各位队员们周日好呀~ 周日的文史哲来了哦~~~
今天的Time1、2、3各自是一篇文章，Time4、5是同一篇文章；速度前三篇个人感觉趣味性相对较高，最后一篇是关于时政的，个人觉得可能没有前面那么有趣，担心会反差有点大...
最后的越障是一个option，第一个是比较偏学究一点来自的关于隐私的哈佛法律评论，第二篇是探究关于怀旧情节的，主要讨论对象是80后，不过Jay作为一个90后看了之后没有太大的共鸣，各位80后的大大们可以仔细品味一下哈~ 虽然字数比较多，但相对第一篇较简单~ （PS：nostalgia -怀旧，是最后一篇越障关键词，大家先理解了文章就会好懂很多哈~）
PS：1. 由于各种原因，这次作业有好几张图片都是我自己找的，特别是第三篇文章，感觉和其他图片很不搭，不过也找不到更好的了，就自己吐个槽了，希望不会影响大家阅读...
PS：2. 不知道为什么Part 1 Speed居中而导致了开头这段文字也居中了，太笨了，求技术指导啊... 谢谢了~~
闲话少说，作业走起~
大家列队练习吧~~~
Part 1 Speed
Article 1(Check the title later)
Galileo's Middle Finger
By Atlas Obscura | Posted Tuesday, May 28, 2013, at 10:40 AM
[TIME1]
It is a remarkable bit of irony, the finger: venerated, kept in a shrine, subjected to the same treatment as a saintly relic. But this finger belonged to no saint. It is the long bony appendage of an enemy of the church, a heretic.
As with a fine wine, it took some years for Galileo’s fingers to age into something worth snapping off his skeletal hand. The finger was removed by one Anton Francesco Gori on March 12, 1737, 95 years after Galileo’s death. Passed around for a couple hundred years, it finally came to rest in the Florence History of Science Museum.
In 2009, two more fingers, a vertebrae, and a tooth belonging to Galileo were discovered at auction. The spare parts had disappeared in 1905, and not been seen for over 100 years. Once their origin was deduced, they were returned them to the Science Museum, to rejoin Galileo's middle finer.
Today the middle finger sits in a small glass egg among lodestones and telescopes, human fragments in a museum devoted entirely to scientific instruments.
It is hard to know how Galileo would have felt about the final resting place of his middle finger. Whether it points upwards to the sky, where Galileo glimpsed the glory of the universe and saw God in mathematics, or if it sits eternally defiant to the church that condemned him, is for the viewer to decide.
[words: 234]
Source: slate
http://www.slate.com/blogs/atlas_obscura/2013/05/28/galileo_s_fingers_tooth_and_vertebrae_are_in_the_florence_history_of_science.html
Article 2(Check the title later) The Art of Buying Happiness With Money May 25, 2013, on page C18 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal [TIME2] Dear Dan, I have worked very hard for most of my life, and I am getting to feel more secure and comfortable. But I don't feel as happy as I expected, given all my achievements and financial success. I am not one of those hippies who think that money is not important, but it feels like something is missing. What am I doing wrong? —Matt
Don't worry. The fact that your financial achievements have not brought you contentment does not mean that you're a hippie. Social scientists have long been troubled by the finding that people basically think money will bring them happiness but it does so less than they expect.
There are two possibilities: First, that money cannot buy happiness. Second, that money can buy some happiness, but people just don't know how to use it that way. The good news is that this seems to be the correct answer.
In their fascinating book "Happy Money: The Science of Smarter Spending," Elizabeth Dunn and Michael Norton say there are two ways to get more happiness out of our money. The first is to buy less stuff and more experiences. We buy a sofa instead of a ski trip, not taking into account that we will get used to the sofa very quickly and that it will stop being a source of happiness, while the vacation will likely stay in our minds for a long time.
Second, and more interesting, Drs. Dunn and Norton demonstrate that we just don't give enough money away. Which of these would make you happier: buying a cup of fancy coffee for yourself, buying one for a stranger, or buying one for a good friend? Buying a cup of coffee for yourself is the worst. Buying for a stranger will linger in your mind and make you happier for a longer time, and buying for a friend is the best—it would also increase your social connection, friendship and long-run happiness.
So money can buy happiness—if we use it right.
