Which of the following activities may be more appropriate to help students practice a newstructure immediately after presentation in class

Which of the following is a typical feature of informal writing

Excellent novels are those which ____ national and cultural barriers.

As Alice believed him to be a man of integrity, she refused to consider the possibility that his statement was＿＿．

The girls are afraid that being friendly to strangers could be misinterpreted by their＿＿neighbours.

His presentation will show you ____ can be used in other contexts.

Many students start each term with an award check, but by the time books are bought, food is paid for, and a bit of social life ＿＿, it looks rather emaciated.

Which of the following is correct in its use of punctuation标点?

The pair of English phonemes音素 _ differ in the place of articulation发音部位.

There are ＿ consonant clusters辅音连缀 in the sentence “Brian, I appreciate beautiful scarf you brought me.”

When saying “It?s noisy outside” to get someone to close the window, the speaker intends to perform a(n) ＿.

That a Japanese child adopted at birth by an American couple will grow up speaking English indicates ＿ of human language.

Fluent and appropriate language use requires knowledge of ＿ and this suggests that we should teach lexical chunks rather than single words.

“Underlining all the past form verbs in the dialogue” is a typical exercise focusing on ＿.

When teaching students how to give appropriate responses to a congratulation or an apology, the teacher is probably teaching at ＿.

Which of the following activities can help develop the skill of listening for gist?

When an EFL teacher asks his student “How do you know that the author liked the place since he did not tell us explicitly?”, he/she is helping students to reach ＿ comprehension.

Which of the following types of questions are mostly used for checking literal comprehension of the text?

Peer-editing during class is an important step of the ＿ approach to teaching writing.

Portfolios, daily reports and speech delivering are typical means of ＿.

When the Viaduct de Millau opened in the south of France in 2004, this tallest bridge in the world won worldwide accolades. German newspapers described how it “floated above the clouds” with “elegance and lightness” and “breathtaking” beauty. In France, papers praised the “immense” “concrete giant.” Was it mere coincidence that the Germans saw beauty where the French saw heft and power? Lera Borodisky thinks not. In a series of clever experiments guided by pointed questions, Boroditsky is amassing evidence that, yes, language shapes thought. The effect is powerful enough, she says, that “the private mental lives of speakers of different languages may differ dramatically,” not only when they are thinking in order to speak, “but in all manner of cognitive tasks,” including basic sensory perception. “Even a small fluke of grammar”—the gender of nouns—“can have an effect on how people think about things in the world,” she says.

As in that bridge, in German, the noun for bridge, Brucke, is feminine. In French, pont is masculine. German speakers saw prototypically female features; Frenchspeakers, masculine ones. Similarly, Germans describe keys (Schlussel) with words such as hard, heavy, jagged, and metal, while to Spaniards keys (llaves) are golden, intricate, little, and lovely. Guess which language construes key as masculine and which as feminine? Grammatical gender also shapes how we construe abstractions. In 85 percent of artistic depictions of death and victory, for instance, the idea is represented by a man if the noun is masculine and a woman if it is feminine, says Boroditsky. Germans tend to paint death as male, and Russians tend to paint it as female. Language even shapes what we see. People have a better memory for colors if different shades have distinct names—not English?s light blue and dark blue, for instance, but Russian?s goluboy and sinly. Skeptics of the language-shapes-thought claim have argued that that?s a trivial finding, showing only tha

When the Viaduct de Millau opened in the south of France in 2004, this tallest bridge in the world won worldwide accolades. German newspapers described how it “floated above the clouds” with “elegance and lightness” and “breathtaking” beauty. In France, papers praised the “immense” “concrete giant.” Was it mere coincidence that the Germans saw beauty where the French saw heft and power? Lera Borodisky thinks not. In a series of clever experiments guided by pointed questions, Boroditsky is amassing evidence that, yes, language shapes thought. The effect is powerful enough, she says, that “the private mental lives of speakers of different languages may differ dramatically,” not only when they are thinking in order to speak, “but in all manner of cognitive tasks,” including basic sensory perception. “Even a small fluke of grammar”—the gender of nouns—“can have an effect on how people think about things in the world,” she says.

