Section A

 The center of American automobile innovation has in the past decade moved 2,000 miles away. It has 1 from Detroit to Silicon Valley, where self-driving vehicles are coming into life.

In a 2 to take production back to Detroit, Michigan lawmakers have introduced 3 that could make their state the best place in the country, if not the world, to develop self-driving vehicles and put them on the road. 

“Michigan ’s 4 in auto research and development is under attack from several states and countries which desire to 5 our leadership in transportation. We can ’t let happen ,” says Senator Mike Kowall, the lead 6 of four bills recently introduced.

If all four bills pass as written, they would 7 a substantial update of Michigan ’s 2013 law that allowed the testing of self-driving vehicles in limited conditions. Manufacturer would have nearly total freedom to test their self-driving technology on public roads. They would be allowed to send groups of self-driving cars on cross-state road trips, and even set on-demand 8 of self-driving cars, like the one General Motors and Lyft are building.

  Lawmakers in Michigan clearly want to make the state ready for the commercial application of self-driving technology. In 9,California, home of Silicon Valley, recently proposed far more 10 rules that would require human drivers be ready to take the wheel, and commercial use of self-driving technology.

A) bid 

B)contrast

C)deputy 

D)dominance

E) fleets

F) knots

G) legislation  

H)migrated

I)replace

J) represent

k) restrictive

L) reward  

M) significant 

N)sponsor

O) transmitted

 Section B

 How Work Will Change When Most of Us Live to 100

A) Today in the United States there are 72,000  centenarians （百岁老人）.Worldwide,Probably 450,000. If current  trends continue,  then by 2050 there will  be more than a million  in the US alone. According to the work of Professor James Vaupel and his co-researchers, 50% of babies born in the US in 2007 have a life expectancy of 104 or more. Broadly the same holds for the UK, Germany, France,Italy and Canada, and for Japan  50% of 2007 babies can expect to live to 107.

B) Understandably, there are concerns  about what this means for public finances given the associated  health and pension challenges.  These challenges  are real, and society urgently needs to address them. But it is also important to look at the wider picture of what happens when so many people live for 100 years. It is a mistake to simply equate  longevity  (长寿) with issues of old age. Longer lives have implications for all of life, not just the end of it.

C) Our view is that if many people are living for longer, and are healthier for longer,  then this will  result  in an inevitable  redesign of work and life.  When people live longer, they are not only older for longer, but also younger for longer. There is some truth in the saying that  “70 is the new 60 ”or  “40 the new 30. ”If you age more slowly over a longer time period, then you are in some sense younger for longer.

D)But the changes go further than that. Take, for instance, the age at which

people make commitments such as buying a house, getting married, having children, or starting a career. These are all fundamental commitments that are now occurring later in life. In 1962, 50% of Americans were married by age 21. By 2014, that  milestone (里程碑)had shifted to age 29.

E)While there are numerous factors behind these shifts, one factor is surely a growing realization  for the young that they are going to live longer.  Options are more valuable  the longer they can be held. So if you believe  you will  live longer, then options become more valuable, and  early  commitment becomes less attractive.  The result  is that the commitments that previously  characterized the beginning  of adulthood are now being delayed, and new patterns  of behavior and a new stage of life are emerging for those in their twenties.

F) Longevity also pushes back the age of retirement, and not only for financial reasons.  Yes, unless people are prepared to save a lot more, our calculations suggest that if you are now in your mid-40s,  then you are likely  to work until your early 70s; and if you are in your early 20s, there is a real chance you will  need to work until  your late 70s or possibly  even into your 80s. But even if people are able to economically support a retirement at 65, over thirty years of potential inactivity is harmful to cognitive (认知的) and emotional vitality. Many people may simply not want to do it.

G)And yet that does not mean that simply extending our careers is appealing. Just lengthening  that second stage of full-time  work may secure the financial assets needed for a 100-year life, but such persistent work will inevitably exhaust precious intangible assets such as productive skills, vitality,happiness, and friendship.

H)The same is true for education.  It is impossible  that a single shot of education,administered in childhood and early adulthood, will be able to support a sustained, 60-year career. If you factor in the projected rates of technological change, either your skills will become unnecessary, or your industry  outdated.  That means that everyone will,  at some point in their  life,have to make a number of major reinvestments in their skills.

I) It seems likely,  then, that the traditional  three-stage  life  will  evolve into multiple stages containing two, three, or oven more different careers. Each of these stages could potentially be different. In one the focus could be on building financial success and personal achievement, in another on creating a better work/life balance, still another on exploring and understanding options  more fully,  or becoming an independent producer,  yet another on making a social Contribution.  These stages will  span sectors,  take people to different

cities, and provide Foundation for building a wide variety of skills.

J)Transitions  between stages could be marked with  sabbaticals  (休假) as people find timrest and recharge their health, re-invest in their relationships, or improve their  skills.  At times, these breaks and transitions will be self-determined, at others they will be forced as existing roles, firms, or industries cease to exist.

K）A multi-stage life will have profound changes not just in how you manage your career, but also

in your approach to life. An increasingly important skill will be your ability to deal with change and even welcome it. A three-stage life has few transitions, while a multi-stage life has many.That is why being self-aware, investing in broader networks of friends,and being open to new ideas will become even more crucial skills.

L）These multi-stage  lives will  create extraordinary  variety  across groups of people simply because there are so many ways of sequencing the stages. More stages mean more possible sequences.

M）With this variety will come the end of the close association of age and stage. I n a three-stage life, people leave university at the same time and the same age, they tend to start their careers and family at the same age, they proceed through middle management all roughly the same time, and then move into retirement within a few years of each other. In a multi-stage life, you could be an undergraduate at 20, 40, or 60; a manager at 30, 50, or 70; and become an independent producer at any age.