[words: 336]
[The rest] Hey, Dan: I'm going to an out-of-town concert next month with friends and, as usual, I ended up organizing everything, booking a hotel room and fronting the money. When I've done this with groups in the past, I always end up spending the most on shared expenses, because they are never divided up evenly.
Perhaps I'm afraid to ask for large amounts of money, even though these are the true expenses that should be shared by everybody. What can I do to make sure that the bill for this upcoming show is split fairly?
—Scott
This is a question, in part, of how much you care about splitting the expenses evenly and how much responsibility you're willing to take to improve the situation. I assume you're willing to take this responsibility, so I suggest that you collect money from everyone in advance and pay all bills from this pool of money (and add 20% just in case, because we often don't take all contingencies into account).
This way, everyone will pay the same amount, and bill-splitting will never come up. If there's extra money, keep it for next year, or buy everyone a small gift to better remember the vacation.
Dear Dan,
I have sometimes found myself walking behind a woman at night in an unsafe place and going in the same direction. Even though there is some distance between us, I can feel the doubt and worry in her mind. How do I handle this situation? Should I stop or say something? I have places to be, too, but clearly I don't want the woman to feel unsafe. —Steve
Simply pick up your cellphone and call your mother. In the world of suspicion, nobody who calls his mother at night could be considered a negative individual.
[words: 297] Source: Wall Street Journal (WSJ) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323582904578489782346229370.html?mod=WSJ_Books_LS_Books_5#articleTabs%3Darticle
Article 3(Check the title later) How Do You Fake Your Own Death? By Brian Palmer|Posted Thursday, May 23, 2013, at 1:06 PM
Bronx-born rapper Tim Dog has been accused of faking his own death in February. A Mississippi prosecutor alleges that Dog, born Timothy Blair, is trying to escape paying court-ordered debts of $19,000, and he won’t accept that the rapper is dead until he sees a death certificate.
[TIME3]
So, what’s the best way to fake your own death?
Tell no one, stay off the grid, and, above all, don’t try to collect the insurance money. Making a clean break is crucial to faking your own death—don’t tell your friends and family about your scheme, and get as far from them as possible. Two of the most famous fakers in recent years were foiled by family members. Debt-laden Englishman John Darwin, who disappeared for five years beginning in 2002, was found after a police investigation into the financial holdings of his wife, who was assisting Darwin. Australian businessman Harry Gordon was living comfortably in his new life until 2005, when he improbably crossed paths with his brother, who encouraged Gordon’s first wife to end the scam. (She, too, knew of her husband’s ruse.) Of course, most of our information about faking death comes from failures, so the best strategies may be unknown.
Drowning is probably the leading cause of fake death. Both Darwin and Gordon staged their deaths by rowing small boats out to sea and abandoning them. A Long Island man faked drowning last year. A judge will eventually declare a missing person legally dead after a fruitless search, which is not uncommon in boating and swimming accidents. In many states, the waiting period is seven years, but families can petition for an earlier declaration if the circumstances strongly suggest death. Small plane crashes are also a popular scheme for this reason.
Some people, especially those attempting to defraud a life insurance company, aren’t willing to wait several years to be declared dead. For these impatient types, a foreign death certificate seems to be the strategy of choice. Lionel Correa bribed Mexican officials to fabricate a death certificate and accident report stating that his wife had fallen from a rooftop in 2001. Briton Anthony McErlean claimed he was hit by a truck in Honduras in 2009, and Ahmad Akhtary used a counterfeit Afghan death certificate to help his British ex-wife collect on his life insurance policy. These schemes are risky. Insurance companies have a financial incentive to track down people who fake death, both to avoid paying claims and to deter copycats. They hire private detectives who regularly catch fraudsters.
It’s best to avoid credit cards, loans, driver’s licenses, and anything else that would require generating a false identity in your new life. While vanishing and starting over isn’t technically a crime, fraud definitely is. Buying a social security number is also fraught with risk: You don’t know who that number used to belong to. It’s still possible to live a completely cash-based life. If you insist on maintaining a legal identity, experienced skip tracer Frank Ahearn recommends establishing a corporation to attenuate the link between your business dealings and yourself.
