Benjie Goodheart is in his late 30s, adores his partner and has a young son. But the thought of marriage has paralyzed him with fear. And it’s all thanks to his parents’ perfect marriage. Wedded bliss ... Benjie Goodheart felt the pressure of wanting an idealized version of his parents’ relationship. According to Christine Northam, a relationship counselor with Relate, “it’s like having a terribly clever elder brother at school—it sets a competitive standard, “ she says. “It’s a normal anxiety about a big change, and you’ve got the added pressure of wanting an idealized version of your parents’ relationship.“ It seems such anxiety is not uncommon. “As much as it’s hard to cope with parents being imperfect, cheating, splitting, “ says therapist Tracey Cox, “it is sometimes harder to be presented with the ideal happy marriage.“ Avy Joseph is a cognitive behavioral therapist and founder of CityMinds. “It’s quite common for people to put pressure on themselves, “ he says, “if they’ve grown up in an environment where, in their view, things have been perfect.“ Overcoming these fears involves accepting the fact that your marriage may not be perfect. But if it isn’t, you will cope. Just because something isn’t perfect doesn’t mean it’s worthless. And if your marriage ends in divorce, it doesn’t define you as a failure. “Your own worth isn’t dependent on the success of your marriage, “ says Joseph. Working at Relate, Christine Northam knows no marriage is perfect. “I don’t know anybody who is 100% happy with their marriage. Most marriages go through ups and downs. You’re idealizing it. You have a false impression of what real marriage is like. Most married people hate each other at times, frankly. You can’t be perfectly in love all the time.“ So marriage is not the happy ending of the fairy-tales. I love the fact that, 44 years after they married, my parents still hold hands, make each other giggle, and tease each other. But they would doubtless balk at the idea that their marriage is perfect. Mum suffers from terrible vertigo, yet Dad persists in taking enormous detours every holiday through a mountain range. Dad could spend a week looking at a ruined church, whereas Mum could do the Acropolis in five minutes. Hundreds more took place along the recurring themes of what time to leave for the airport (Mum, six hours before a flight; Dad, six minutes), how to pour a drink (Mum, fill a large glass to the brim; Dad, quarter-fill a thimble) and how best to pass leisure time (Mum, bulk-buying from catalogue companies; Dad, reading every column inch of the newspaper). They aren’t perfect. They just love each other enough to deal with the imperfections. As Cox says: “What they are good at is having faith, loving each other and finding compromises to make them both happy. No one breezes through (marriage) without working at it.“ And yes, I would hope to have a marriage as successful as theirs. But I know it will take some work. I’m ready for that. I finally got down on one knee this year. After waiting for the perfect romantic moment, I realized it would probably never come. I had prevaricated long enough. So I asked her on the spur of the moment, while I was unpacking the shopping from the car, with Wendy in a bath towel standing in our driveway asking why I’d put Fred in the boot of the car (he’d insisted) while he banged on the rear windscreen, pronouncing loudly about his latest fecal production. The proposal wasn’t on a moonlit beach or over a candlelit dinner, but slap bang in the minutiae of everyday life, in all its hilarious, glorious ridiculousness—and because of the person she is, Wendy loved it. And so it is that I find myself marching towards my impending nuptials, eyes wide open, resolve secure, safe in the knowledge that I am punching well above my weight with the woman who will be my wife. Benjie and Wendy were married last Saturday.

