资料：The hop flower has been used in beer-making at least since the eighth century. Traditionally it was a preservative, but it also imparts flavor. To some, the taste is bitter and unpalatable, and thus many brewers use only minimal amounts. But, depending on variety, growing conditions, and other factors, hops can impart a range of flavors that connoisseurs say rivals that of wine grapes. Starting in the nineteen-seventies, small brewers on the West Coast began dramatically upping the amount of hops in their brews. One of their most popular products was the India pale ale, or L.P.A., a brew that has been around since the late eighteenth century. The story goes that necessity drove the British to add large quantities of hops in order to preserve the beer they shipped to India, to quench the thirst of the Sahibs managing the Empire there.
Over the past decade, varieties once thought of as boutique beers, such as L.P.A.s, have exploded in the United States, thanks to the locavore movement. Craft brewing is now doubling in sales, by volume, every five years, today, craft-beer make up twenty-one percent of the beer market, and twelve percent of the volume. The Brewers Association, a craft-brewing trade group, expects craft beers to have a fifty-per-cent market share in a decade. Since craft brewers use about ten times more hops than megabrewers, the trend has been a bonanza for Hopsteiner and the other big hops companies. But while an emphasis on brewers to come up with new beer, which, in turn, leads to a hunt for new hops varieties.
Which of the following best expresses the author’s main point?
本题考查的是主旨大意。
【关键词】author’ main point
【主题句】第一段第1句The hop flower has been used in beer-making at least since the eighth century. Traditionally it was a preservative, but it also imparts flavor.（至少从8世纪开始，啤酒花就被应用在啤酒酿造中。传统上，啤酒花是一种防腐剂，但是它也能传递味道。）
【解析】本题问“以下哪项最好诠释了作者的主要观点？”。主旨题在解题时一般看首段，找到作者论述的重点，即hop flower（啤酒花）。A选项“啤酒花应用在啤酒酿造已有几十年”。根据主题句，啤酒花从8世纪开始使用，几十年和时间不符，排除该选项。B选项“不同种类的啤酒花能带来不同口味的啤酒”，和第一段“hops can impart a range of flavors”表述一致，且和本文中心一致。C、D两项均为局部信息，不能作为全文主旨。
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
Which of the following is suggested in the last paragraph?（ ）
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
The author holds that the current collective doctrine shows（ ）.
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
The author believes that Rebekah Brook’s defense（ ）.
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that（ ）.
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
According to the first two paragraphs,Elisabeth was upset by（ ）.
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
When will the judging begin?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
Which of the following will NOT be evaluated by the judges?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
What condition is placed on those who wish to enter the contest?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
What is the main purpose of this competition?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
Who is the intended audience of this contest?