[words: 464] Source: slate http://www.slate.com/articles/life/explainer/2013/05/rapper_tim_dog_how_do_you_fake_your_own_death.html?wpisrc=flyouts
Article 4(Check the title later) A power test for the U.S. and China By David Ignatius, Saturday, June 1, 7:24 AM [TIME4] U.S. officials describe a common frustration in dealing with China over the past decade. Beijing wants to be recognized as a rising economic power but refuses to be an active partner in maintaining security. Beijing has seemed to want a free ride, without the corresponding responsibilities.
The next week will test whether China’s new president, Xi Jinping, intends to play a more engaged role with the United States and the world. Xi will spend two days in secluded strategic talks with President Obama, in what Chinese officials have been describing over the past year as a search for “a new type of great power relationship.”
The dilemma of great power relations that Xi and Obama will explore is often likened to the anxiety that the rise of Athens provoked in Sparta. As Harvard professor Joseph Nye noted back in 2005, the Peloponnesian War resulted from Sparta’s fears of an economically powerful Athens, but conflict wasn’t inevitable. It could have been averted by negotiations and wise policy. So, too, with America and China.
In the run-up to the meeting that will begin Friday at the Sunnylands estate east of Los Angeles, Xi has offered a demonstration of China’s new stance. He bluntly warned a North Korean emissary in May that Pyongyang should back away from its reckless nuclear threats and negotiate peace with China, the United States and others. “The denuclearization of the Korean peninsula . . . is what the people want and also the trend of the times,” Xi said.
U.S. officials think the Chinese stopped waffling on North Korea for three reasons: They fear that a nuclear North Korea will force neighboring South Korea and Japan to have nuclear weapons, too; they worry that North Korea will proliferate technology to rogue nations and terrorists; and, perhaps most important, they fear the United States will take military actions to protect itself that will reduce China’s security.
[words: 315]
[TIME5]
If the Chinese become a more reliable, stand-up regional power, what do they get in return? That surely will be on top of Xi’s list of questions for Obama. The most dangerous test is a small chain of islands in the East China Sea that the Chinese call the Diaoyu and the Japanese the Senkaku. The Japanese have recently asserted a stronger claim of sovereignty over the islands, and the Chinese have pushed back with gunboat diplomacy. The United States wants the issue to go away — taking no position on sovereignty and urging de-escalation — but it could be compelled by its defense treaty with Japan. It’s enough for now that Xi and Obama talk honestly about the issue. The Chinese also want a partnership in managing the global economy. Vice Premier Wang Yang told visiting national security adviser Thomas Donilon last week that the two nations should “strengthen macroeconomic policy coordination, and jointly promote world economic recovery and growth.”
Beijing has come a long way from its skepticism during the depth of the Great Recession, when U.S. capitalism seemed like the god that had failed. In a speech at the 2009 World Economic Forum in Davos, then-Prime Minister Wen Jiabao chided “inappropriate macroeconomic policies” and greedy banks and called the U.S. model “unsustainable.” The Chinese have changed their tune, thanks to solid economic measures by the Obama administration. Now they want even more free-market policies, on the American model.
The toughest nut will be cyber-issues. Here, Chinese behavior has been egregious, as they have stolen hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of U.S. technology over the past decade, including many of the most secret U.S. weapons systems. Donilon said in March that the United States wants three things: a Chinese recognition that this is a real and urgent problem, a Chinese commitment to investigate, and an agreement to cooperate on a framework for cyber-protection. That will be the agenda at Sunnylands, but U.S. officials say they are looking for a strategic discussion rather than a “deliverable.”
The U.S.-China relationship is the biggest play on the board of international relations. This is an area where Donilon’s hyper-organized approach, which sometimes annoys his colleagues, has paid dividends. The United States has been building the groundwork for a new relationship with Xi for more than a year, and Donilon rightly says it could be Obama’s “signature achievement.”
U.S. officials stress in every speech about China the paramount need for military-to-military dialogue. Perhaps history would have been different if Spartan and Athenian commanders had been friendly, though I’m not sure. But given the stakes, this week’s summit meeting between Obama and Xi deserves the term “historic.” [words: 442] Source: the Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-a-us-china-summit-worthy-of-the-name/2013/05/31/54d7ea1e-c981-11e2-9245-773c0123c027_story.html
Part 2 Obstacle
Article 5(Check the title later) Introduction: Privacy Self-Management and the Consent Dilemma by Daniel J. Solove [TIME6] During the past decade, the problems involving information privacy — the ascendance of Big Data and fusion centers, the tsunami of data security breaches, the rise of Web 2.0, the growth of behavioral marketing, and the proliferation of tracking technologies — have become thornier. Policymakers have proposed and passed significant new regulation in the United States and abroad, yet the basic approach to protecting privacy has remained largely unchanged since the 1970s. Under the current approach, the law provides people with a set of rights to enable them to make decisions about how to manage their data. These rights consist primarily of rights to notice, access, and consent regarding the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data. The goal of this bundle of rights is to provide people with control over their personal data, and through this control people can decide for themselves how to weigh the costs and benefits of the collection, use, or disclosure of their information. I will refer to this approach to privacy regulation as “privacy self-management.”