The concern throughout the world in 1988 for those three whales that were locked in the Arctic ice was dramatic proof that whales, several species of which face extinction, have become subjects of considerable sympathy. These are the recorded voices of whales. These monstrous creatures have been trumpeting their songs, one to another, in the world’s oceans since the dawn of time, while overhead, great empires and civilizations have come and gone. Now, their time of decline has come. It began a long time ago. Four-thousand-year-old rock carvings show that the people who lived in what is now Norway were probably the first to seek out and kill whales in the sea. By around 890 AD, 3, 000 years later, the practice had spread to the Basque people of France and Spain, who hunted whales from boats in the Bay of Biscay. In the centuries that followed, whaling became an important industry in Denmark, England, Germany, the Netherlands, and, finally, in what would become America. Whaling went into dramatic decline, beginning around 1900. Today, whales are hunted commercially only by Norway, Iceland and Japan. The world’s fascination with them, however, is at an all-time high, because so few of them are left. Given their tragic history. Richard Ellis writes about whales, takes pictures of whales in the open sea, and sketches whales stranded on the beach. He says it’s a 20-year obsession that began in the mid-1960s, when he designed a model of a great blue for the Museum of Natural History in New York. “As I began to do the research, I realized that nobody knew anything about whales. And I couldn’t really find any pictures of what they looked like: all I could find was pictures of dead whales. And I became very excited at the prospect of doing what seemed to be original research on something that was so peculiar, which was the largest animal that has ever lived on earth.“ So large, he discovered, that the largest dinosaur weighed only half as much as the female blue whale. As he continued his research he boarded scientific vessels, dove with whales in the Pacific, and even watched whales die at the hands of modern, explosive-tipped harpoons. His sketches appeared in magazines and encyclopedias and at the center of what was then the beginning of a movement to save the whales. “I was one of those people who used to stand on street corners and ask for people to sign petitions, which at that time were directed towards the Japanese and the Soviets. Because in that period of time—late 60s, early 70s—the Japanese and the Soviets were killing tens of thousands of sperm particularly in the North Pacific. And we thought that getting the world’s opinion on paper would make them say, ’Oh look, all these people don’t like what we are doing. We will stop.’ Well, of course, they didn’t stop.“ Not at first, commercial whaling peaked in the mid-1960s, with more than 60, 000 whales killed each year. The International Whaling Commission, a group of member nations aimed at regulating the industry, began to make recommendations to end commercial whaling entirely. Why kill whales for soap, or fuel or paints and varnishes, even margarine, if we had substitutes for all those products? The seemingly senseless slaughter focused the world’s attention on the whale and consequently the International Whaling Commission or IWC. “And since it’s said nowhere in the constitution of the IWC that you had to be whaling nation to join, you have countries like Kenya and the Seychelles. Switzerland is a member of the IWC, a country not known for its whaling history. Countries joined because they felt that this was something that needed to be done.“ By 1986, the Commission had passed a moratorium on commercial whaling. But since the organization had no enforcement powers, it could and cannot impose sanctions on violators. Only a few nations—Japan, Iceland, and Norway—continue to hunt whales commercially. Richard Ellis says there is something magical about this animal caught in the net of life and time, and we must continue to fight to preserve it, because in the end we are really protecting a small part of ourselves and our earth.

From the point of view of health we are living in a marvelous age. We are immunized from birth against many of the most dangerous diseases. A large number of once fatal illnesses can now be cured by modern drugs and surgery. It is almost certain that certain remedies will be found for the most stubborn remaining diseases. The expectation of life has increased enormously. Although the possibility of living a long and happy life is greater than ever before, every day we witness the incredible slaughter of men, women and children on the roads. Man versus the motor-car! It is a never-ending battle which man is losing. Thousands of people over the world are killed or horribly killed each year and we are quietly sitting back and letting it happen. It is estimated that throughout the world, at least half a million people are killed and about 15 million injured on the roads each year. Most people suggest that we should do something to prevent the accidents and thus save many lives. Fortunately, society has become more life conscious, and over the last few years, people have become more aware of the reasons why they should drive more carefully. The facts that careless driving and poor road conditions are dangerous for other drivers, passengers and passers-by and well cause permanent disability and even death are just a few incentives to keep drivers from thoughtless driving. It has been rightly said that when a man is sitting behind a steering wheel, his car becomes the extension of his personality. There is no doubt that the motor-car often brings out a man’s very worst qualities. People who are normally quiet and pleasant may become unrecognizable when they are behind a steering-wheel. They swear! They are ill-mannered and aggressive, willful as two-years-olds and utterly selfish. All their hidden frustrations, disappointments and jealousies seem to be brought to the surface by the act of driving. The surprising thing is that society smiles so benignly on the motorist and seems to condone his behavior. Everything is done for his convenience. Cities are allowed to become almost uninhabitable because of heavy traffic; towns are made ugly by huge car parks; the countryside is desecrated by road networks; and the mass annual slaughter becomes nothing more than a statistic, to be conveniently forgotten. It is high time a world code were created to reduce this senseless waste of human life. With regard to driving, the laws of some countries are notoriously lax and even the strictest are not strict enough. A code which was universally accepted could only have a dramatically beneficial effect on the accident rate. Here are a few examples of something that might be done. The driving test should be standardized and made far more difficult than it is; all the drivers should be made to take a test every three years or so; the age at which young people are allowed to drive any vehicle should be raised to at least 21; all vehicles should be put through stringent annual tests for safety. Even the smallest amount of alcohol in the blood can impair a person’s driving ability. Present drinking and driving laws (where they exist) should be made much stricter. Maximum and minimum speed limits should be imposed on all roads. Governments should lay down safety specifications for manufacturers, as has been done in the USA. And governments should impose stricter fines for those who do not comply with speed limits on roads. Typically, more deaths occur on rural roads, where speeds are higher than in urban areas. Besides, the authorities should make an effort to improve road conditions. There should be no holes, no bumps, but more motorways. Thanks to this, our vehicle can also be in a better condition. Additionally, no driver should use mobile phones as we are not concentrated on the road when we are driving. All advertising stressing power and performance should be banned. These measures may sound inordinately harsh. But surely nothing should be considered as to be severe if it results in reducing the annual toll of human life. After all, the world is for human beings, not motor-cars.

