网友您好， 请在下方输入框内输入要搜索的题目：
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
You don't know what you've got till it's gone,Joni Mitchell rold us.So now that the 2018 Nobel Prize in Literature will be postponed-it seems worth asking what,exactly,the prize gives us.For decades,the choices of the Swedish Academy have failed to provoke much interest from American publishers and readers.This i.s not just because American readers are resistant to fiction in translation,as publishers often complain.On the contrary,over the last two decades,many foreign writers have made a major impact on American literature.But then,the failure of the Swedish Academy to reflect the actual judgment of literary history is nothing new.If you drew a Venn diagram showing the winners of the Nobel Prize in one circle and the most influential and widely read 20th-century writers in the other,their area of overlap would be surprisingly small.Does this mean that a different group of critics and professors in a bigger,more diverse country woulcl have done a better job at picking the winners?Very possibly.In the mind of the general public,the Nobel basically descends from the sky to bless the winner.But it is nothing more or less than the decision of a particular group of readers,with their own strengths and weaknesses.And the problem with the Nobel Prize in Literature goes deeper.No matter who is in the room where it happens,the Nobel Prize is based on the idea that merit can best be determined by a small group of specialists.This may make sense for the prizes in the sciences,since those fields are less than penetrable to anyone but fellow practitioners.Even in the sciences,however,there is a growing sense that the tradition of awarding the prize to just one or two people distoris the way modern science is actually practiced today:Most important discoveries are the work of teams,not of individual geniuses brooding in isolation.Literature is at least produced by individual authors;but in this case,the Nobel's reliance on seemingly expert judgment runs into a different problem.For literature is not addressed to an audience of experts;it is open to the judgment of every reader.Nor is literature proZressive,with new discoveries replacing old ones:Homer is just as groundbreaking today as he was 2,500 years ago.This makes it impossible to rank literary works according to an objective standard of superiority.Good criticism helps people to find the books that will speak to them,but it doesn't attempt to simply name"the most outstanding work,"in the way the Nobel Prize does.A book earns the status of a classic,not because it is approved by a committee or put on a syllabus,but simply because a lot of people like it for a long time.Literary reputation can only emerge on the free market,not through central planning.
We can learn from the last paragraph that
We can learn from the last paragraph that
A.enduring love of readers makes a work a classic.
B.readers do need the Nobel Prize in Literature.
C.marketing makes contribution to literary reputation.
D.excellent works naturally attract much good criticism.
B.readers do need the Nobel Prize in Literature.
C.marketing makes contribution to literary reputation.
D.excellent works naturally attract much good criticism.
参考答案
参考解析
解析：第六段②③句总结道“文学作品只有通过自由竞争，争取读者持久的热爱，才能成为经典、获得声誉”。可见A.正确。[解题技巧]B.与①②句“诺贝尔奖既没有帮助读者寻找吸引他们的书籍，也无法造就文学经典”（committee指代包含诺贝尔文学奖在内的各奖项评委会）中隐含的态度“诺贝尔奖对读者没有太多意义”相悖。C.将③句market（free market与central planning分别比喻“作品自由竞争，从读者处赢得声誉”与“官方指定‘伟大’作品，试图为作品带来声誉”）误解为“商业推广”，得出“商业推广可提升文学声誉”。D.由①句细节good criticism、outstanding work杂糅而成，原文并未谈及出色作品是否吸引优质评论。
更多 “You don't know what you've got till it's gone,Joni Mitchell rold us.So now that the 2018 Nobel Prize in Literature will be postponed-it seems worth asking what,exactly,the prize gives us.For decades,the choices of the Swedish Academy have failed to provoke much interest from American publishers and readers.This i.s not just because American readers are resistant to fiction in translation,as publishers often complain.On the contrary,over the last two decades,many foreign writers have made a major impact on American literature.But then,the failure of the Swedish Academy to reflect the actual judgment of literary history is nothing new.If you drew a Venn diagram showing the winners of the Nobel Prize in one circle and the most influential and widely read 20th-century writers in the other,their area of overlap would be surprisingly small.Does this mean that a different group of critics and professors in a bigger,more diverse country woulcl have done a better job at picking the winners?Very possibly.In the mind of the general public,the Nobel basically descends from the sky to bless the winner.But it is nothing more or less than the decision of a particular group of readers,with their own strengths and weaknesses.And the problem with the Nobel Prize in Literature goes deeper.No matter who is in the room where it happens,the Nobel Prize is based on the idea that merit can best be determined by a small group of specialists.This may make sense for the prizes in the sciences,since those fields are less than penetrable to anyone but fellow practitioners.Even in the sciences,however,there is a growing sense that the tradition of awarding the prize to just one or two people distoris the way modern science is actually practiced today:Most important discoveries are the work of teams,not of individual geniuses brooding in isolation.Literature is at least produced by individual authors;but in this case,the Nobel's reliance on seemingly expert judgment runs into a different problem.For literature is not addressed to an audience of experts;it is open to the judgment of every reader.Nor is literature proZressive,with new discoveries replacing old ones:Homer is just as groundbreaking today as he was 2,500 years ago.This makes it impossible to rank literary works according to an objective standard of superiority.Good criticism helps people to find the books that will speak to them,but it doesn't attempt to simply name"the most outstanding work,"in the way the Nobel Prize does.A book earns the status of a classic,not because it is approved by a committee or put on a syllabus,but simply because a lot of people like it for a long time.Literary reputation can only emerge on the free market,not through central planning. We can learn from the last paragraph thatA.enduring love of readers makes a work a classic. B.readers do need the Nobel Prize in Literature. C.marketing makes contribution to literary reputation. D.excellent works naturally attract much good criticism.” 相关考题
考题
See what you’ve done ! Don’t you have a ______ of right or wrong ?
