C
While safety improvements might have been made to our streets in recent years, transport studies also show declines in pedestrian (行人) mobility, especially among young children. Many parents say there’s too much traffic on the roads for their children to walk safely to school, so they pack them into the car instead.
Dutch authors Thalia Verkade and Marco te Br?mmelstroet are bothered by facts like these. In their new book Movement: How to Take Back Our Streets and Transform Our Lives, they call for a rethink of our streets and the role they play in our lives.
Life on city streets started to change decades ago. Whole neighbourhoods were destroyed to make way for new road networks and kids had to play elsewhere. Some communities fought back. Most famously, a Canadian journalist who had moved her family to Manhattan in the early 1950s led a campaign to stop the destruction of her local park. Describing her alarm at its proposed replacement with an expressway, Jane Jacobs called on her mayor (市长) to champion “New York as a decent place to live, and not just rush through.” Similar campaigns occurred in Australia in the late 1960s and 1970s as well.
Although these campaigns were widespread, the reality is that the majority of the western cities were completely redesigned around the needs of the motor car. The number of cars on roads has been increasing rapidly. In Australia we now have over twenty million cars for just over twenty-six million people, among the highest rate of car ownership in the world.
We invest a lot in roads that help us rush through, but we fail to account for the true costs. Do we really recognise what it costs us as a society when children can’t move safely around our communities? The authors of Movement have it right: it’s time to think differently about that street outside your front door.
8. What phenomenon does the author point out in paragraph 1?
A. Cars often get stuck on the road. B. Traffic accidents occur frequently.
C.People walk less and drive more. D. Pedestrians fail to follow the rules.
9. What were the Canadian journalist and other campaigners trying to do?
A. Keep their cities livable. B. Promote cultural diversity.
慧升cca61241途限件有法元公学东bd2f上技司科4d50优软-网得广
C. Help the needy families. D. Make expressways accessible.10. What can be inferred about the campaigns in Australia in the late 1960s and 1970s?
A. They boosted the sales of cars. B. They turned out largely ineffective.
C. They won government support. D. They advocated building new parks.
11. What can be a suitable title for the text?
A. Why the Rush? B. What’s Next?
C. Where to Stay? D. Who to Blame?
【答案】8. C 9. A 10. B 11. A
【解析】
【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要介绍了西方城市过度围绕汽车设计导致行人流动性下降，尤其是儿童步行减少的现象，并通过历史案例和现状分析呼吁反思街道功能，重视城市宜居性。
【8题详解】
细节理解题。根据文章第一段“While safety improvements might have been made to our streets in recent years, transport studies also show declines in pedestrian (行人) mobility, especially among young children. Many parents say there’s too much traffic on the roads for their children to walk safely to school, so they pack them into the car instead. (虽然近年来我们的街道可能已经改善了安全性，但交通研究也表明行人的流动性下降，尤其是年轻儿童。许多家长说，路上的交通太拥挤，他们的孩子无法安全步行上学，所以他们把孩子塞进车里)”可知，作者指出的现象是人们步行减少、开车增多。故选C。
【9题详解】
推理判断题。根据文章第三段“Most famously, a Canadian journalist who had moved her family to Manhattan in the early 1950s led a campaign to stop the destruction of her local park. Describing her alarm at its proposed replacement with an expressway, Jane Jacobs called on her mayor (市长) to champion “New York as a decent place to live, and not just rush through.” (最著名的是，一位加拿大记者在20世纪50年代初举家迁往曼哈顿，她领导了一场阻止当地公园被毁的运动。在描述她对用高速公路取代公园的提议感到震惊时，Jane Jacobs呼吁她的市长捍卫“纽约作为适宜居住的地方，而不仅是匆匆穿过的通道”)”可推知，加拿大记者和其他运动参与者旨在保持城市宜居性。故选A。
【10题详解】
推理判断题。根据文章倒数第二段“Although these campaigns were widespread, the reality is that the majority of the western cities were completely redesigned around the needs of the motor car. The number of cars on roads has been increasing rapidly. (尽管这些运动很普遍，但现实是大多数西方城市完全围绕汽车需求重新设计。道路上的汽车数量一直在迅速增加)”可推知，20世纪60年代末和70年代澳大利亚的竞选活动未能阻止汽车发展，基本上没有效果。故选B。
【11题详解】
件东bd2f上心元广bb67技-a785优根9384限网得高点司4ccb慧有法公bcdf03db软升cca61241途学科4d50
主旨大意题。通读全文，并根据文章最后一段“We invest a lot in roads that help us rush through, but we fail to account for the true costs. Do we really recognise what it costs us as a society when children can’t move safely around our communities? (我们在帮助我们快速通过的道路上投入了大量资金，但我们没有考虑到真正的成本。我们真的认识到当孩子们不能在我们的社区安全地移动时，我们作为一个社会将会付出什么代价吗)”可推知，本文批判城市过度追求交通效率、忽视行人需求的现象，A项“Why the Rush? (为何匆匆?)”质问“rush through (匆匆通行)”的规划理念，契合主旨，最适合作为本文标题。故选A。
编辑：小徐