N）Current life structures, career paths, educational choices, and social norms are out of tune with the emerging reality of longer lifespans. The three-stage life of full-time education, followed by continuous work, and then complete retirement may have worked for our parents or even

grandparents, but it is not relevant today. We believe that to focus on longevity as primarily an issue of aging is to miss its full implications. Longevity is not necessarily about being older for longer. It is about living longer, being older later, and being younger longer.

Section C

Passage OneQuestions 1 to 5 are based on the following passage.

   In the classic  marriage  vow （誓约）, couples promise to stay together  in sickness and in health. But a new study finds that the risk of divorce among older couples rises when the wife-not the husband —becomes seriously ill.

 “Married women diagnosed with a serious health condition may find themselves struggling with the impact of their disease while also experiencing the stress of divorce, ”said researcher Amelia Karraker.

   Karraker and co-author Kenzie Latham analyzed 20 years of data on 2,717 marriages from a study conducted by Indiana University since 1992. At the time of the first interview, at least one of the partners was over the age of 50.

  T he researchers examined how the  onset （发生）of four serious physical illnesses affected  marriages.  They found that,  overall,  31% of marriages ended in divorce over the period studied. The incidence of new chronic （慢性的）illness onset increased over time as will,  with more husbands than wives developing  serious  health problems.

  “We found that women are doubly vulnerable to marital break-up in the face of illness, ”Karraker said.“They’re more likely  to be widowed, and if they’re the noes who become ill, they ’re more likely to get divorced. ”

    While the study didn’t assess why divorce  in more likely  when wives but not husbands become seriously ill, Karraker offers a few possible reasons.  “Gender norms and social  expectations  about caregiving  many make it more difficult  for men to provide care to sick spouses, ”Karraker said.  “And because of the imbalance in marriage markets, especially  in older ages, divorced  men have more choices among prospective partners than divorced women. ”

    Given the increasing concern about health care costs for the aging population,Karraker believes  policymakers  should be aware of the relationship  between disease and risk of divorce.

  “Offering support services to spouses caring for their other halves may reduce marital stress and prevent divorce at older ages, ”she said.  “But it ’s also important  to recognize  that the pressure to divorce  may be health-related  and that sick ex-wives may need additional  care and services  to prevent worsening health and increased health costs. ”

A.They may not guarantee a lasting marriage.

B.They are as binding as they used to be.

C.They are not taken seriously any more.

D.They may help couples tide over hard times.

A.They are generally not good at taking care of themselves.

B.They can become increasingly vulnerable to serious illnesses.

C. They can develop different kinds of illnesses just like their wives.

D.They are more likely to contract serious illnesses than their wives.

A.They are more likely to be widowed.

B.They are more likely to get divorced.

C.They are less likely to receive good care.

D.They are less likely to bother their spouses.

A.They are more accustomed to receiving care.

B. They find it more important to make money for the family.

C. They think it more urgent to fulfill their social obligations.

D.They expect society to do more of the job.

A.Reducing marital stress on wives.

B. Stabilizing old couples ’s relations.

C.Providing extra care for divorced women.

D.Making men pay for their wives ’health costs.

 Section D Questions 1 to 5 are based on the following passage.

If you were like most children, you probably got upset when your mother called you by a sibling ’s(兄弟姐妹的)name. How could she not know you? Did it mean she loved you less?

Probably not. According to the first  research to tackle this topic  head-on, misnaming the most familiar people in our life is a common  cognitive  (认知的)error that has to do with how our memories classify  and store familiar names.

The study, published  online in April  in the journal  Memory and Cognition ,found that the  “wrong”name is not random but is invariably fished out from the same relationship pond: children, siblings, friends. The study did not examine the

possibility of deep psychological significance to the mistake, says psychologist David Rubin,  “but it does tell us who ’s in and who ’s out of the group. ”

The study also found that within that group, misnamings occurred where the names shared initial or internal sounds, like Jimmy  and Joanie or John and Bob. Physical resemblance between people was not a factor. Nor was gender.

The researchers  conducted five  separate surveys of more than 1,700 people.  Some of the surveys included only college students; others were done with a mixed-age population.  Some asked subjects  about incidents  where someone close to them—family or friend—had called them by another person’s name. The other surveys asked about times when subjects had themselves called someone close to them by the wrong name. All the surveys found that people mixed up names within relationship groups such as grandchildren, friends and siblings but hardly ever crossed these boundaries.

In general,  the study found that undergraduates  were almost as likely  as old people to make this mistake and men as likely as women. Older people and this mistake and men as likely  as women. Older people and women made the mistake slightly  more often,

but that may be because grandparents  have more grandchildren  to mix up than parents have children. Also, mothers may call on their children more often than fathers,given traditional  gender norms. There was no evidence that errors occurred more when the misnamer was frustrated, tired or angry.

A.Unwanted.

B.Unhappy.

C.Confused.

D.Indifferent.

A.It is related to the way our memories work.

B.It is a possible indicator of a faulty memory.

C.It occurs mostly between kids and their friends.

D.It often causes misunderstandings among people.

A. Similar personality traits.

B.Similar spellings of names.

C. Similar physical appearance.

D.Similar pronunciation of names.

A.It more often than not hurts relationships.

B.It hardly occurs across gender boundaries.

C.It is most frequently found in extended families.

D.It most often occurs within a relationship groups.

A.They suffer more frustrations.

B.They become worn out more often.

C.They communicate more with their children.

D.They generally take on more work at home.