As in that bridge, in German, the noun for bridge, Brucke, is feminine. In French, pont is masculine. German speakers saw prototypically female features; Frenchspeakers, masculine ones. Similarly, Germans describe keys (Schlussel) with words such as hard, heavy, jagged, and metal, while to Spaniards keys (llaves) are golden, intricate, little, and lovely. Guess which language construes key as masculine and which as feminine? Grammatical gender also shapes how we construe abstractions. In 85 percent of artistic depictions of death and victory, for instance, the idea is represented by a man if the noun is masculine and a woman if it is feminine, says Boroditsky. Germans tend to paint death as male, and Russians tend to paint it as female. Language even shapes what we see. People have a better memory for colors if different shades have distinct names—not English?s light blue and dark blue, for instance, but Russian?s goluboy and sinly. Skeptics of the language-shapes-thought claim have argued that that?s a trivial finding, showing only tha

When the Viaduct de Millau opened in the south of France in 2004, this tallest bridge in the world won worldwide accolades. German newspapers described how it “floated above the clouds” with “elegance and lightness” and “breathtaking” beauty. In France, papers praised the “immense” “concrete giant.” Was it mere coincidence that the Germans saw beauty where the French saw heft and power? Lera Borodisky thinks not. In a series of clever experiments guided by pointed questions, Boroditsky is amassing evidence that, yes, language shapes thought. The effect is powerful enough, she says, that “the private mental lives of speakers of different languages may differ dramatically,” not only when they are thinking in order to speak, “but in all manner of cognitive tasks,” including basic sensory perception. “Even a small fluke of grammar”—the gender of nouns—“can have an effect on how people think about things in the world,” she says.

As in that bridge, in German, the noun for bridge, Brucke, is feminine. In French, pont is masculine. German speakers saw prototypically female features; Frenchspeakers, masculine ones. Similarly, Germans describe keys (Schlussel) with words such as hard, heavy, jagged, and metal, while to Spaniards keys (llaves) are golden, intricate, little, and lovely. Guess which language construes key as masculine and which as feminine? Grammatical gender also shapes how we construe abstractions. In 85 percent of artistic depictions of death and victory, for instance, the idea is represented by a man if the noun is masculine and a woman if it is feminine, says Boroditsky. Germans tend to paint death as male, and Russians tend to paint it as female. Language even shapes what we see. People have a better memory for colors if different shades have distinct names—not English?s light blue and dark blue, for instance, but Russian?s goluboy and sinly. Skeptics of the language-shapes-thought claim have argued that that?s a trivial finding, showing only tha

When the Viaduct de Millau opened in the south of France in 2004, this tallest bridge in the world won worldwide accolades. German newspapers described how it “floated above the clouds” with “elegance and lightness” and “breathtaking” beauty. In France, papers praised the “immense” “concrete giant.” Was it mere coincidence that the Germans saw beauty where the French saw heft and power? Lera Borodisky thinks not. In a series of clever experiments guided by pointed questions, Boroditsky is amassing evidence that, yes, language shapes thought. The effect is powerful enough, she says, that “the private mental lives of speakers of different languages may differ dramatically,” not only when they are thinking in order to speak, “but in all manner of cognitive tasks,” including basic sensory perception. “Even a small fluke of grammar”—the gender of nouns—“can have an effect on how people think about things in the world,” she says.

As in that bridge, in German, the noun for bridge, Brucke, is feminine. In French, pont is masculine. German speakers saw prototypically female features; Frenchspeakers, masculine ones. Similarly, Germans describe keys (Schlussel) with words such as hard, heavy, jagged, and metal, while to Spaniards keys (llaves) are golden, intricate, little, and lovely. Guess which language construes key as masculine and which as feminine? Grammatical gender also shapes how we construe abstractions. In 85 percent of artistic depictions of death and victory, for instance, the idea is represented by a man if the noun is masculine and a woman if it is feminine, says Boroditsky. Germans tend to paint death as male, and Russians tend to paint it as female. Language even shapes what we see. People have a better memory for colors if different shades have distinct names—not English?s light blue and dark blue, for instance, but Russian?s goluboy and sinly. Skeptics of the language-shapes-thought claim have argued that that?s a trivial finding, showing only tha

When the Viaduct de Millau opened in the south of France in 2004, this tallest bridge in the world won worldwide accolades. German newspapers described how it “floated above the clouds” with “elegance and lightness” and “breathtaking” beauty. In France, papers praised the “immense” “concrete giant.” Was it mere coincidence that the Germans saw beauty where the French saw heft and power? Lera Borodisky thinks not. In a series of clever experiments guided by pointed questions, Boroditsky is amassing evidence that, yes, language shapes thought. The effect is powerful enough, she says, that “the private mental lives of speakers of different languages may differ dramatically,” not only when they are thinking in order to speak, “but in all manner of cognitive tasks,” including basic sensory perception. “Even a small fluke of grammar”—the gender of nouns—“can have an effect on how people think about things in the world,” she says.