Privacy self-management takes refuge in consent. It attempts to be neutral about substance — whether certain forms of collecting, using, or disclosing personal data are good or bad — and instead focuses on whether people consent to various privacy practices. Consent legitimizes nearly any form of collection, use, or disclosure of personal data.
Although privacy self-management is certainly a laudable and necessary component of any regulatory regime, I contend that it is being tasked with doing work beyond its capabilities. Privacy self-management does not provide people with meaningful control over their data. First, empirical and social science research demonstrates that there are severe cognitive problems that undermine privacy self-management. These cognitive problems impair individuals’ ability to make informed, rational choices about the costs and benefits of consenting to the collection, use, and disclosure of their personal data.
Second, and more troubling, even well-informed and rational individuals cannot appropriately self-manage their privacy due to several structural problems. There are too many entities collecting and using personal data to make it feasible for people to manage their privacy separately with each entity. Moreover, many privacy harms are the result of an aggregation of pieces of data over a period of time by different entities. It is virtually impossible for people to weigh the costs and benefits of revealing information or permitting its use transfer without an understanding of the potential downstream uses, further limiting the effectiveness of the privacy self-management framework.
In addition, privacy self-management addresses privacy in a series of isolated transactions guided by particular individuals. Privacy costs and benefits, however, are more appropriately assessed cumulatively and holistically — not merely at the individual level. As several Articles in this Symposium demonstrate, privacy has an enormous social impact. Professor Neil Richards argues that privacy safeguards intellectual pursuits, and that there is a larger social value to ensuring robust and uninhibited reading, speaking, and exploration of ideas. Professor Julie Cohen argues that innovation depends upon privacy, which is increasingly under threat as Big Data mines information about individuals and as media-content providers track people’s consumption of ideas through technology. Moreover, in a number of cases, as Professor Lior Strahilevitz contends, privacy protection has distributive effects; it benefits some people and harms other people. Privacy thus does more than just protect individuals. It fosters a certain kind of society, since people’s decisions about their own privacy affect society, not just them-selves. Because individual decisions to consent to data collection, use, or disclosure might not collectively yield the most desirable social outcome, privacy self-management often fails to address these larger social values.
With each sign of failure of privacy self-management, however, the typical response by policy-makers, scholars, and others is to call for more and improved privacy self-management. In this Article, I argue that in order to advance, privacy law and policy must face the problems with privacy self-management and start forging a new direction.
Any solution must confront a complex dilemma with consent. Consent to collection, use, and disclosure of personal data is often not meaningful, but the most apparent solution — paternalistic measures — even more directly denies people the freedom to make consensual choices about their data. Paternalism would be easy to justify if many uses of data had little benefit or were primarily detrimental to the individual or society. But many uses of data have benefits in addition to costs, and individuals could rationally reach opposite conclusions regarding whether the benefits outweigh the costs. Making the choice for individuals restrains their ability to consent. Thus, to the extent that legal solutions follow a path away from privacy self-management and toward paternalism, they are likely to limit consent. A way out of this dilemma remains elusive.
Until privacy law recognizes the true depth of the difficulties of privacy self-management and confronts the consent dilemma, privacy law will not be able to progress much further. In this Article, I will propose several ways privacy law can grapple with the consent dilemma and move beyond relying too heavily on privacy self-management.
[words: 832]
Source: Havrad Law review http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/126/may13/Symposium_9475.php
Article 6(Check the title later) WHY A GREAT WAVE OF NOSTALGIA IS SWEEPING THROUGH CHINA POSTED BY AMANDA R. MARTINEZ MAY 31, 2013
[TIME7] At the No. 8 Hot Pot Restaurant in Beijing, a school bell rings at 5:30 P.M. sharp. Diners sit at old-style wooden desks rather than tables. The menu is a multiple-choice test. Instead of waiters, there are class monitors, who respond to raised hands. Not everyone can eat here, though. The restaurant is designed exclusively for people born between 1980 and 1989; I.D.s are checked at the door.