PASSAGE ONE

PASSAGE FOUR

The world seems increasingly divided into those who favor genetically modified (GM) foods and those who fear them. Advocates assert that growing genetically altered crops can be kinder to the environment and that eating foods from those plants is perfectly safe. And, they say, genetic engineering—which can induce plants to grow in poor soils or to produce more nutritious foods—will soon become an essential tool for helping to feed the world’s burgeoning population. Skeptics contend that GM crops could pose unique risks to the environment and to health—risks too troubling to accept placidly. Taking that view, many European countries are restricting the planting and importation of GM agricultural products. Much of the debate hinges on perceptions of safety. But what exactly does recent scientific research say about the hazards? Advocates of GM, or transgenic, crops say the plants will benefit the environment by requiring fewer toxic pesticides than conventional crops. But critics fear the potential risks and wonder how big the benefits really are. “We have so many questions about these plants, “ remarks Guenther Stotzky, a soil microbiologist at New York University. “There’s a lot we don’t know and need to find out.“ As GM crops multiply in the landscape, unprecedented numbers of researchers have started fanning into the fields to get the missing information. Some of their recent findings are reassuring; others suggest a need for vigilance. Every year U.S. growers shower crops with an estimated 971 million pounds of pesticides, mostly to kill insects, weeds and fungi. But pesticide residues linger on crops and the surrounding soil, leaching into groundwater, running into streams and getting gobbled up by wildlife. The constant chemical trickle is an old worry for environmentalists. In the mid-1990s agribusinesses began advertising GM seeds that promised to reduce a farmer’s use of toxic pesticides. Today most GM crops—mainly soybean, corn, cotton and canola—contain genes enabling them to either resist insect pests or tolerate weed-killing herbicides. The insect-resistant varieties make their own insecticide, a property meant to reduce the need for chemical sprays. The herbicidetolerant types survive when exposed to broad-spectrum weed killers, potentially allowing farmers to forgo more poisonous chemicals that target specific weed species. Farmers like to limit the use of more hazardous pesticides when they can, but GM crops also hold appeal because they simplify operations (reducing the frequency and complexity of pesticide applications) and, in some cases, increase yields. But confirming environmental benefit is tricky. Virtually no peer-reviewed papers have addressed such advantages, which would be expected to vary from plant to plant and place to place. Some information is available, however. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, farmers who plant herbicidetolerant crops do not necessarily use fewer sprays, but they do apply a more benign mix of chemicals. For instance, those who grow herbicide-tolerant soybeans typically avoid the most noxious weed killer, turning instead to glyphosate herbicides, which are less toxic and degrade more quickly. Insect-resistant crops also bring mixed benefits. To date, insect resistance has been provided by a gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). This gene directs cells to manufacture a crystalline protein that is toxic to certain insects—especially caterpillars and beetles that gnaw on crops—but does not harm other organisms. The toxin gene in different strains of Bt. can affect different mixes of insects, so seed makers can select the version that seems best suited to a particular crop. Defining the environmental risks of GM crops seems even harder than calculating their benefits. At the moment, public attention is most trained on Bt crops, thanks to several negative studies. Regulators, too, are surveying the risks intensely. This spring or summer the EPA is expected to issue major new guidelines for Bt crops, ordering seed producers to show more thoroughly that the crops can be planted safely and monitored in farm fields. In the face of mounting consumer concern, scientists are stepping up research into the consequences of Bt and other GM crops. Among their questions: How do Bt crops affect “nontarget“ organisms—the innocent bugs, birds, worms and other creatures that happen to pass by the modified plants? Will GM crops pollinate nearby plants, casting their genes into the wild to create superweeds that grow unchecked? What are the odds that the genetically engineered traits will lose their ability to protect against insects and invasive weeds, leaving GM plants suddenly vulnerable?

