unit 1 总论Day 4 题型及应对策略三（态度题）
What is the author’s attitude in writing this passage?
What is the author’s tone?
arbitrary武断的 advisory建议的 complimentary赞扬的
concerned关心的，关注的 critical批评的 emotional情绪化的
sarcastic嘲讽的 ironical讥讽的 humorous幽默的
indifferent漠不关心的 informative提供信息的 outraged愤怒的
descriptive描述的 explanatory解释的 sympathetic同情的
enthusiastic热情的 cautious小心翼翼的 objective客观的
neutral中性的，不偏不倚的 compromising妥协的 subjective主观的
Unless we spend money to spot and prevent asteroids（小行星）now, one might crash into Earth and destroy life as we know it, say some scientists.
Asteroids are bigger versions of the meteorites（流星）that race across the night sky. Most orbit the sun far from Earth and don’t threaten us. But there are also thousands whose orbits put them on a collision course with Earth.
Buy $ 50 million worth of new telescopes right now. Then spend $ 10 million a year for the next 25 years to locate most of the space rocks. By the time we spot a fatal one, the scientists say, we’ll have a way to change its course.
Some scientists favor pushing asteroids off course with nuclear weapons. But the cost wouldn’t be cheap.
Is it worth it? Two things experts consider when judging any risk are: 1) How likely the event is; and 2) How bad the consequences if the event occurs. Experts think an asteroid big enough to destroy lots of life might strike Earth once every 500,000 years. Sounds pretty rare—but if one did fall, it would be the end of the world. “If we don’t take care of these big asteroids, they’ll take care of us. ” says one scientist, “It’s that simple.”
The cure, though, might be worse than the disease. Do we really want fleets of nuclear weapons sitting around on Earth? “The world has less to fear from doomsday（毁灭性的）rocks than from a great nuclear fleet set against them. ”said a New York Times article.
Q: Which of the following best describes the author’s tone in this passage?
A) Optimistic. B) Critical.
C) Objective. D) Arbitrary.
【答案解析】C。纵观全文可发现，文章通篇分析了小行星撞击地球的可能性并探讨其解决方法，没有给出作者自己的观点，都是引用“some scientists”，“the scientists”，“experts”和“a New York Times article”的话，由此可推断出作者的态度是客观的。选项A“乐观的”，B“批判的”，D“武断的”，均不符合题意。
Exercise 2 (2000.12)
Engineering students are supposed to be examples of practicality and rationality, but when it comes to my college education I am an idealist and a fool. In high school I wanted to be an electrical engineer and, of course, any sensible student with my aims would have chosen a college with a large engineering department, famous reputation and lots of good labs and research equipment. But that’s not what I did.
I chose to study engineering at a small liberal-arts（文科）university that doesn’t even offer a major in electrical engineering. Obviously, this was not a practical choice; I came here for more noble reasons. I wanted a broad education that would provide me with flexibility and a value system to guide me in my career. I wanted to open my eyes and expand my vision by interacting with people who weren’t studying science or engineering. My parents, teachers and other adults praised me for such a sensible choice. They told me I was wise and mature beyond my 18 years, and I believed them.
I headed off to college sure I was going to have an advantage over those students who went to big engineering “factories” where they didn’t care if you had values or were flexible. I was going to be a complete engineer: technical genius and sensitive humanist（人文学者）all in one.
Now I’m not so sure. Somewhere along the way my noble ideals crashed into reality, as all noble ideals eventually do. After three years of struggling to balance math, physics and engineering courses with liberal-arts courses, I have learned there are reasons why few engineering students try to reconcile（协调）engineering with liberal-arts courses in college.
The reality that has blocked my path to become the typical successful student is that engineering and the liberal arts simply don’t mix as easily as I assumed in high school. Individually they shape a person in very different ways; together they threaten to confuse. The struggle to reconcile the two fields of study is difficult.
Q: The author’s experience shows that he was .
A) creative B) ambitious
C) unrealistic D) irrational
Some pessimistic experts feel that the automobile is bound to fall into disuse. They see a day in the not-too-distant future when all autos will be abandoned and allowed to rust. Other authorities, however, think the auto is here to stay. They hold that the car will remain a leading means of urban travel in the foreseeable future.
The motorcar will undoubtedly change significantly over the next 30 years. It should become smaller, safer, and more economical, and should not be powered by the gasoline engine. The car of the future should be far more pollution—free than present types.
Regardless of its power source, the auto in the future will still be the main problem in urban traffic congestion（拥挤）. One proposed solution to this problem is the automated highway system.
When the auto enters the highway system, a retractable（可伸缩的）arm will drop from the auto and make contact with a rail, which is similar to those powering subway trains electrically.
Once attached to the rail, the car will become electrically powered from the system, and control of the vehicle will pass to a central computer. The computer will then monitor all of the car’s movements.
The driver will use a telephone to dial instructions about his destination into the system. The computer will calculate the best route, and reserve space for the car all the way to the correct exit from the highway. The driver will then be free to relax and wait for the buzzer（蜂鸣器）that will warn him of his coming exit. It is estimated that an automated highway will be able to handle 10,000 vehicles per hour, compared with the 1,500 to 2,000 vehicles that can be carried by a present-day highway.
Q: What is the author’s attitude toward the future of autos?
A) Enthusiastic. B) Pessimistic.
C) Optimistic. D) Cautious.