外刊改编语法填空题Day 37-Day 38-2025届高三英语一轮复习

这是一份外刊改编语法填空题Day 37-Day 38-2025届高三英语一轮复习，共8页。

It suggests that the rise f allergenic sensitivity bserved in rich cuntries ver the curse f the 20th century may _____1______ (cause) by a crrespnding decline in childhd infectins, and als by a shift frm rural t urban living, s that children are n lnger _____2_____(rutine) expsed t farm animals.
Dr Strachan’s wrk still has much t recmmend it. What the catchy label has fstered, hwever, is an errneus belief that cleanliness is nt necessarily a health benefit.
In reality, says Thmas Marrs, a paediatric allergist at Kings Cllege, Lndn, hygiene is usually abut bugs causing infectin—and the bugs that may be beneficial are different frm thse.
But it is plain t see why alternative descriptins, such as “the high turnver and diversity hypthesis” r “the micrbial deprivatin hypthesis”, have nt caught _____3______, mre accurate _____4______ they may be.
In an attempt t cllect further data n the matter, Okabe Hisa f Fukushima Medical University and his clleagues have trawled thrugh the Japan Envirnment and Children’s Study, which tracked ver 100,000 pregnancies between 2011 and 2014.
T pursue the animal cnnectin, they lked fr crrelatins between husehld pet wnership befre and immediately after a child’s birth, and any fd allergies _____5______ (diagnse) in that child’s first three years. They have just published their results in PLOS ONE.
Of the 66,000 r s children they chse t lk at, 22% had been brn int husehlds with pets, and were thus expsed t micrbes and ther ptential allergens frm thse animals bth befre and after birth.
Children in husehlds with dgs, the researchers fund, had lwer rates than average f allergies t eggs, milk and nuts. Thse chabiting with cats seemed _____6_____ (tlerate) f eggs, wheat and syabeans.
Hwever, children _____7_____ parents kept “turtles” (terrapins, in particular, are ppular pets in Japan) appeared unaffected. And, curiusly, thse expsed t hamsters appeared mre likely than average t be allergic t nuts.
What exactly all this means is unclear. One ptentially imprtant _____8______ (bserve) is that bth pre- and pstpartum expsure were needed fr the bserved effects t shw up. Neither, by _____9______(it), was sufficient. Pssibly, it is the time arund birth itself which is the crucial factr, fr this is _____10______ it is believed that the bulk f a child’s gut flra is established.
There are cnfunding variables. The researchers themselves pint ut that pet-wning husehlds are mre likely t live in the cuntryside, with its ther surces f immune-system-stimulating factrs.
And, as Dr Marrs bserves, allergy-prne families are less likely t wn pets in the first place. These facts, rather than the presence f cmpanin animals, might explain at least part f the effect.
Cnfirming r denying this will need mre study. Nevertheless, Dr Okabe’s cntributin is an interesting additin t the debate abut Dr Strachan’s brainchild.
Mre evidence that animals reduce childhd allergies
It suggests that the rise f allergenic sensitivity bserved in rich cuntries ver the curse f the 20th century may have been caused (cause) by a crrespnding decline in childhd infectins, and als by a shift frm rural t urban living, s that children are n lnger rutinely (rutine) expsed t farm animals.
Dr Strachan’s wrk still has much t recmmend it. What the catchy label has fstered, hwever, is an errneus belief that cleanliness is nt necessarily a health benefit.
In reality, says Thmas Marrs, a paediatric allergist at Kings Cllege, Lndn, hygiene is usually abut bugs causing infectin—and the bugs that may be beneficial are different frm thse.
But it is plain t see why alternative descriptins, such as “the high turnver and diversity hypthesis” r “the micrbial deprivatin hypthesis”, have nt caught n, mre accurate as/thugh they may be.
In an attempt t cllect further data n the matter, Okabe Hisa f Fukushima Medical University and his clleagues have trawled thrugh the Japan Envirnment and Children’s Study, which tracked ver 100,000 pregnancies between 2011 and 2014.
T pursue the animal cnnectin, they lked fr crrelatins between husehld pet wnership befre and immediately after a child’s birth, and any fd allergies diagnsed (diagnse) in that child’s first three years. They have just published their results in PLOS ONE.
Of the 66,000 r s children they chse t lk at, 22% had been brn int husehlds with pets, and were thus expsed t micrbes and ther ptential allergens frm thse animals bth befre and after birth.
Children in husehlds with dgs, the researchers fund, had lwer rates than average f allergies t eggs, milk and nuts. Thse chabiting with cats seemed mre tlerant (tlerate) f eggs, wheat and syabeans.
