未分类题

SECTION A CONVERSATIONS
Directions: In this section you will hear several conversations. Listen to the conversations carefully and then answer the questions that follow.
听力原文:M: Hey, Helen, how are you?
W: I'm fine, Bob. Arch't you glad the semester is over?
M: Are you going to the rock concert Friday night?
W: I haven't thought much about it. Are you?
M: Sure. Would you like to go with me?
W: Sounds like fun.
M: You'll have to buy your own ticket though.
W: Are you broke again? Let me treat you. You know I am a waitress at the student center. Anyway now that the final exams are almost over, I'd love a night out.
M: Since you'ye been so great about buying the tickets, why don't I take us out to dinner?
W: You'ye got a deal. Let's buy the tickets now.
When does this conversation take place?

A.
听力原文:M:
B.
M:
C.
W:
D.
M:
E.
When
F.In
G.
B.At
H.
C.At
I.
D.In
J.


【参考答案】

C
解析:录音中多次说到“Aren'tyougladthesemesterisover.”和“Anywaynow......

(↓↓↓ 点击下方‘点击查看答案’看完整答案 ↓↓↓)
热门 试题

未分类题
A century ago in the United States, when an individual brought suit against a company, public opinion tended to protect that company. But perhaps this phenomenon was most striking in the case of the railroads. Nearly half of all negligence cases decided through 1896 involved railroads. And the railroads usually won.Most of the cases were decided in state courts, when the railroads had the climate of the times on their sides. Government supported the railroad industry; the progress railroads represented was not to be slowed down by requiring them often to pay damages to those unlucky enough to be hurt working for them.Court decisions always went against railroad workers. A Mr. Farwell, an engineer, lost his right hand when a switchman's negligence ran his engine off the track. The court reasoned that since Farwell had taken the job of an engineer voluntarily at good pay, he had accepted the risk. Therefore the accident, though avoidable had the switchman acted carefully, was a 'pure accident'. In effect a railroad could never be held responsible for injury to one employee caused by the mistake of another.In one case where a Pennsylvania Railroad worker had started a fire at a warehouse and the fire had spread several blocks, causing widespread damage, a jury found the company responsible for all the damage. But the court overturned the jury's decision because it argued that the railroad's negligence was the immediate cause of damage only to the nearest buildings. Beyond them the connection was too remote to consider.