Falling between frames Institutional discourse and disability in radio

Falling between frames:Institutional discourse and

disability in radio

Mary-Pat O’Malley

Speech and Language Therapy Department,A

`ras Moyola,National University of Ireland,Galway,Ireland Received 7March 2005;received in revised form 7March 2008;accepted 4July 2008

Abstract

Much commentary exists concerning the disempowering portrayal of disabled people in the media.Very little research exists that systematically examines talk-in-interaction with a view to uncovering how disability is constructed through and in talk.Even less research has focused on radio talk as a form of institutional talk with implications for the social construction of disability.Traditional studies of radio talk have tended to examine news interviews,radio call in shows and so on but relatively little work exists concerning the construction of disability in programmes that interview disabled people.This study explores the talk in an Irish radio programme about disability as an instance of institutional discourse.Drawing on frame theory as an analytical framework,the study demonstrates how the discourse of the interviews in the programme undermines the stated aim of the programme as being ‘for and about people with disability.’The explicit or stated aim of the programme implies at least the possibility of an alternative perspective to the traditional,medical,‘tragedy’,of disability perspective.However,close analysis shows that the nature of the talk in this context actually sabotages the programme’s stated aims and actually reinforces the image of the disabled person as Other.#2008Elsevier B.V .All rights reserved.

Keywords:Radio;Disability;Frames;Joint exploration of disability

1.Introduction

‘‘Broadcasting is an institution –a power,an authority-and talk on radio ...is public,institutional talk’’(Scannell,1991:2).Radio has been described as ‘an old-fashioned medium in a (post)modern world’(Ross,2001:421).It has attracted less academic attention since television emerged as a mass medium and possibly even less since the development of the World Wide Web and more recently developed media.

The portrayal of disabled people in the media,in parallel with the treatment of radio as a medium,has also been neglected in contemporary research.Research that has been conducted has been of a generic nature –discussions of stereotyped portrayals of disabled people,disabling imagery,and language use in the most general of senses (Barnes,1992;Shakespeare,1997).While it has been acknowledged that ‘‘what is understood and accepted to be a ‘disability’is always socially and culturally located and constructed via discourse’’(Lupton and Seymour,2003:247as cited by Oliver,1994),very little research has examined the talk itself in mass media as a context in which perspectives on disability are both re?ected and constituted.

This study aims to examine the talk of an Irish radio programme called Outside the Box which is ‘a radio programme for and about disability’(www.rte.ie )as an instance of institutional discourse,at a micro level of https://www.wendangku.net/doc/ed1380247.html,/locate/pragma

Available online at https://www.wendangku.net/doc/ed1380247.html,

Journal of Pragmatics 41(2009)346–356

E-mail address:marypat.omalley@nuigalway.ie.

0378-2166/$–see front matter #2008Elsevier B.V .All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.07.008

M.-P.O’Malley/Journal of Pragmatics41(2009)346–356347 Frame theory is deployed to examine both the organization of the talk in the programme and its content.A hallmark feature of the interviews on this programme is their distancing character whereby there is a distinct failure to engage in joint construction joint exploration of the experience of disability.The overarching programme frame limits the focus of the talk to the exchange of factual medical information.An overemphasis on the medical aspects of disabled people’s lives perpetuates a limited,one-dimensional view of disabled people and has been repeatedly challenged in the literature(Oliver,1994;Shakespeare,1997).Signi?cant aspects of individual experience fall between the frames, and silence shrouds the meaning of that experience for the individual.The image of the disabled person as Other is therefore repeatedly reinforced and alternative voices are prevented from entering the public domain.

As this talk constitutes an instance of institutional discourse,issues of power and control are also considered.To this end,power is conceptualized in two ways:?rstly as an attribute of‘unequal’or‘asymmetrical’relations de?ned pre-discursively in this institutional context and secondly,as an emergent interactional quality between non-equals (Jaworski and Coupland,1999).Attention is paid to‘power in discourse’and‘power behind discourse’(Fairclough, 1989).To this end,a random selection of15radio programmes broadcast from6/11/01to23/04/02were purchased from the Irish national radio station,transcribed using the conventions employed by Jaworski(2003),and analysed drawing on the works of Goffman(1981,1986)and Tannen(1993a,b)in particular.Multiple genres are found in the discourse of the radio programme,for example live interviews,recorded interviews,humorous sketches,and book reviews.The main focus of the analysis for this paper is on live interviews.Three frames are examined:Radio Programme Frame,Presenter Frame,and Interview Frame.