As in that bridge, in German, the noun for bridge, Brucke, is feminine. In French, pont is masculine. German speakers saw prototypically female features; Frenchspeakers, masculine ones. Similarly, Germans describe keys (Schlussel) with words such as hard, heavy, jagged, and metal, while to Spaniards keys (llaves) are golden, intricate, little, and lovely. Guess which language construes key as masculine and which as feminine? Grammatical gender also shapes how we construe abstractions. In 85 percent of artistic depictions of death and victory, for instance, the idea is represented by a man if the noun is masculine and a woman if it is feminine, says Boroditsky. Germans tend to paint death as male, and Russians tend to paint it as female. Language even shapes what we see. People have a better memory for colors if different shades have distinct names—not English?s light blue and dark blue, for instance, but Russian?s goluboy and sinly. Skeptics of the language-shapes-thought claim have argued that that?s a trivial finding, showing only tha

When American-born actor Michael Pena was a year old, his parents were deported. They had illegally walked across the U.S. border from Mexico and when they were caught by immigration authorities, they sent Pena and his brother to stay with relatives in the U.S. “It was quite a bit of a gamble for my parents,” says Pena, “but they came back a year later.” Pena?s father, who had been a farmer in Mexico, got a job at a button factory in Chicago and, eventually, a green card. Pena stayed in Chicago until, at 19, he fled to Los Angeles to pursue his acting dreams. This family history makes Pena?s latest role especially personal. In Cesar Chavez, Pena plays the labor leader as he struggles to organize immigrant California farm workers in the 1960s. To pressure growers to improve working conditions and wages, Chavez led a national boycott of table grapes that lasted from 1965 to 1970 and is recorded in the film. Chavez, like Pena, was the American-born son of Mexican farmers who immigrated to the U.S. “

He understands this duality, the feeling of being born in a place but having a very big idea of where your heritage comes from,” says the film director, Diego Luna. “This thing of having to go to school and learn in English and then go home to speak Spanish with your parents.”

As immigration policy is hotly debated on Capitol Hill this year, Luna and others who were involved with Cesar Chavez are hoping the movie will spark new support for reform and inspire American Latinos to get involved. “The message Chavez left was that change couldn?t happen without the masses being a part of their own change,” says Ferrera, a first generation Honduran American who plays the union leader?s wife Helen. Rosario Dawson, who co-founded the advocacy group Voto Latino, plays Chavez ally and labor leader Dolores Huerta.

Immigrant-rights issues in the U.S. have evolved substantially in the years since Chavez founded the United Farm Workers (UFW). Undocumented worker

When American-born actor Michael Pena was a year old, his parents were deported. They had illegally walked across the U.S. border from Mexico and when they were caught by immigration authorities, they sent Pena and his brother to stay with relatives in the U.S. “It was quite a bit of a gamble for my parents,” says Pena, “but they came back a year later.” Pena?s father, who had been a farmer in Mexico, got a job at a button factory in Chicago and, eventually, a green card. Pena stayed in Chicago until, at 19, he fled to Los Angeles to pursue his acting dreams. This family history makes Pena?s latest role especially personal. In Cesar Chavez, Pena plays the labor leader as he struggles to organize immigrant California farm workers in the 1960s. To pressure growers to improve working conditions and wages, Chavez led a national boycott of table grapes that lasted from 1965 to 1970 and is recorded in the film. Chavez, like Pena, was the American-born son of Mexican farmers who immigrated to the U.S. “

He understands this duality, the feeling of being born in a place but having a very big idea of where your heritage comes from,” says the film director, Diego Luna. “This thing of having to go to school and learn in English and then go home to speak Spanish with your parents.”