A.feelingB.senseC.thoughtD.knowledge
考题
–If you were in my position, what would you do?–()
A、Hi! It’s you problem.B、I weren’t you.C、If I were you, I would give up.D、I don’t know.
考题
–What do you think I should do?–().
A、I don’t know.B、That’s not my business.C、You must talk with him.D、You’d better talk with him.
考题
— What’s the matter with you? — ()
A、No, I don’t know.B、I feel rather unwell.C、Sure. What is it?D、That’s it.
考题
If you are admitted to a key university, _________ as a prize?I’m looking for a cell phone.A.What you expect your father will offer youB.Do you expect what your father will offer youC.What do you expect will your father offer youD.What do you expect your father will offer you
考题
Will you tell me something about your sister Kitty? ( )
A.Well，I know.B.Sure, what do you want to know?C.Exactly.D.That’s her secret.
考题
— _______________? — That’s a good idea.A、When can you write the invitationsB、What do you think of the invitationsC、Why don’t you write the invitations nowD、Why not you write the invitations now
考题
– I got the first prize! --____________A、I got a prize too.B、Well done!C、When did you get it?D、Come on!
考题
You don't know what you've got till it's gone,Joni Mitchell rold us.So now that the 2018 Nobel Prize in Literature will be postponed-it seems worth asking what,exactly,the prize gives us.For decades,the choices of the Swedish Academy have failed to provoke much interest from American publishers and readers.This i.s not just because American readers are resistant to fiction in translation,as publishers often complain.On the contrary,over the last two decades,many foreign writers have made a major impact on American literature.But then,the failure of the Swedish Academy to reflect the actual judgment of literary history is nothing new.If you drew a Venn diagram showing the winners of the Nobel Prize in one circle and the most influential and widely read 20th-century writers in the other,their area of overlap would be surprisingly small.Does this mean that a different group of critics and professors in a bigger,more diverse country woulcl have done a better job at picking the winners?Very possibly.In the mind of the general public,the Nobel basically descends from the sky to bless the winner.But it is nothing more or less than the decision of a particular group of readers,with their own strengths and weaknesses.And the problem with the Nobel Prize in Literature goes deeper.No matter who is in the room where it happens,the Nobel Prize is based on the idea that merit can best be determined by a small group of specialists.This may make sense for the prizes in the sciences,since those fields are less than penetrable to anyone but fellow practitioners.Even in the sciences,however,there is a growing sense that the tradition of awarding the prize to just one or two people distoris the way modern science is actually practiced today:Most important discoveries are the work of teams,not of individual geniuses brooding in isolation.Literature is at least produced by individual authors;but in this case,the Nobel's reliance on seemingly expert judgment runs into a different problem.For literature is not addressed to an audience of experts;it is open to the judgment of every reader.Nor is literature proZressive,with new discoveries replacing old ones:Homer is just as groundbreaking today as he was 2,500 years ago.This makes it impossible to rank literary works according to an objective standard of superiority.Good criticism helps people to find the books that will speak to them,but it doesn't attempt to simply name"the most outstanding work,"in the way the Nobel Prize does.A book earns the status of a classic,not because it is approved by a committee or put on a syllabus,but simply because a lot of people like it for a long time.Literary reputation can only emerge on the free market,not through central planning.
Which of the following is true of the Nobel Prize in Literature according to Para.3?A.Its judges are narrow-minded.
B.lts value is overstated by the public.
C.Its decision is interfered by amateurs.
D.Its rewards for the winners are falling.