“We don’t mean to exclude anyone,” said Yuan Bao, the owner, an affable thirty-two-year-old with long bangs, dressed in cargo pants and a T-shirt with a skull on it. It’s just that “we know we all have similar memories and experiences.” Yuan’s goal is to create a safe space where his patrons can recall a very specific era of childhood innocence. It appears to be working: when the tinny, saccharine strains of a classic children’s song came on the restaurant’s sound system, one twenty-five-year-old diner said that it made her want to cry.
The classroom restaurant is part of a wave of nostalgia sweeping the generation of Chinese born between 1980 and 1989, known in China as baling hou, or “post-eighties.” In late 2010, in the eleven days after an online video featuring two young men performing Michael Jackson’s “Billie Jean” was posted, the forty-two-minute film was viewed more than seven million times, provoking an outpouring of comments from twenty and thirtysomethings who confessed to being moved to tears. The same generational cohort has also been flocking to the country’s few remaining state-run department stores, which predate China’s economic reform and which have been rendered all but extinct by Western-style malls. With their hodgepodge of merchandise, the stores bear a striking resemblance to America’s five-and-dimes—save for the faded Mao posters and the use of abaci to tally up orders—and are among the only places where young people can find guohuo, the state-produced consumer products they grew up with. Mrs. Zhang, an employee at the Youn’an department store in southwest Beijing, said that, when members of the post-eighties generation started showing up, a couple of years ago, they looked around and were transported back. As if on cue, a twenty-six-year-old man appeared. Reflecting on a cluster of tin cups, he said, “I used to play with these when I was little.”
Such outbreaks of bittersweet sentiments are perhaps an expression of China’s strong interest in its own history, or attempts at maintaining a sense of cultural continuity—albeit a variant that favors one’s personal experience of the past. But recent psychological research on the cognitive function of nostalgia suggests that the cause of this wave could be the post-eighties’ contemporary social experience.
A number of studies have revealed that when we suffer from certain psychological ailments—loneliness, social isolation, self-doubt, negative mood, and the feeling that life is meaningless—nostalgia can act as a coping mechanism. Such ailments can cause the mind to sift through its cache of memories, summoning up those with a particular narrative signature. Researchers analyzed hundreds of nostalgic accounts, and found that they typically featured family and friends, a momentous event, or, often, both. The participant describing the memory was almost always the protagonist, and the narrative arc was generally one of redemption: at first, conditions may have seemed grim or hopeless, but eventually things were resolved in a favorable ending. Through nostalgia, the researchers claimed, we bring back to the surface evidence of past triumphs and close relationships, times when our lives felt safe and ordered. Clay Routledge, a psychologist and nostalgia researcher at North Dakota State University, explained, “You’re affirming the self—’I’ve done great things’—which is presumably predictive of the future. ‘I might be uncertain right now, but just look at my past. I’m a likeable person. I’m destined for great things.’ ”
To illuminate nostalgia’s role as an emotional buffer, Routledge and other researchers attempted to destabilize their subjects’ sense of self. Participants took tests that could be collectively characterized as psychologically diabolical: performing math in public, reading an essay designed to provoke existential angst, and being told that their answers on a personality survey indicated they would likely end up alone and unloved. In some of the experiments, the subjects who’d been made to feel insignificant or destined for abandonment reported feeling significantly more nostalgic than those who hadn’t. In other studies, participants were prompted to evoke either a nostalgic memory or an ordinary event, before or just after having their sense of self assailed. The subjects who indulged in a nostalgic reminiscence reported feeling significantly less stressed, less defensive, more socially supported and content, and more optimistic than their non-nostalgic counterparts.
That nostalgia could be a source of mental resilience and motivation directly challenges certain critics’ notion of the sentiment as paralyzing, a harbinger of cultural stagnation. “It’s exactly the opposite,” Constantine Sedikides, a psychologist and nostalgia expert at the University of Southampton, said. “When you become nostalgic, you don’t become past-oriented. You want to go out there and do things.”