PASSAGE TWO

PASSAGE THREE

Standing tall as the defining landmark of Toronto is the CN Tower, Canada’s National Tower. On 553.33 metres, it is the world’s 【S1】______ tallest freestanding tower and a symbol of Canadian achievement recognized around the world. This architectural triumph is an engineering wonder of the modern world and widely regarded as the iconic symbol of tourism for Toronto. With breathtaking views from three observation levels, the CN Tower is a worldly class entertaining 【S2】______ and dining destination and must-see attraction when visiting Toronto. The CN Tower has dominated Toronto’s skyline during daylight hours since it opened 31 years before. But at night, the dimly lit giant 【S3】______ fades nearly to black. Not anymore. Last week, it was illuminated 【S4】______ for the first time in a dazzling light show. CN Tower can now claim to be the world’s tallest illuminated structure. The newly lit tower will consume up 60 percent less electricity than the old scheme. It 【S5】______ is an energy efficient, costly effective and architecturally 【S6】______ stunning result that whole Canadians can be proud of. On 【S7】______ a clean night, residents will be able to spot the illuminated 【S8】______ tower. It is hoped that the new lighting will help end Toronto’s five- year tourist slump. It will serve as a beacon for tourism representing extraordinary experiences that can be found in Toronto and throughout 【S9】______ Canada. Throughout the year, the lighting will pay attribute to national 【S10】______ holidays, special occasions and some citywide events.

As you can see in the two excerpts below, people hold different opinions toward whether one should be similar or different in order to gain success. To what degree do you agree that one can truly have unique individuality? How much can individuality, or similarity, contribute to success? Following are two excerpts on this topic. Read these excerpts carefully and write a response of no less than 300 words, in which you should: 1. summarize the opinions from both sides; 2. give your comment. Marks will be awarded for content relevance, content sufficiency, organization and language quality. Failure to follow the above instructions may result in a loss of marks. Excerpt 1 Born to Win Muriel James & Dorothy Jongeward Each human being is born as something new, something that never existed before. Each is born with the capacity to win at life. Each person has a unique way of seeing, hearing, touching, tasting and thinking. Each has his or her own unique potentials—capabilities and limitations. Each can be a significant, thinking, aware, and creative being—a productive person, a winner. The word “winner“ and “loser“ have many meanings. When we refer to a persona as a winner, we do not mean one who makes someone else lose. To us, a winner is one who responds authentically by being credible, trustworthy, responsive, and genuine, both as an individual and as a member of a society. Winners are not afraid to do their own thinking and to use their own knowledge. They can separate facts from opinion and don’t pretend to have all the answers. They listen to others, evaluate what they say, but come to their own conclusions. Although winners can admire and respect other people, they are not totally defined, demolished, bound, or awed by them. … Excerpt 2 People don’t like to be told they are similar to everyone else. But that’s ridiculous, really. Because feeling special and different is a luxury only for those who are very mainstream. I can tell you, as a person who does not fit in that well, I work very hard to fit in. You think the eccentrics are trying to be eccentric, but they are not. It’s not fun to be eccentric if you really are. It’s only fun to be eccentric if you aren’t. … By examining how I fit into the generations, I can see the larger context of myself and my community. And the larger a context you can see yourself in, the more varied your self-knowledge will be. When it comes to making choices in your life, you will make better choices with better self-knowledge—understanding how you are the same as other people. If you know how you are the same, you can leverage the knowledge and research what has come before you. You are probably an average juggler. You are probably part of your generation. You probably hate being told you are regular and typical. But let me tell you something. The best way to solve your career problems is to recognize that you are not the first to have them.