考题
You don't know what you've got till it's gone,Joni Mitchell rold us.So now that the 2018 Nobel Prize in Literature will be postponed-it seems worth asking what,exactly,the prize gives us.For decades,the choices of the Swedish Academy have failed to provoke much interest from American publishers and readers.This i.s not just because American readers are resistant to fiction in translation,as publishers often complain.On the contrary,over the last two decades,many foreign writers have made a major impact on American literature.But then,the failure of the Swedish Academy to reflect the actual judgment of literary history is nothing new.If you drew a Venn diagram showing the winners of the Nobel Prize in one circle and the most influential and widely read 20th-century writers in the other,their area of overlap would be surprisingly small.Does this mean that a different group of critics and professors in a bigger,more diverse country woulcl have done a better job at picking the winners?Very possibly.In the mind of the general public,the Nobel basically descends from the sky to bless the winner.But it is nothing more or less than the decision of a particular group of readers,with their own strengths and weaknesses.And the problem with the Nobel Prize in Literature goes deeper.No matter who is in the room where it happens,the Nobel Prize is based on the idea that merit can best be determined by a small group of specialists.This may make sense for the prizes in the sciences,since those fields are less than penetrable to anyone but fellow practitioners.Even in the sciences,however,there is a growing sense that the tradition of awarding the prize to just one or two people distoris the way modern science is actually practiced today:Most important discoveries are the work of teams,not of individual geniuses brooding in isolation.Literature is at least produced by individual authors;but in this case,the Nobel's reliance on seemingly expert judgment runs into a different problem.For literature is not addressed to an audience of experts;it is open to the judgment of every reader.Nor is literature proZressive,with new discoveries replacing old ones:Homer is just as groundbreaking today as he was 2,500 years ago.This makes it impossible to rank literary works according to an objective standard of superiority.Good criticism helps people to find the books that will speak to them,but it doesn't attempt to simply name"the most outstanding work,"in the way the Nobel Prize does.A book earns the status of a classic,not because it is approved by a committee or put on a syllabus,but simply because a lot of people like it for a long time.Literary reputation can only emerge on the free market,not through central planning.
The author mentioned science prizes to support the view thatA.scientific reputation should depend on expert opinion.
B.science prizes should not ignore the work of teams.
C.literary writers should be judged by fellow writers.
D.literary merit should not rely on specialist judgment.
考题
You don't know what you've got till it's gone,Joni Mitchell rold us.So now that the 2018 Nobel Prize in Literature will be postponed-it seems worth asking what,exactly,the prize gives us.For decades,the choices of the Swedish Academy have failed to provoke much interest from American publishers and readers.This i.s not just because American readers are resistant to fiction in translation,as publishers often complain.On the contrary,over the last two decades,many foreign writers have made a major impact on American literature.But then,the failure of the Swedish Academy to reflect the actual judgment of literary history is nothing new.If you drew a Venn diagram showing the winners of the Nobel Prize in one circle and the most influential and widely read 20th-century writers in the other,their area of overlap would be surprisingly small.Does this mean that a different group of critics and professors in a bigger,more diverse country woulcl have done a better job at picking the winners?Very possibly.In the mind of the general public,the Nobel basically descends from the sky to bless the winner.But it is nothing more or less than the decision of a particular group of readers,with their own strengths and weaknesses.And the problem with the Nobel Prize in Literature goes deeper.No matter who is in the room where it happens,the Nobel Prize is based on the idea that merit can best be determined by a small group of specialists.This may make sense for the prizes in the sciences,since those fields are less than penetrable to anyone but fellow practitioners.Even in the sciences,however,there is a growing sense that the tradition of awarding the prize to just one or two people distoris the way modern science is actually practiced today:Most important discoveries are the work of teams,not of individual geniuses brooding in isolation.Literature is at least produced by individual authors;but in this case,the Nobel's reliance on seemingly expert judgment runs into a different problem.For literature is not addressed to an audience of experts;it is open to the judgment of every reader.Nor is literature proZressive,with new discoveries replacing old ones:Homer is just as groundbreaking today as he was 2,500 years ago.This makes it impossible to rank literary works according to an objective standard of superiority.Good criticism helps people to find the books that will speak to them,but it doesn't attempt to simply name"the most outstanding work,"in the way the Nobel Prize does.A book earns the status of a classic,not because it is approved by a committee or put on a syllabus,but simply because a lot of people like it for a long time.Literary reputation can only emerge on the free market,not through central planning.
It can be inferred from Para.5 thatA.literary creation requires more talent than science.
B.nowadays literature is seeing a decline and fall.
C.old literary works do not always lack novelty.
D.there are no criteria for ranking literary works.
