Question

Over 500 dogs being delivered to a butcher house were saved by a Chinese animal protection organization.

The incident then triggered debate among Chinese netizens about the necessity of pouring so much money and efforts into saving dogs.

On Friday, a truck loaded with over 500 dogs were stopped by volunteers from animal protection organization on Jingha Expressway Beijing section.

Beijing Times reported these dogs were being delivered to slaughter houses in the city of Changchun, northeast Jilin Province and would be eventually served on dinner tables.

After negotiations with the truck driver, pet service provider Leepet Holding Corp. and a philanthropic foundation, Shang shan Foundation purchased these dogs, each paying 50,000 yuan. Dogs were then delivered to the eadquarter of China Small Animal Protection Association (CSAPA), being taken care of and waiting for adoption.

After the “dog saving mission” was reported, Chinese net users debate over whether saving dogs worth so much efforts and money while there are still many poor and needy people in China lacking assistance.

Some net users argue the “dog saving mission” is placing overt attention to animals while lots of needy people are still left unattended.

A microblogger “Xiaowulaitajie” said on China's twitter­ like website, weibo.com, “Dogs are saved, adopted and they attracted media spotlight. We'd better spend such money and take such efforts in helping the needy people.”

Another microblogger, Liluping, said “We poured such huge sum of money into saving dogs. I would rather the money be spent on disaster relief.”

Some applaud volunteers' actions and show eagerness of offering their helping hands to those saved dogs.

Still many disapprove those “saving dogs” critics, but they argue that such act nonetheless promotes social progress.

A microblogger named “broken bridge” said, saving dogs does not run counter to taking care of people. Such enthusiasm in public affairs will help raise social awareness in helping the needy.

I think people and animals are created equal. Attention should be paid to people as well as animals.

1.Where did the article come from?

A. A storybook. B. A novel.

C. Internet. D. A magazine.

2.Which one has the similar meaning to the underlined phrase “run counter to” in the last but one paragraph?

A. meet with B. go against

C. agree with D. come across

3.Whose opinion is closest to the writer's?

A. Some net users'. B. Broken bridge's.

C. Liluping's. D. Xiaowulaitajie's.

4.The following statements are TRUE except _______.

A. All the people don't think it right to save these dogs with so much money.

B. More than 25,000,000 yuan was given to the truck driver to purchase these dogs.

C. These dogs were finally saved and sent back to their owners.

D. Some people think it better to spend the money in helping the needy people.

 

Answer 1

1.C

2.B

3.B

4.C

【解析】

试题分析：有消息称大约500只狗即将被运往位于长春的屠宰场。幸运的是，一个动物保护协会拿出大量的资金买下了这500多只狗。这个事件在网上引起了网友的热烈讨论。

1.The incident then triggered debate among Chinese netizens about”和后文的“Some net users argue the “dog saving mission” is placing overt attention to animals...A microblogger “Xiaowulaitajie” said...Another microblogger, Liluping,...A microblogger named “broken bridge” said”可知，动物保护协会救下500多只狗的行为引起了网民的热烈讨论，由此可知，这是一篇来自互联网的文章，故选C。

2.Such enthusiasm in public affairs will help raise social awareness in helping the needy.”可知，类似于救狗的行为有助于提高人们帮助有需要的人或动物的意识，救狗和助人并不冲突，A满足；B违反，违背；C同意；D偶遇，故选B。

3.I think people and animals are created equal. Attention should be paid to people as well as animals.”可知，作者认为动物和人类是平等的，根据倒数第二段“A microblogger named “broken bridge” said, saving dogs does not run counter to taking care of people.”可知，微博“broken bridge”的观点与作者的相似，故选B。

4.Dogs were then delivered to the eadquarter of China Small Animal Protection Association (CSAPA), being taken care of and waiting for adoption.”可知，被救的500多只狗在等待人们前去领养，故选C。

考点：社会类短文阅读