As immigration policy is hotly debated on Capitol Hill this year, Luna and others who were involved with Cesar Chavez are hoping the movie will spark new support for reform and inspire American Latinos to get involved. “The message Chavez left was that change couldn?t happen without the masses being a part of their own change,” says Ferrera, a first generation Honduran American who plays the union leader?s wife Helen. Rosario Dawson, who co-founded the advocacy group Voto Latino, plays Chavez ally and labor leader Dolores Huerta.

Immigrant-rights issues in the U.S. have evolved substantially in the years since Chavez founded the United Farm Workers (UFW). Undocumented worker

When American-born actor Michael Pena was a year old, his parents were deported. They had illegally walked across the U.S. border from Mexico and when they were caught by immigration authorities, they sent Pena and his brother to stay with relatives in the U.S. “It was quite a bit of a gamble for my parents,” says Pena, “but they came back a year later.” Pena?s father, who had been a farmer in Mexico, got a job at a button factory in Chicago and, eventually, a green card. Pena stayed in Chicago until, at 19, he fled to Los Angeles to pursue his acting dreams. This family history makes Pena?s latest role especially personal. In Cesar Chavez, Pena plays the labor leader as he struggles to organize immigrant California farm workers in the 1960s. To pressure growers to improve working conditions and wages, Chavez led a national boycott of table grapes that lasted from 1965 to 1970 and is recorded in the film. Chavez, like Pena, was the American-born son of Mexican farmers who immigrated to the U.S. “

He understands this duality, the feeling of being born in a place but having a very big idea of where your heritage comes from,” says the film director, Diego Luna. “This thing of having to go to school and learn in English and then go home to speak Spanish with your parents.”

As immigration policy is hotly debated on Capitol Hill this year, Luna and others who were involved with Cesar Chavez are hoping the movie will spark new support for reform and inspire American Latinos to get involved. “The message Chavez left was that change couldn?t happen without the masses being a part of their own change,” says Ferrera, a first generation Honduran American who plays the union leader?s wife Helen. Rosario Dawson, who co-founded the advocacy group Voto Latino, plays Chavez ally and labor leader Dolores Huerta.

Immigrant-rights issues in the U.S. have evolved substantially in the years since Chavez founded the United Farm Workers (UFW). Undocumented worker

When American-born actor Michael Pena was a year old, his parents were deported. They had illegally walked across the U.S. border from Mexico and when they were caught by immigration authorities, they sent Pena and his brother to stay with relatives in the U.S. “It was quite a bit of a gamble for my parents,” says Pena, “but they came back a year later.” Pena?s father, who had been a farmer in Mexico, got a job at a button factory in Chicago and, eventually, a green card. Pena stayed in Chicago until, at 19, he fled to Los Angeles to pursue his acting dreams. This family history makes Pena?s latest role especially personal. In Cesar Chavez, Pena plays the labor leader as he struggles to organize immigrant California farm workers in the 1960s. To pressure growers to improve working conditions and wages, Chavez led a national boycott of table grapes that lasted from 1965 to 1970 and is recorded in the film. Chavez, like Pena, was the American-born son of Mexican farmers who immigrated to the U.S. “

He understands this duality, the feeling of being born in a place but having a very big idea of where your heritage comes from,” says the film director, Diego Luna. “This thing of having to go to school and learn in English and then go home to speak Spanish with your parents.”

As immigration policy is hotly debated on Capitol Hill this year, Luna and others who were involved with Cesar Chavez are hoping the movie will spark new support for reform and inspire American Latinos to get involved. “The message Chavez left was that change couldn?t happen without the masses being a part of their own change,” says Ferrera, a first generation Honduran American who plays the union leader?s wife Helen. Rosario Dawson, who co-founded the advocacy group Voto Latino, plays Chavez ally and labor leader Dolores Huerta.

Immigrant-rights issues in the U.S. have evolved substantially in the years since Chavez founded the United Farm Workers (UFW). Undocumented worker

When American-born actor Michael Pena was a year old, his parents were deported. They had illegally walked across the U.S. border from Mexico and when they were caught by immigration authorities, they sent Pena and his brother to stay with relatives in the U.S. “It was quite a bit of a gamble for my parents,” says Pena, “but they came back a year later.” Pena?s father, who had been a farmer in Mexico, got a job at a button factory in Chicago and, eventually, a green card. Pena stayed in Chicago until, at 19, he fled to Los Angeles to pursue his acting dreams. This family history makes Pena?s latest role especially personal. In Cesar Chavez, Pena plays the labor leader as he struggles to organize immigrant California farm workers in the 1960s. To pressure growers to improve working conditions and wages, Chavez led a national boycott of table grapes that lasted from 1965 to 1970 and is recorded in the film. Chavez, like Pena, was the American-born son of Mexican farmers who immigrated to the U.S. “

He understands this duality, the feeling of being born in a place but having a very big idea of where your heritage comes from,” says the film director, Diego Luna. “This thing of having to go to school and learn in English and then go home to speak Spanish with your parents.”