(S)=Simon Fanshawe (I)=Interviewer (I): Hello and welcome to our talk show. In the next few minutes we’re going to be talking about modern manners. It’s an argument that, on the face of it, has been going on between the generations, for hundreds of generations. Older people can often be heard saying the youth of today lack the basics in good behavior and with newspapers and the media focusing on the anti-social activities of a minority of young people. It’s easy for them to be branded with a negative stereotype. So are British manners really getting worse? With me today here is Simon Fanshawe, the author of the book called “The Done Thing“ all about modern British manners. Simon, do you think that the British manners are really getting worse? (S): Well, let’s first see what people think about it. I’ve come to a typical UK high street on a weekday to talk to the young mums and dads, business people, elderly people and students and I then get an interesting mix of views. Some think that our manners are getting better and some think they are getting really worse because the moral standards are declining generally. However, more think generally in buses and trains people’s manners have improved in many ways. And they also think that there are cultural differences, so one might meet someone from a different culture with a rather different set of manners. So, you see it is however a question of individual taste. Different people have different opinions on this issue. (I): OK, but is there some common ground? Or what are the basic dos and don’ts? (S): I think one of the things confusing for people is when they come here there appears to be hundreds and hundreds of rules, hundreds of things you should and shouldn’t do. And the truth of it is that most of them are about class. And lots of them are trip-wires actually for people who don’t know them. So what I tried to do in my book was take it back to the first principle and say look — there are anthropological reasons why we have certain kinds of manners. So I’ll give you a very good example. In Britain there are sort of two ways of holding a knife, very broadly. And broadly speaking the middle-classes hold it with the index finger on the top, gripped in the hand. And working-class people hold it like a pen. Entirely a class distinction and people mercilessly exploit it if they want to. The truth of it is, the one way not to hold a knife at the table, is clasped in your fist, raised as if to kill your guest. This is the end of Part One of the interview. Questions 1 to 5 are based on what you have just heard Question One What do newspapers and the media focus on? Question Two Who was not interviewed by Simon Fanshawe? Question Three Some British people think the manners are getting worse. What’s the reason? Question Four What is the truth concerning numerous rules of dos and don’ts? Question Five How do the middle-classes hold the knife? Great changes in modern British manners. Anti-social activities of some young people. The book called The Done Thing. Generation gap.

(I): And what does that tell us about eating? (S): Well, what that tells us about eating is two things, which is never confusing your guests with either the food or the enemy. Don’t eat them and don’t kill them. That’s about how you should hold your knife, because actually manners are really about the reduction of violence. There’s a lot in there about reducing violence. So that’s just an illustration of what one tries to do so actually when you look at real table manners they’re about people feeling comfortable with each other, sharing food around a table. It’s a very important human thing. (I): And are things actually getting worse? (S): Very broadly speaking, we all rub along together pretty well actually. We don’t do so badly. The trouble with bad manners is that when you experience it, it completely occupies your field of vision. So you feel completely knocked back and rather hurt by somebody. (I): Should foreigners, say, comply with British manners when in Britain or just be themselves? (S): Well, I think one issue we should be very gentle with is because we’re not terribly good at understanding that there are lots of different customs from around the world, so you know, be gentle. But I think the thing what I would say to anybody going to any other culture, any other country in the world: Number one — be curious, ask questions if possible. The other thing is don’t think there’s a right and a wrong way to do things in terms of little funny details. Always remember that fundamentals matter more than anything else. “Please“ and “Thank You“ is a gift and a grace in any language so treat people in the fundamental purpose of manners which is to make life easier. If I can give you a definition of manners, it is the reduction of actual or potential violence between strangers. So always seek to defuse conflict, always seek to reach out and offer yourself to other people, always seek to open the door and let them through. Always do those kinds of things because actually you’ll find people love it and they’ll respond to you. (I): Simon Fanshawe, it would be very bad manners of me not to say, “thank you“ for coming to talk to us. So, thank you very much for all the useful information and advice you have given to us. (S): My pleasure. This is the end of Part Two of the interview. Questions 6 to 10 are based on what you have just heard. Question Six Why is the way of holding the knife important at table? Question Seven According to Simon, what is the influence of bad manners on people? Question Eight What should foreigners do in Britain? Question Nine How does Simon define “manners“? Question Ten Which of the following tips is NOT suggested by Simon when anybody travels abroad? Because it is convenient to cut steak. Because it is helpful to reduce violence. Because it is comfortable to eat food. Because it is important to show respect.