考题
You don't know what you've got till it's gone,Joni Mitchell rold us.So now that the 2018 Nobel Prize in Literature will be postponed-it seems worth asking what,exactly,the prize gives us.For decades,the choices of the Swedish Academy have failed to provoke much interest from American publishers and readers.This i.s not just because American readers are resistant to fiction in translation,as publishers often complain.On the contrary,over the last two decades,many foreign writers have made a major impact on American literature.But then,the failure of the Swedish Academy to reflect the actual judgment of literary history is nothing new.If you drew a Venn diagram showing the winners of the Nobel Prize in one circle and the most influential and widely read 20th-century writers in the other,their area of overlap would be surprisingly small.Does this mean that a different group of critics and professors in a bigger,more diverse country woulcl have done a better job at picking the winners?Very possibly.In the mind of the general public,the Nobel basically descends from the sky to bless the winner.But it is nothing more or less than the decision of a particular group of readers,with their own strengths and weaknesses.And the problem with the Nobel Prize in Literature goes deeper.No matter who is in the room where it happens,the Nobel Prize is based on the idea that merit can best be determined by a small group of specialists.This may make sense for the prizes in the sciences,since those fields are less than penetrable to anyone but fellow practitioners.Even in the sciences,however,there is a growing sense that the tradition of awarding the prize to just one or two people distoris the way modern science is actually practiced today:Most important discoveries are the work of teams,not of individual geniuses brooding in isolation.Literature is at least produced by individual authors;but in this case,the Nobel's reliance on seemingly expert judgment runs into a different problem.For literature is not addressed to an audience of experts;it is open to the judgment of every reader.Nor is literature proZressive,with new discoveries replacing old ones:Homer is just as groundbreaking today as he was 2,500 years ago.This makes it impossible to rank literary works according to an objective standard of superiority.Good criticism helps people to find the books that will speak to them,but it doesn't attempt to simply name"the most outstanding work,"in the way the Nobel Prize does.A book earns the status of a classic,not because it is approved by a committee or put on a syllabus,but simply because a lot of people like it for a long time.Literary reputation can only emerge on the free market,not through central planning.
It's implied that the Swedish Academy fails toA.see the value of non-English novels.
B.arouse the passion of worldwide readers.
C.recognize many historically great writers.
D.expand the influence of American literature.
考题
Which was NOT originally one of the Nobel Prizes?A The medicine prize. B The literature prize. C The peace prize. D The economics prize.
考题
I need to go to the library today. Do you know what time it closes?（）ANo, thanks.BI'm very busy now.CAt aboutDI don't need to go there.
考题
Could you pass me the salt and pepper?（）ASorry, I didn't know what you mean.BOk, here you are.CNo, I won't.DI don't know.
考题
My son won the first prize in the writing contest!（）A、Congratulations!B、Are you sure of that?C、What a pity!D、It's terrible.
考题
Could you pass me the salt and pepper?（）A、Sorry, I didn't know what you mean.B、Ok, here you are.C、No, I won't.D、I don't know.
考题
单选题Matt: Hello, Helen! Helen: Matt, hi. Matt: Haven’t seen you for ages. What’ve you been up to? Helen:I’ve been to Toronto. Matt:Toronto? What brought you there? Helen:I got married—married a Canadian! Matt: You didn’t! _____ How about a drink?A
How can you do that? B
Well, congratulations!C
I know you didn’t marry him.D
I’ll miss you a lot.
考题
单选题Could you pass me the salt and pepper?（）A
Sorry, I didn't know what you mean.B
Ok, here you are.C
No, I won't.D
I don't know.
考题
单选题— Can you help me? —（）A
No, I don’t know.B
Don’t mention it.C
Sure, What is itD
That’s it
考题
单选题Ivan: I brought you the new Groove People CD. Dale: What good is a CD if I haven’t got a CD player? Ivan: I can bring you a CD player. Dale: What good is a CD player if I don’t even have electricity? Ivan: ________. Dale: What good is calling the Electric Company if I haven’t got a house?A
Why do you have so many questions?B
What are you going to buy tomorrow?C
Why don’t you call the Electric Company?D
Where did you buy the new CD?
考题
单选题W: Do, you want to go for a walk? M: No, I’ve got far too much work to do. W: Oh please, It’s a lovely day. M: I know, ______?A
you like to go with me, don’t youB
but let’s go later, OKC
but I’m busy now, isn’t itD
but it’s hard to say, isn’t it
考题
单选题I don’t know exactly, what he did, but _____ he got a knighthood for it.A
in any rateB
at that rateC
at this rateD
at any rate
考题
填空题What kind of hotel can you stay in free of charge if you win a second prize?A ____.
热门标签
最新试卷