If there is a poster population for nostalgia’s self-regulatory effects, it is China’s post-eighties cohort. As the nation’s first generation of only children—China instituted its one-child policy in 1979—the post-eighties are predisposed to loneliness. They came of age in tandem with China’s transition to a more market-based economy, a fateful stroke of timing through which they were enlisted as involuntary trailblazers, tasked with defining what it means to be both modern and Chinese. While their parents received state-appointed factory jobs and government-subsidized housing, they were encouraged to pursue their dreams amidst a fluctuating social structure with few defined paths. Studying hard and making top grades became a generational cornerstone; academic diligence, it was understood, would lead to a more fulfilling professional life, and greater wealth. But the emphasis on education has produced more university graduates than positions with which to employ them. (A 2011 survey cited unemployment among college degree-holders aged twenty-one to twenty-five at just over sixteen per cent. Nearly seven million new graduates are expected this year.)
Now in their late twenties or early thirties, the post-eighties are trying to navigate a desolate job market, often as the sole financial providers for both their children and their parents (as is China’s custom). Many left their rural hometowns for the more prosperous cities only to face vicious competition for scarce white-collar jobs. To vie for scant promotions, they work eleven-hour days and engage in brutal office politics. Housing costs are out of reach for most, with the real-estate price-to-income ratio in cities like Shanghai and Beijing as high as twenty-three to one, yet post-eighties men are under tremendous pressure to own a home before they propose marriage. Add to all of this urban overcrowding, unprecedented pollution, and a barrage of food-safety scandals (in the last six months alone, there have been rumors of anthrax in beef, rat meat sold as lamb, chicken laced with unsafe levels of antibiotics, thousands of dead pigs found in a river that supplies Shanghai’s water, and the discovery that the country’s bottled water may be as bad or worse than its tap water), and the resulting stress presents an onslaught of nostalgia’s known psychological triggers. Xinyue Zhou, a psychologist at Sun Yat-sen University, in Guangzhou, whose research has demonstrated nostalgia’s ability to bolster a sense of social connectedness among a diverse cross-section of Chinese citizens, said, “The uncertainty, the lack of control over our lives, is most unbearable to the post-eighties, so we have to seek confirmation from the past.”
Marketers have been eager to capitalize on the post-eighties’ newly materialistic longing: Chevrolet and Hewlett-Packard launched nostalgic campaigns in recent years, while national brands, such as Huili Warrior sneakers, Forever bikes, and Jianlibao soda, have taken the opportunity to revive old products. According to Mary Bergstrom, the founder of the Bergstrom Group, a Shanghai-based consulting firm, and the author of “All Eyes East: Lessons from the Front Lines of Marketing to China’s Youth,” the most successful nostalgic ads and goods don’t just offer temporary relief within a safe moment of the past, they are also relevant to the post-eighties’ present reality and their hope for the future—a detail that underscores researchers’ findings that nostalgia can mitigate psychological slights and promote optimism.
China’s young adults aren’t the only ones reeling from the country’s dramatic social shifts. Rampant health and safety issues, as well as the general transition from a more community-focussed culture to one that values individual wealth, have people of all ages yearning for a simpler, more trustworthy time. But the post-eighties, as the first generation to come of age in a China with global consumerism, popular culture, and technology, have, by far, the most universal cultural references through which to express their nostalgia. An emblematic example is the generation’s rekindled obsession with Transformers, a toy line and cartoon, introduced in 1984, about robots that morph into powerful machines in pursuit of good or evil. In July, 2007, the American film “The Transformers” opened in China, becoming the country’s second-highest-grossing foreign film at the time, and sparking a resurgence in the toy’s popularity.
Back at the classroom restaurant in Beijing, a Transformers robot was featured prominently on a shelf strewn with colorful eighties-era toys. At a nearby table-desk, twenty-nine-year-old Jing Liu was laughing over beers with some of her actual former classmates. “Coming here makes us feel like we are back at the age when we didn’t have any pressure on us, just happily going to school every day,” she said. Just then, the staff handed out copies of an instantly recognizable first-grade English primer, and a young man volunteered to read aloud. A hush fell over his fellow diners, who turned to the appropriate page to follow along.
[words: 1621] Source: New Yorker http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/why-a-great-wave-of-nostalgia-is-sweeping-through-china.html#entry-more
| 
[复制链接]
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2013-6-2 20:42:06
收藏
收藏
来自 80#
楼主
