers doubt the suitability of criticism on dailies
Text 1 Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century,perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers.Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews.To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II,at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared.In those far-off days,it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered.Theirs was a serious business,and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly,like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman,could be trusted to know what they were about.These men believed in journalism as a calling,and were proud to be published in the daily press.“So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,”Newman wrote,“that I am tempted to define‘journalism’as‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are.’”Unfortunately,these critics are virtually forgotten.Neville Cardus,who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975,is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket.During his lifetime,though,he was also one of England’s foremost classical-music critics,a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography（1947）became a best-seller.He was knighted in 1967,the first music critic to be so honored.Yet only one of his books is now in print,and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus’s criticism will enjoy a revival?The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death,and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized.Moreover,the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.21.It is indicated in Paragraphs 1 and 2 thatA.arts criticism has disappeared from big-city newspapers.B.English-language newspapers used to carry more arts reviews.C.high-quality newspapers retain a large body of readers.D.young readers doubt the suitability of criticism on dailies.
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.Which of the following would Shaw and Newman most probably agree on?A.It is writers' duty to fulfill journalistic goals.B.It is contemptible for writers to be journalists.C.Writers are likely to be tempted into journalism.D.Not all writers are capable of journalistic writing.
Text 1 Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century,perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers.Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews.To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II,at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared.In those far-off days,it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered.Theirs was a serious business,and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly,like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman,could be trusted to know what they were about.These men believed in journalism as a calling,and were proud to be published in the daily press.“So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,”Newman wrote,“that I am tempted to define‘journalism’as‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are.’”Unfortunately,these critics are virtually forgotten.Neville Cardus,who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975,is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket.During his lifetime,though,he was also one of England’s foremost classical-music critics,a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography（1947）became a best-seller.He was knighted in 1967,the first music critic to be so honored.Yet only one of his books is now in print,and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus’s criticism will enjoy a revival?The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death,and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized.Moreover,the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.24.What can be learned about Cardus according to the last two paragraphs?A.His music criticism may not appeal to readers today.B.His reputation as a music critic has long been in dispute.C.His style caters largely to modern specialists.D.His writings fail to follow the amateur tradition.
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.What would be the best title for the text?A.Newspapers of the Good Old DaysB.The Lost Horizon in NewspapersC.Mournful Decline of JournalismD.Prominent Critics in Memory
Text 1 Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century,perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers.Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews.To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II,at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared.In those far-off days,it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered.Theirs was a serious business,and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly,like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman,could be trusted to know what they were about.These men believed in journalism as a calling,and were proud to be published in the daily press.“So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,”Newman wrote,“that I am tempted to define‘journalism’as‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are.’”Unfortunately,these critics are virtually forgotten.Neville Cardus,who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975,is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket.During his lifetime,though,he was also one of England’s foremost classical-music critics,a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography（1947）became a best-seller.He was knighted in 1967,the first music critic to be so honored.Yet only one of his books is now in print,and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus’s criticism will enjoy a revival?The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death,and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized.Moreover,the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.25.What would be the best title for the text?A.Newspapers of the Good Old DaysB.The Lost Horizon in NewspapersC.Mournful Decline of JournalismD.Prominent Critics in Memory
Text 1 Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century,perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers.Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews.To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II,at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared.In those far-off days,it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered.Theirs was a serious business,and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly,like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman,could be trusted to know what they were about.These men believed in journalism as a calling,and were proud to be published in the daily press.“So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,”Newman wrote,“that I am tempted to define‘journalism’as‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are.’”Unfortunately,these critics are virtually forgotten.Neville Cardus,who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975,is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket.During his lifetime,though,he was also one of England’s foremost classical-music critics,a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography（1947）became a best-seller.He was knighted in 1967,the first music critic to be so honored.Yet only one of his books is now in print,and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus’s criticism will enjoy a revival?The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death,and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized.Moreover,the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.23.Which of the following would Shaw and Newman most probably agree on?A.It is writers'duty to fulfill journalistic goals.B.It is contemptible for writers to be journalists.C.Writers are likely to be tempted into journalism.D.Not all writers are capable of journalistic writing.
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.Newspaper reviews in England before World War II were characterized by__A.free themesB.casual styleC.elaborate layoutD.radical viewpoints
Text 2 Whatever happened to the death of newspaper?A year ago the end seemed near.The recession threatened to remove the advertising and readers that had not already fled to the Internet.Newspapers like the San Francisco Chronicle were chronicling their own doom.America's Federal Trade Commission launched a round of talks about how to save newspapers.Should they become charitable corporations?Should the state subsidize them?It will hold another meeting soon.But the discussions now seem out of date.In much of the world there is little sign of crisis.German and Brazilian papers have shrugged off the recession.Even American newspapers,which inhabit the most troubled corner of the global industry,have not only survived but often returned to profit.Not the 20%profit margins that were routine a few years ago,but profit all the same.It has not been much fun.Many papers stayed afloat by pushing journalists overboard.The American Society of News Editors reckons that 13,500 newsroom jobs have gone since 2007.Readers are paying more for slimmer products.Some papers even had the nerve to refuse delivery to distant suburbs.Yet these desperate measures have proved the right ones and,sadly for many journalists,they can be pushed further.Newspapers are becoming more balanced businesses,with a healthier mix of revenues from readers and advertisers.American papers have long been highly unusual in their reliance on ads.Fully 87%of their revenues came from advertising in 2008,according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation&Development（OECD）.In Japan the proportion is 35%.Not surprisingly,Japanese newspapers are much more stable.The whirlwind that swept through newsrooms harmed everybody,but much of the damage has been concentrated in areas where newspapers are least distinctive.Car and film reviewers have gone.So have science and general business reporters.Foreign bureaus have been savagely cut off.Newspapers are less complete as a result.But completeness is no longer a virtue in the newspaper business.The most appropriate title for this text would be____A.American Newspapers:Struggling for SurvivalB.American Newspapers:Gone with the WindC.American Newspapers:A Thriving BusinessD.American Newspapers:A Hopeless Story
During the past ten years there have been dramatic changes in the international situation.A:permanent B:powerful C:striking D:practical
Some desirable changes have taken place in this town.A: identicalB: uncertainC:.frequentD: satisfactory
During the past ten years there have been dramatic changes in the international situation.A:permanentB:powerful.C:strikingD:practical
They all agreed that the changes that have taken place are substantial.A:significantB:superficialC:inadequateD:inevitable
They all agreed that the changes that have taken place are substantial.A:significant B:superficial C:inadequate D:inevitable
Great changes （） in China since 1978.A、take the placeB、took the place ofC、have taken placeD、have been taken place
单选题What is the text about?AAdvertisements are the most important part in newspapers.BIt introduces newspapers past and today and its contents.CThere is a lot of useful information on newspapers.DPeople like newspapers very much.
单选题In our company, great changes _____ since the new manager came.Atook placeBtake placeCwill have taken placeDhave taken place
单选题Great changes （） in China since 1978.Atake the placeBtook the place ofChave taken placeDhave been taken place
单选题During the past ten years, there have been_____changes in the country.AlastingBdramaticCpowerfulDimaginary
单选题Big changes have taken place at Marketing Department ______ the new manager came.AbeforeBafterCsinceDwhile