Hwever, children whse parents kept “turtles” (terrapins, in particular, are ppular pets in Japan) appeared unaffected. And, curiusly, thse expsed t hamsters appeared mre likely than average t be allergic t nuts.
What exactly all this means is unclear. One ptentially imprtant bservatin (bserve) is that bth pre- and pstpartum expsure were needed fr the bserved effects t shw up. Neither, by itself (it), was sufficient. Pssibly, it is the time arund birth itself which is the crucial factr, fr this is when it is believed that the bulk f a child’s gut flra is established.
There are cnfunding variables. The researchers themselves pint ut that pet-wning husehlds are mre likely t live in the cuntryside, with its ther surces f immune-system-stimulating factrs.
And, as Dr Marrs bserves, allergy-prne families are less likely t wn pets in the first place. These facts, rather than the presence f cmpanin animals, might explain at least part f the effect.
Cnfirming r denying this will need mre study. Nevertheless, Dr Okabe’s cntributin is an interesting additin t the debate abut Dr Strachan’s brainchild.
更多证据表明宠物能减少儿童过敏
研究表明，20世纪在富裕国家观察到的过敏性体质的盛行可能与儿童感染的相应下降有关，随着人们由农村生活向城市生活的转变，儿童不再经常接触农场动物。
斯特拉坎的研究仍然有很多值得推荐的地方。然而，这个朗朗上口的标签却助长了一种错误的观念，即清洁不一定有益于健康。
伦敦国王学院的儿科过敏症专科医生托马斯·马尔斯说，事实上，卫生通常讨论的是引起感染的细菌，而有益的细菌与引起感染的细菌是不同的。
但显而易见的是，相比卫生假说描述更准确的“生物多样性假说”或“微生物剥夺假说”却没有流行开来。
为了收集有关这一问题的进一步数据，福岛医科大学的冈部久雄和他的同事们查阅了日本环境与儿童的研究，该研究在2011年至2014年间对超过10万名孕妇进行了追踪研究。
为了探究动物与过敏的联系，他们寻找了孩子出生前和出生后立即饲养宠物与孩子三岁前被诊断出的任何食物过敏之间的相关性。他们刚刚在《公共科学图书馆·综合》上发表了他们的研究成果。
在他们选择观察的大约6.6万名儿童中，22%出生在有宠物的家庭，因此在出生前后都暴露在这些动物的微生物和其他潜在过敏原中。
研究人员发现，养狗家庭的孩子对鸡蛋、牛奶和坚果的过敏率低于平均水平。那些养猫家庭的孩子似乎对鸡蛋、小麦和大豆更耐受。
然而，父母养“龟类”（尤其是水龟，在日本是很受欢迎）的孩子似乎不受影响。奇怪的是，那些接触过仓鼠的人似乎比一般人更容易对坚果过敏。
这一切究竟意味着什么目前尚不清楚。一个潜在的重要观察结果是，只有产前和产后都与饲养宠物，结果才具有显著差异。仅其中一个阶段都是不够的。可能的原因是，出生前后的时间本身是关键因素，因为这通常被认为是儿童肠道菌群建立的时间。
这中间也存在混淆变量。研究人员自己指出，养宠物的家庭更有可能生活在农村，那里存在其他刺激免疫系统的因素。
而且，正如马尔斯所观察到的，容易过敏的家庭一开始就不太可能养宠物。这些事实（而不是伴侣动物的存在）至少可以解释部分影响。
确认或否认这一点还需要更多的研究。尽管如此，冈部久雄的贡献是对有关斯特拉坎理论争议的一个有趣的补充。
生词积累
crrespnding
adj.相应的
fster
v.促进，培养；领养，收养
catch n
流行
pregnancy
n.怀孕（期），妊娠（期）
diagnse
v.诊断（病症）；找出原因
tlerant
adj.宽容的，容忍的；（植物、动物、机器）能耐……的，有耐受性的
原创外刊改编语法填空题打卡Day 38
Is street phtgraphy an invasin f privacy?
Frm: EnglishLearningYking
Since the inceptin f street phtgraphy, there has always been tensin between phtgraphers wanting t capture the lives f rdinary peple and turn them int wrks f art ______1_____ the subjects f thse phts wh feel vilated by the unauthrized use f their likeness.
Legal dctrines, such as the right t privacy, were initially develped t prtect individuals wh were victims f “yellw jurnalists” wh used phts f peple “ut f cntext” t tell a false narrative and prfundly _____2______(impact) the subject’s reputatins and stature within their cmmunities.