As immigration policy is hotly debated on Capitol Hill this year, Luna and others who were involved with Cesar Chavez are hoping the movie will spark new support for reform and inspire American Latinos to get involved. “The message Chavez left was that change couldn?t happen without the masses being a part of their own change,” says Ferrera, a first generation Honduran American who plays the union leader?s wife Helen. Rosario Dawson, who co-founded the advocacy group Voto Latino, plays Chavez ally and labor leader Dolores Huerta.

Immigrant-rights issues in the U.S. have evolved substantially in the years since Chavez founded the United Farm Workers (UFW). Undocumented worker

某位高一英语教师组织了一个关于oil pollution的口语活动，学生们却对该活动没有兴趣，活动难以开展。请分析学生不感兴趣的两个主要原因，并列举组织成功的口语活动应注意的三个主要事项。

下面是某高中教师的课堂教学片段。

T: Just now we get to know many different sports, for example ... Ss: Weight-lifting, fencing, aerobics, triathlon, shooting ...

T: Great. Now, let?s think about this question: How many types can these sports be divided into?

Ss: (discuss with partners)

T: For example, football, tennis, table-tennis, they belong to ... Sl: Ball games.

T: Great. And then ... How about rings? Double bars? Which type of sports do they belong to?

Ss: (silent)

T: (write “gymnastics” on the blackboard) Now read after me ...

S2: Ms Xia, how to say “kua lan” in English? It is the honor of all our Chinese people.

T: Yeah, we really ought to know l10-hurdle race. By the way, which type do both running and l10-hurdle race belong to?

Ss: (silent)

T: Let me tell you, track and field sports. Read after me.

Ss: (read after the teacher)

T: Don?t forget the sports that are done in the water—the water sports. So what are the different types of sports we?ve learnt today?

Ss: Ball games, gymnastics, track and field and water games.

T: Excellent!

根据上面所给信息，从下列两个方面作答：

(1)该片段属于什么教学环节?其教学目的是什么？

(2)该片段存在哪两个主要问题?请提出相应的改进建议。

设计任务：请阅读下面学生信息和语言素材，设计20分钟的英语阅读教学方案。

该方案没有固定格式，但须包含下列要点：

●teaching objectives

●teaching contents

●key and difficult points

●major steps and time allocation

●activities and justifications

教学时间：20分钟

学生概况：某城镇普通高中二年级（第一学期）学生，班级人数40人。多数学生已经达到《普通高中英语课程标准（实验）》六级水平。学生课堂参与积极性一般。 语言素材：

Words, words, words British and American English are different in many ways. The first and most obvious way is in the vocabulary. There are hundreds of different words which are not used on the other side of the Atlantic, or which are used with a different meaning. Some of these words are well known—Americans drive automobiles down freeways and fill up with gas; the British drive cars along motorways and fill up with petrol. As a tourist, you will need to use the

underground in London or the subway in New York, or maybe you will prefer to get around the town by taxi (British) or cab (American). Chips or French fries? But other words and expressions are not so well known. Americans use a flashlight, while for the British, it?s a torch. The British queue up; Americans stand in line. Sometimes the same word has a slightly different meaning, which can be confusing. Chips, for example, are pieces of hot fried potato in Britain; in the States chips are very thin and are sold in packets. The British call these crisps. The chips the British know and love are French fries on the other side of the Atlantic. Have or have got? There are a few differences in grammar, too. The British say Have you got ...? While Americans prefer Do you have ...? An American might say My friend just arrived, but a British person would say My friend has just arrived. Prepositions, too, can be different: compare on the team, on the weekend (American) with in the team, at the weekend (British). The British use prepositions where Americans sometimes omit them (I’ll see you Monday; Write me soon!). Colour or color? The