Nobody wants to be called a helicopter parent,who manages to be responsible for whatever a child does, however small a matter is--but parents want to protect their kids.At least no playing with sticks means no risk of lost eyes. Yet as Gever Tulley points out in Fifty Dangerous Things(You Should Let Your Children Do),children who grow up as safe as possible become adults who aren't adventurous,highly adaptable,or confident.Sometimes you have to fall out of a tree to figure out how to climb one the right way,and learning that you can accomplish such a thing on your own teaches you that you can be self--sufficient. With Fifty Dangerous Things,Gever Tulley,has written a handbook of activities that are,yes,dangerous at some level-like playing with fire,breaking glass,and opening batteries.The book is a blueprint to help parents and children explore the world,and ensure the children grow up,with a little common sense and a lot of curiosity. Both the advice and the warnings are down to earth.Yes,there are risks,but Tulley provides good ways to learn to avoid them through your own skill.It takes work to raise a child who can use a table saw or build a campfire.But with this book in hand,it'll be a satisfying adventure. We see a child climbing a tree and the first thing we think of is how they might fall and be disabled for life.We seldom say,"Look at how well Sarah is climbing that tree!" When we protect children from every possible source of danger,we also prevent them from having the kinds of experiences that develop their sense of self--reliance,their ability to deal with risks,and their sense of accomplishment. In Gever Tulley's view,_. A) children should grow up in a completely safe environment B) doing dangerous things can be harmful to some degree C) children should keep away from dangerous environment D) dangerous activities can make adaptable children
D
(Question)
Like every language, American English is full of special expressions, phrases that come from the day-to-day life of the people and develop in their own way. Our expression today is "to face the music". When someone says, "Well, I guess I'll have to face the music," it does not mean he's planning to go to the concert. It is something far less pleasant, like being called in by your boss to explain why you did this and did that, and why you didn't do this or that. Awful music indeed, but it has to be faced. At sometime or another, every one of us has to face the music, especially as children. We can all remember father's angry voice, "I want to talk to you." and only because we did not obey him. What an unpleasant business it was! The phrase "to face the music" is familiar to every American, young and old. It is at least 100 years old. And where did this expression come from? The first explanation comes from the American novelist, James Fenimore Looper. He said, in 1851, that the expression was first used by actors while waiting to go on the stage. When they got their cue to go on, they often said, "Well, it's time to face the music." And that was exactly what they did--facing the orchestra which was just below them. And an actor might be frightened or nervous as he moved on to the stage in front of an audience that might be friendly or perhaps _ , especially if he forgot his lines. But he had to go out. If he did not, there would be no play. So the expression "to face the music" came to mean "having to go through something, no matter how unpleasant the experience might be, because you knew you had no choice." Other explanations about the expression go back to the army. When the men faced an inspection by their leader, the soldiers would be worried about how well they looked. Was their equipment clean, shiny enough to pass the inspection? Still the men had to go out and face the music of the band as well as the inspection. What else could they do? Another army explanation is more closely linked to the idea of... How many ways does the phrase "to face the music" comes from? A) 1. B) 2. C) 3. D) 4.
(Answer)
C
I entered St Thoma's Hospital as a medical student at the age of 18 and spent five years there . I was an unsatisfactory student , for my heart , as you might have guessed , was not in it . I wanted , I had always wanted to be a writer , and in the evening , after my high tea , I wrote and read . Before long , I wrote a novel , called " Liza of Lambeth", which I sent to a publisher and was accepted . It appeared during my last year at the hospital and had something of a success . It was of course an accident , but naturally I did not know that . I felt I could afford to give up medicine and make writing my profession ; so, three days after I graduated from the school of medicine , I set out forprefix = st1 /Spainto write another book. Looking back now , and knowing as I do the terrible difficulties of making a living by writing , I realize I was taking a fearful risk . It never even occurred to me . The next ten years were very hard , and I earned an average of PS100 a year . Then I had a bit of luck . The manager of the Court Theatre put on a play that failed ; the next play he arranged to put on was not ready , and he was at his wits' end.He read a play of mine and , though he did not much like it , he thought it might just run for the six weeks till the play he had in mind to follow it with could be produced . It ran for fifteen months . Within a short while I had four plays running in Londonat the same time . Nothing of the kind had ever happened before . I was the talk of the town . One of the students atSt Thomas's Hospital asked the eminent surgeon with whom I had worked whether he remembered me . " Yes, I remember him quite well , " he said . " One of our failures , I'm afraid ." The manager of the Court Theatre agreed to put the author's play on the stage because _ . A) he thought it would run for fifteen months B) he knew it was one of the author's best plays shown in London C) he had just put on a play that failed D) the play he had arranged to put on was not ready
D