Question

【題目】A recent survey in the United States showed that the average family spent more money on its pets than on its children. Although rather shocking, it should not surprise anyone who has seen the doggy parlors(客廳) where loved pets rest. Are Americans unique in treating their little friends in this way? No, the English, too, pay more attention to their pets.

This can clearly be seen when we look at pet foods, which often contain more vitamins than human food. They certainly cost much. Last year the British public spent two hundred million pounds on pet food alone, to say nothing of veterinary bills or animal furniture. It is difficult not to feel angry about this when considering what the same amount could do for victims of starvation and poverty, so it is not unusual for me to get hot under collar when I read an old man left all his money to his dog instead of his children.

There are a variety of reasons why I find pets-raising alarming. They cause physical problems. An example of this is New York where they have great difficulty getting rid of the mess that dogs leave on the streets. Many people find this funny, but in a number of large cities it is a major problem. Animals can cause disease, too. It is the threat of rabies — a disease with no known cure.

Another problem is the carelessness of pet owners. Most little children want a dog or a cat, and they continually push their mothers and fathers until they get one. It is only when the "sweet little thing" has been brought home that the parents realize how much time and money must be spent on "Rover" or "Bonzo". Then they just abandon it. As a result, they are allowed to run free. English farmers lose hundreds of sheep a year, killed by someone's pet and you must have read of children being hurt by some pets of their own.

Lastly, I would only suggest that we have got our priorities wrong and that something should be done about it. In my view, it's time we stopped being sentimental about pets. I can see no reason why we should get upset when animals are cut up for medical experiments. This will lead us to discovering cures for serious human diseases, then I say, “keep cutting!”

【1】The doggy parlors are mentioned in the 1st paragraph to show ________.

A. where Americans keep their pets

B. what costly lives the pets are living

C. why children love their pets so much

D. how much pets depend on their masters

【2】In the second paragraph "to get hot under the collar" probably means ________.

A. getting quite hot B. feeling overwhelmingly angry

C. becoming excited D. receiving a fashionable shirt

【3】According to the author, in which field can animals be most useful?

A. Pet. B. Food. C. Medicine. D. Sports.

【4】What is author’s attitude towards pets-raising?

A. Pitiful. B. Neutral. C. Opposed. D. Supportive.

Answer 1

【答案】

【1】B

【2】B

【3】C

【4】C

【解析】

試題分析：作者從現(xiàn)如今人們大量養(yǎng)寵物的社會現(xiàn)象入手，敘述了養(yǎng)寵物的缺點，比如花費大、容易帶來

疾病、被拋棄后易造成他人損失等等。

【1】B細節(jié)理解題。根據(jù)the average family spent more money on its pets than on its children 對doggy

parlors的介紹也是為了介紹養(yǎng)寵物的花費有多大，故選B

【2】B 詞義猜測題。to get hot under the collar是生氣的意思，feeling overwhelmingly angry感到無比

憤怒，符合語境，故選B。

【3】C推理判斷題。根據(jù) I can see no reason why we should get upset when animals are cut up for

medical experiments.作者認為沒有任何理由應該為醫(yī)療實驗而導致動物被削減而感到不安，因此可知在醫(yī)療實驗中動物是最有用的。故選C。

【4】C推理判斷題。從全文可知作者對養(yǎng)寵物的態(tài)度是反對的。作者認為寵物會花費很多的錢，會

帶來疾病，會造成損失。故選C。