评论
打印
In spite of “endless talkof difference,”American society is an amazing machine for homogenizing people.There is “the democratizing uniformity of dress and discourse, and thecasualness and absence of difference” characteristic ofpopular culture. People are absorbed into “a culture ofconsumption” launched by the 19th-century department stores that offered “vast arraysof goods in an elegant atmosphere. Instead of intimate shops catering to aknowledgeable elite。” these were stores “anyone could enter, regardless of class or background. This turnedshopping into a public and democratic act。” The mass media,advertising and sports are other forces for homogenization。
Immigrants are quickly fitting into this common culture, which maynot be altogether elevating but is hardly poisonous. Writing for the NationalImmigration Forum, Gregory Rodriguez reports that today’simmigration is neither at unprecedented level nor resistant to assimilation. In1998 immigrants were 9.8 percent of population; in 1900, 13.6 percent .In the10 years prior to 1990, 3.1 immigrants arrived for every 1,000 residents; inthe 10years prior to 1890, 9.2 for every 1,000. Now, consider three indices ofassimilation-language, home ownership and intermarriage。
The 1990 Census revealed that “a majority ofimmigrants from each of the fifteen most common countries of origin spokeEnglish ‘well’ or ‘very well’ after ten years of residence。” The children ofimmigrants tend to be bilingual and proficient in English. “By the thirdgeneration, the original language is lost in the majority of immigrant families。” Hence thedescription of America as a “graveyard” for languages. By 1996 foreign–born immigrants whohad arrived before 1970 had a home ownership rate of 75.6 percent, higher thanthe 69.8 percent rate among native-born Americans。
Foreign-born Asians and Hispanics “have higher rates ofintermarriage than do U.S.–born whites and blacks。” By the third generation, one third of Hispanic women are married tonon-Hispanics, and 41 percent of Asian–American women aremarried to non-Asians。
Rodriguez notes that children in remote villages around the worldare fans of superstars like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Garth Brooks, yet “someAmericans fear that immigrants living within the United States remain somehowimmune to the nation’s assimilative power。”
Are there divisive issues and pockets of seething anger in America?Indeed. It is big enough to have a bit of everything. But particularly whenviewed against America’s turbulent past, today’s social indiceshardly suggest a dark and deteriorating social environment。
21. The word “homogenizing”(Line 2, Paragraph 1) most probably means
[A] identifying.
[B] associating.
[C] assimilating.
[D] monopolizing。
22. According to the author, the department stores of the 19thcentury
[A] played a role in the spread of popular culture。
[B] became intimate shops for common consumers。
[C] satisfied the needs of a knowledgeable elite。
[D] owed its emergence to the culture of consumption。
23. The text suggests that immigrants now in the U.S。
[A] are resistant to homogenization。
[B] exert a great influence on American culture。
[C] are hardly a threat to the common culture。
[D] constitute the majority of the population。
24. Why are Arnold Schwarzenegger and Garth Brooks mentioned inParagraph 5?
[A] To prove their popularity around the world。
[B] To reveal the public’s fear of immigrants。
[C] To give examples of successful immigrants。
[D] To show the powerful influence of American culture。
25. In the author’s opinion, the absorption of immigrants into American society is
[A] rewarding.
[B] successful.
[C]. fruitless.
[D]. harmful。