Benjie Goodheart is in his late 30s, adores his partner and has a young son. But the thought of marriage has paralyzed him with fear. And it’s all thanks to his parents’ perfect marriage. Wedded bliss ... Benjie Goodheart felt the pressure of wanting an idealized version of his parents’ relationship. According to Christine Northam, a relationship counselor with Relate, “it’s like having a terribly clever elder brother at school—it sets a competitive standard, “ she says. “It’s a normal anxiety about a big change, and you’ve got the added pressure of wanting an idealized version of your parents’ relationship.“ It seems such anxiety is not uncommon. “As much as it’s hard to cope with parents being imperfect, cheating, splitting, “ says therapist Tracey Cox, “it is sometimes harder to be presented with the ideal happy marriage.“ Avy Joseph is a cognitive behavioral therapist and founder of CityMinds. “It’s quite common for people to put pressure on themselves, “ he says, “if they’ve grown up in an environment where, in their view, things have been perfect.“ Overcoming these fears involves accepting the fact that your marriage may not be perfect. But if it isn’t, you will cope. Just because something isn’t perfect doesn’t mean it’s worthless. And if your marriage ends in divorce, it doesn’t define you as a failure. “Your own worth isn’t dependent on the success of your marriage, “ says Joseph. Working at Relate, Christine Northam knows no marriage is perfect. “I don’t know anybody who is 100% happy with their marriage. Most marriages go through ups and downs. You’re idealizing it. You have a false impression of what real marriage is like. Most married people hate each other at times, frankly. You can’t be perfectly in love all the time.“ So marriage is not the happy ending of the fairy-tales. I love the fact that, 44 years after they married, my parents still hold hands, make each other giggle, and tease each other. But they would doubtless balk at the idea that their marriage is perfect. Mum suffers from terrible vertigo, yet Dad persists in taking enormous detours every holiday through a mountain range. Dad could spend a week looking at a ruined church, whereas Mum could do the Acropolis in five minutes. Hundreds more took place along the recurring themes of what time to leave for the airport (Mum, six hours before a flight; Dad, six minutes), how to pour a drink (Mum, fill a large glass to the brim; Dad, quarter-fill a thimble) and how best to pass leisure time (Mum, bulk-buying from catalogue companies; Dad, reading every column inch of the newspaper). They aren’t perfect. They just love each other enough to deal with the imperfections. As Cox says: “What they are good at is having faith, loving each other and finding compromises to make them both happy. No one breezes through (marriage) without working at it.“ And yes, I would hope to have a marriage as successful as theirs. But I know it will take some work. I’m ready for that. I finally got down on one knee this year. After waiting for the perfect romantic moment, I realized it would probably never come. I had prevaricated long enough. So I asked her on the spur of the moment, while I was unpacking the shopping from the car, with Wendy in a bath towel standing in our driveway asking why I’d put Fred in the boot of the car (he’d insisted) while he banged on the rear windscreen, pronouncing loudly about his latest fecal production. The proposal wasn’t on a moonlit beach or over a candlelit dinner, but slap bang in the minutiae of everyday life, in all its hilarious, glorious ridiculousness—and because of the person she is, Wendy loved it. And so it is that I find myself marching towards my impending nuptials, eyes wide open, resolve secure, safe in the knowledge that I am punching well above my weight with the woman who will be my wife. Benjie and Wendy were married last Saturday.

例如我翻译莎士比亚，本来计划于课余之暇每年翻译两部，二十年即可完成，但是我用了三十年，主要的原因是懒。翻译之所以完成，主要的是因为活得相当长久，十分惊险。翻译完成之后，虽然仍有工作计划，但体力渐衰，有力不从心之感。假使年轻的时候鞭策自己，如今当有较好或较多的表现。然而悔之晚矣。再例如，作为一个中国人，经书不可不读。我年过三十才知道读书自修的重要。我披阅，我圈点，但是恒心不足，时作时辍。五十以学易，可以无大过矣，我如今年过八十，还没有接触过《易经》，说来惭愧。史书也很重要。我出国留学的时候，我父亲买了一套同文石印的前四史，塞满了我的行箧的一半空间，我在外国混了几年之后又把前四史原封带回来了。直到四十年后才鼓起勇气读了《通鉴》一遍。现在我要读的书太多，深感时间有限。无论做什么事，健康的身体是基本条件。我在学校读书的时候，有所谓“强迫运动”，我踢破过几双球鞋，打断过几只球拍。因此侥幸维持下来最低限度的体力。老来打过几年太极拳，目前则以散步活动筋骨而已。寄语年轻朋友，千万要持之以恒的从事运动，这不是嬉戏，不是浪费时间。健康的身体是作人做事的真正的本钱。

What does “balk“ mean in the third paragraph?

The author’s proposal of marriage can be described as______.

According to the last paragraph, all of the following statements are correct EXCEPT______.