第 31 题 阅读理解C 阅读选择题 2.5 分
🎧 听力音频

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 Brömmelstroet 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.

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?
查看答案与解析

答案

A

解析

【详解】 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。

本题来自2025年普通高等学校招生全国统一考试(全国一卷) 英语学科 本试卷共150分,共12页。考试结束后,将本试题和答题卡一并交回。(英语,共 67 题 150 分)阅读理解C部分。 返回整卷目录可按题型浏览全部题目;也可以在良师宝 App 中刷题。