Hwever, frm the street phtgraphers perspective, these laws als inhibited their freedm f expressin, _____3______ right enshrined in the Cnstitutin’s first amendment. On tp f that, several ther legal dctrines have als placed limits n the right f street phtgraphers t create wrks, including natinal security cncerns, trespassing and harassment laws, and gvernmental regulatins.
These cnflicting elements have made _____4______ difficult fr street phtgraphers and the general public t knw what actins are permissible under the law and when a phtgrapher needs cnsent befre taking a pht.
Balancing Freedm f Expressin And The Right t Privacy Fr Street Phtgraphers.
Generally, if street phtgraphers sht frm a public space, such as a street r a park, they usually have the right t phtgraph anyne withut their cnsent, even in a private space. If yu can see it frm a public space, yu can take a picture f it.
Since art and editrial wrks are cnsidered a prtectable expressin f ne’s mind (and part f the Cnstitutin), curts will ften _____5______ (prir) freedm f expressin. Street phtgraphy is a perfect example. Mre than just pretty pictures, street phtgraphers tell stries intended t illuminate aspects f sciety. The curts want t prtect thse images.
Unfrtunately, in their quest t capture rdinary peple’s raw emtins and candid mments, street phtgraphers may smetimes inadvertently invade the privacy f the persn they are phtgraphing, s with the curts have had t find a way t strike a balance between these tw ______6_____ (seem) cnflicting rights.
There Is N Right T Privacy In Public Places
On the ne hand, Privacy is “the state r cnditin f being free frm _____7______ (bserve) r disturbed by thers.” S It wuld be bjectively unreasnable t expect privacy n a city street r a crwded subway. Therefre, the curts have interpreted this t mean that the privacy right f a persn desn’t apply unless that persn has a reasnable expectatin f privacy.
The practical result f that legal dctrine is _____8______ street phtgraphers can take a picture f anything they can see frm a public area, even if the pht’s subject is n private prperty. Fr example, a phtgrapher wuld be free t phtgraph a cuple sitting n a restaurant pati r inside the restaurant thrugh a windw as lng as the phtgrapher is n public prperty.
On the ther hand, it is illegal t take phts f peple where they have a reasnable expectatin f privacy. If yu are in a public bathrm stall _____9______ the dr clsed, there is a clear expectatin f privacy, such that nbdy can shve a camera ver the stall wall and take a pht f yu.
Hwever, if yu are in a private htel rm with a giant windw and the phtgrapher can view yu frm the street, there is n expectatin f privacy. Absent lcal laws expressly _____10______ (establish) an expectatin f privacy, the phtgrapher culd sht phts f that persn withut yur permissin.
Is street phtgraphy an invasin f privacy?
Frm: EnglishLearningYking
Since the inceptin f street phtgraphy, there has always been tensin between phtgraphers wanting t capture the lives f rdinary peple and turn them int wrks f art and the subjects f thse phts wh feel vilated by the unauthrized use f their likeness.
Legal dctrines, such as the right t privacy, were initially develped t prtect individuals wh were victims f “yellw jurnalists” wh used phts f peple “ut f cntext” t tell a false narrative and prfundly impacted (impact) the subject’s reputatins and stature within their cmmunities.
Hwever, frm the street phtgraphers perspective, these laws als inhibited their freedm f expressin, a right enshrined in the Cnstitutin’s first amendment. On tp f that, several ther legal dctrines have als placed limits n the right f street phtgraphers t create wrks, including natinal security cncerns, trespassing and harassment laws, and gvernmental regulatins.
These cnflicting elements have made it difficult fr street phtgraphers and the general public t knw what actins are permissible under the law and when a phtgrapher needs cnsent befre taking a pht.
Balancing Freedm f Expressin And The Right t Privacy Fr Street Phtgraphers.
Generally, if street phtgraphers sht frm a public space, such as a street r a park, they usually have the right t phtgraph anyne withut their cnsent, even in a private space. If yu can see it frm a public space, yu can take a picture f it.
Since art and editrial wrks are cnsidered a prtectable expressin f ne’s mind (and part f the Cnstitutin), curts will ften priritize (prir) freedm f expressin. Street phtgraphy is a perfect example. Mre than just pretty pictures, street phtgraphers tell stries intended t illuminate aspects f sciety. The curts want t prtect thse images.
Unfrtunately, in their quest t capture rdinary peple’s raw emtins and candid mments, street phtgraphers may smetimes inadvertently invade the privacy f the persn they are phtgraphing, s with the curts have had t find a way t strike a balance between these tw seemingly (seem) cnflicting rights.
