There are now about 376 million people who speak English as their first language, and also about 376 million people who have learnt it in addition to their mother tongue. It is said that one million people learning English now and about 80% of the information on the Internet is in English.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Should we celebrate the fact that more and more of us can communicate, using a common language, across countries and cultures? Or should we worry about the dangers of “monoculturalism”, a world in which we all speak the same language, eat the same food and listen to the same music?

Does it matter if an increasing number of people speaking the same language? Not necessarily. I have never agreed that if only we all understood each other better, there would be fewer wars. Ask the people of India, where many of them speak at least some English, and Pakistan, the same situation with India…

If we all speak English, will we then all start eating McDonald’s burgers? Surely not. If English becomes more dominant (占优势的), will it kill other languages? I doubt it. When I travel in Africa and Asia, I am always surprised by how many people can speak not only their own languages but often one or more other related languages, as well as English and perhaps French or German as well.

When we discussed this on Talking Point a couple of years ago, we received a wonderfully poetic有诗意的）e-mail from a listener in Ireland. “The English language is a beautiful language. Maybe it’s like a rose,” he said. “But who would ever want his garden just full of roses?”

Well, I love roses and I think they make a beautiful addition to any garden. But the way I see it, just by planting a few roses, you don’t necessarily need to pull out everything else. If more and more people want to plant English roses, that will be fine.

63. By saying “Ask the people of India…and Pakistan” (in paragraph 3), the author is trying to show that___.

A. speaking the same language doesn’t necessarily bring peace.

B. wars can destroy the relationship between two countries.

C. English doesn’t kill other languages

D. English is widely used in the world

64. What does “rose” in the last paragraph stand for?

A. The world.　　 B. A kind of flower.　　 C. A language.　 D. The earth.

65. The author would probably agree that___.

A. it’s very hard to plant many kinds of flowers in a garden.

B. it’s all right for people from other countries to learn English.

C. more and more people like to plant roses in their gardens.

D. English is easier to learn than other languages.

66. This passage is mainly about ___.

A. why English has become a global language.

B. how many people in the world speak English

C. how people in the world learn English as a foreign language.

D. whether we need to worry about English being a world language.

　 English as a Foreign Language

　 Who taught you to speak English? Your parents, while you were a young child? Your teachers at school? Perhaps even the BBC as a grown-up. Whoever it was, somehow you have developed an understanding of what is rapidly becoming a truly global language.

　 There are now about 376 million people who speak English as their first language, and about the same number who have learnt it in addition to their mother tongue. There are said to be one billion people learning English now and about 80% of the information on the Internet is in English.

　 Is this a good thing, or a bad thing? Should we celebrate the fact that more and more of us can communicate, using a common language, across countries and cultures（文化）？Or should we worry about the dangers of ‘mono-centralism’, a world in which we all speak the same language, eat the same food and listen to the same music?

　 Does it matter if an increasing number of people speak the same language? On the contrary（相反），I would have thought－although I have never accepted the argument that if only we all understood each other better, there would be fewer wars. Ask the people of India（where many of them speak at least some English）and Pakistan（the same situation with India）…

　 If we all speak English, will we then all start eating McDonalds burgers? Surely not. If English becomes more dominant（占主导地位的）, it will kill other languages ? I doubt it. When I travel in Africa or Asia, I am always surprised by how many people can speak not only their own language but often one or more other related languages, as well as English and perhaps some French or German as well.

　 When we discussed this on Talking Point a couple of years ago, we received a wonderfully poetic email from a listener in Ireland. “The English language is a beautiful language. Maybe it’s like a rose,” he said. “But who would ever want their garden just full of roses?”

　 Well, I love roses, and I think they make a beautiful addition to any garden. But the way I see it, just by planting a few roses, you don’t necessarily need to pull out everything else. If more and more people want to plant English roses, that’s fine by me.

67．By saying “Ask the people of India…and Pakistan”（in Paragraph 4）, the author is trying to show that _____.

A．speaking the same language doesn’t necessarily bring peace

B．wars can destroy the relationship between two countries

C．English doesn’t kill other languages

D．English is widely used in the world

68．What does “garden” in the last two paragraphs stand for?

A．Language　　　　　　　 B. Family　 　　　　　　　 C. The world　　　　　　　 D. The Earth

69．The author would probably agree that ______.

A．it’s very hard to plant many kinds of flowers in a garden

B．it’s good for people from other countries to learn English

C．more and more people like to plant roses in their gardens

D．English is easier to learn than other languages

70．This passage is mainly about ________.

A．why English has become a global language

B．how many people in the world speak English

C．how people in the world learn English as a foreign language

D．whether we need to worry about English being a world language

Passage four(preface)
Science is a dominant theme in our culture. Since it touches almost every facet of our life, educated people need at least some acquaintance with its structure and operation. They should also have an understanding of the subculture in which scientists live and the kinds of people they are. An understanding of general characteristics of science as well as specific scientific concepts is easier to attain if one knows something about the things that excite and frustrate the scientist.
This book is written for the intelligent student or lay person whose acquaintance with science is superficial; for the person who has been presented with science as a musty storehouse of dried facts; for the person who sees the chief objective of science as the production of gadgets; and for the person who views the scientists as some sort of magician. The book can be used to supplement a course in any science, to accompany any course that attempts to give an understanding of the modern world, or – independently of any course – simply to provide a better understanding of science. We hope this book will lead readers to a broader perspective on scientific attitudes and a more realistic view of what science is, who scientists are, and what they do. It will give them an awareness and understanding of the relationship between science and our culture and an appreciation of the roles science may play in our culture. In addition, readers may learn to appreciate the relationship between scientific views and some of the values and philosophies that are pervasive in our culture.
We have tried to present in this book an accurate and up-to-date picture of the scientific community and the people who populate it. That population has in recent years come to comprise more and more women. This increasing role of women in the scientific subculture is not an unique incident but, rather, part of the trend evident in all segments of society as more women enter traditionally male-dominated fields and make significant contributions. In discussing these changes and contribution, however, we are faced with a language that is implicitly sexist, one that uses male nouns or pronouns in referring to unspecified individuals. To offset this built-in bias, we have adopted the policy of using plural nouns and pronouns whenever possible and, when absolutely necessary, alternating he and she. This policy is far form being ideal, but it is at least an acknowledgment of the inadequacy of our language in treating half of the human race equally.
We have also tried to make the book entertaining as well as informative. Our approach is usually informal. We feel, as do many other scientists, that we shouldn’t take ourselves too seriously. As the reader may observe, we see science as a delightful pastime rather than as a grim and dreary way to earn a living.
1.According to the passage, ‘scientific subculture’ means
A.cultural groups that are formed by scientists.
B.people whose knowledge of science is very limited.
C.the scientific community.
D.people who make good contribution to science.
2.We need to know something about the structure and operation of science because
A.it is not easy to understand the things that excite and frustrate scientists.
B.Science affects almost every aspect of our life.
C.Scientists live in a specific subculture.
D.It is easier to understand general characteristics of science.
3.The book mentioned in this passage is written for readers who
A.are intelligent college students and lay person who do not know much about science.
B.are good at producing various gadgets.
C.work in a storehouse of dried facts.
D.want to have a superficial understanding of science.
4.According to this passage,
A.English is a sexist language.
B.only in the scientific world is the role of women increasing rapidly.
C.women are making significant contributions to eliminating the inadequacy of our language.
D.male nouns or pronouns should not be used to refer to scientists.
5.This passage most probably is
A.a book review.
B.the preface of a book.
C.the postscript of a book.
D.the concluding part of a book.