There Is N Right T Privacy In Public Places
On the ne hand, Privacy is “the state r cnditin f being free frm being bserved (bserve) r disturbed by thers.” S It wuld be bjectively unreasnable t expect privacy n a city street r a crwded subway. Therefre, the curts have interpreted this t mean that the privacy right f a persn desn’t apply unless that persn has a reasnable expectatin f privacy.
The practical result f that legal dctrine is that street phtgraphers can take a picture f anything they can see frm a public area, even if the pht’s subject is n private prperty. Fr example, a phtgrapher wuld be free t phtgraph a cuple sitting n a restaurant pati r inside the restaurant thrugh a windw as lng as the phtgrapher is n public prperty.
On the ther hand, it is illegal t take phts f peple where they have a reasnable expectatin f privacy. If yu are in a public bathrm stall with the dr clsed, there is a clear expectatin f privacy, such that nbdy can shve a camera ver the stall wall and take a pht f yu.
Hwever, if yu are in a private htel rm with a giant windw and the phtgrapher can view yu frm the street, there is n expectatin f privacy. Absent lcal laws expressly establishing (establish) an expectatin f privacy, the phtgrapher culd sht phts f that persn withut yur permissin.
街拍是一种对隐私的侵犯吗？
自街头摄影诞生以来，摄影师想要捕捉普通人的生活并将其转化为艺术作品，而这些照片的被拍人员则因未经授权使用他们的肖像而感到受到骚扰，两者之间一直存在紧张关系。
隐私权等法律原则最初是为了保护“卑鄙记者”的受害者，这些“卑鄙记者”使用人们的照片“断章取义”地来讲述虚假的故事，并深刻地影响了当事人在他们的圈子中的声誉和地位。
然而，从街头摄影师的角度来看，这些法律也限制了他们的言论自由，这是宪法第一修正案所规定的权利。除此之外，其他一些法律条文也对街头摄影师创作作品的权利进行了限制，包括国家安全问题、非法侵入和骚扰法以及政府法规。
这些相互冲突的因素使得街头摄影师和公众很难了解法律允许的行为，以及摄影师在拍照前什么时候需要征得同意。
平衡街头摄影师的言论自由和隐私权。
一般来说，如果街头摄影师在公共空间拍摄，比如街道或公园，他们通常有权在未经他们同意的情况下拍摄任何人，即使是在私人空间。如果你能从公共场所看到它，你也可以给它拍照。
由于艺术和编辑作品被认为是一种受保护的思想表达(也是宪法的一部分)，法院通常会优先考虑言论自由。街拍就是一个很好的例子。除了漂亮的照片，街头摄影师还讲述了旨在照亮社会各个方面的故事。法院想要保护这些图像。
不幸的是，街头摄影师在追求捕捉普通人的原始情感和坦率时刻的过程中，有时可能会无意中侵犯他们所拍摄的人的隐私，因此法院不得不找到一种方法来平衡这两种看似冲突的权利。
在公共场所没有隐私权
一方面，隐私是“不被他人观察或干扰的状态或条件”。因此，客观上，期望在城市街道或拥挤的地铁上获得隐私是不合理的。因此，法院对此的解释是，一个人的隐私权不适用，除非这个人对隐私有合理的预判。
这一法律原则的实际结果是，街头摄影师可以拍摄他们在公共场所看到的任何东西，即使照片所拍对象是在私人财产上。例如，只要摄影师是在公共场所，摄影师就可以自由地拍摄坐在餐厅露台上或通过窗户进入餐厅的夫妇。
另一方面，在人们合理期望有隐私的地方拍照是违法的。如果你在一个关着门的公共厕所隔间里，你显然希望有隐私，这样就没有人可以把相机推过隔间的墙给你拍照。
然而，如果你住在一个有巨大窗户的私人酒店房间里，摄影师可以从街上看到你，那就没有隐私可言了。如果没有当地法律明确建立对隐私的规定，摄影师可以在未经你允许的情况下拍摄那个人的照片。
生词积累
likeness
n.相似，相像；样子，肖像；照片，画像；
ut f cntext
断章取义
stature
n. 地位
inhibit
v.抑制，约束；使拘束，使尴尬
enshrine
vt.<正式>把（法律、权利等）奉为神圣
dctrine
n.教义，主义，信条
trespass
v.侵入；犯罪
har
assment
n.骚扰
cnsent
n.许可，允许；同意，赞同
priritize
v.按优先顺序列出；优先考虑（处理）
illuminate
v.照射，照亮；阐明，解释
inadvertently
adv.无意地，不经意地
expressly
adv.清楚地，明显地；特别地，专门地