2.The Micro View:frames in operation and evidence for interactive frames

The notion of frame,according to Goffman(1986:8)has to do with the fact that individuals attending to any current situation‘‘face the question‘What is it that’s going on here?’’’.According to Tannen(1993:15),‘‘the only way we can make sense of the world is to see the connections between present things and things we have experienced before or heard about.’’Expectation is seen as an integral part of the fabric of social life and underlies discussions of frame theory.Frames and structures of expectation are not innate but‘‘acquired through socialization,‘constructed’out of experience(out of our own experience or accounts of experiences by others)’’(Bednarek,2004:690).Dornelles and Garcez(2001)comment further that people’s expectations about ways of interacting contribute to their framing of the situation.In the context of the radio programme about disability,the view that talk-in-interaction is both context-shaping and context-renewing assumes particular signi?cance as the programme’s explicit goal is to put issues relevant to disabled people on the public agenda.This stated goal implies the presentation of an alternative to the current situation where there is a distinct absence and/or distortion of the representation of disabled people in the media.If knowledge structures are acquired through socialization,and constructed out of individual and vicarious experience,then the power of representation through the medium of the radio programme is signi?cant for the lived experience of disabled people.Similarly signi?cant in this context is the notion that once established,frames are rather stable(Bednarek,2005).

‘‘Any speech event represents the overlapping and intertwining of many relations concerning the context as well as the content of communication’’(Tannen,1993a,b:22).In the case of the radio programme,the broadest level of context is the radio programme itself as an entity being broadcast on national radio and therefore designed with an overhearing audience in mind(Radio Programme Frame).Within this larger context nestle other levels of context,for example,the Presenter Frame in which the programme’s presenter accomplishes the task of managing the delivery of the show’s content.Live interviews also occupy a sub-space within the context of the radio programme.In live interviews, participants are aware that their talk is being listened to by the invisible audience(Interview Frame).The knowledge that the talk is being broadcast to the overhearing audience affects the participants’contributions.Further subsets within the overarching context are the pre-recorded interviews,live book reviews,and the humorous sketches on disability.The analysis focuses on the Radio Programme Frame,Presenter Frame,and Interview Frame in particular to examine how the expectations are revealed in surface evidence of the talk of the radio programme.

2.1.Radio Programme Frame

Radio talk is designed with the overhearing audience in mind.Scannell(1991:2)points out that‘‘if you want people to listen to or to watch your programmes you must make them listenable to.’’Listenability must be inherent in the talk of the programme,not only in order to capture the attention of the audience,but also to sustain it–the audience

requires a reason to continue listening.How then is communicative intentionality organized within the Radio Programme Frame?Firstly,11out of the 15programmes analysed have a medical condition as the main topic of the programme,including conditions such as arthritis,multiple sclerosis,asthma,eczema,migraine,and neuro?bromatosis.These medical conditions are presented as forms of disability in their own right and not as other conditions that disabled people may also experience in addition to physical or sensory impairments for example.Content analysis of programmes broadcast over the past year indicates a persistent pattern with topics such as attention de?cit disorder,epilepsy,cystic ?brosis,depression,and Alzheimer’s disease featuring as topics.So the overarching frame is characterized by a medical focus in terms of content.Overemphasis of medical aspects of disabled people’s lives has consistently been criticized as distorting the portrayal of disabled people in the media.An almost exclusive ?lter of a ‘disability as illness’in the programme precludes the possibility of re?ecting and constructing a view of disability that incorporates positive aspects of that experience.

From a structural point of view,the presenter controls the proceedings and constraints are therefore placed on the content of participants’contributions.While interviewees’responses to questions within the Interview Frame are multi-unit responses,the presenter’s questions focus mainly on medical or problematic elements of being disabled with the presenter remaining largely in response to talk about personal experience.The questions posed by the presenter and his responses to guests’contributions have implications for how views of disability are constructed in this medium,which in turn has rami?cations for people’s personal experience of disability.Therefore the power of the presenter’s role in re?ecting contemporary beliefs about disability and the subsequent construction of the experience of disability is signi?cant.

2.2.Presenter Frame

Within the overarching Radio Programme Frame is the Presenter Frame.Linguistic evidence for the Presenter Frame lies in the conventionalized lexical and syntactic choices deemed appropriate for an overhearing audience and is considered here in terms of openings and closings in the programme.The conventionalized features highlight the institutional nature of the discourse in this context and re?ect the power and control of the presenter’s role in terms of speaker selection and shaping the direction of topics.

2.2.1.Openings

The opening moments of the programme involve the presenter producing talk clearly designed to capture the overhearing audience’s attention and focus it on the next item.The talk in these opening segments pre?gures both the form and content of the interaction that is to follow.The Presenter Frame can be seen in the following extracts where the presenter introduces the ?rst item in the programme directly as in the ?rst extract or indirectly as in the second extract:

P:welcome to the programme (30seconds music)eating disorders are a form of disability that affect all social

groups seldom and are seldom out of the news .hhh sometime ago I spoke to two people directly affected by an eating disorder (.)?rstly we meet Susan .hhh who in nineteen ninety three was diagnosed as suffering from anorexia

The Presenter Frame can be identi?ed in the initial welcome to the overhearing audience ‘welcome to the programme ’.This welcome indicates immediately that the talk is designed with an overhearing audience in mind and suggests easy familiarity with the medium.The welcome also re?ects the intimate nature of the relationship between radio and its listeners.Music marks the boundary between the greeting and the ?rst programme item.This extract contains an example of a direct statement of the ?rst item in the programme ‘eating disorders are a form of disability that affect all social groups’.Further evidence of an orientation to an overhearing audience is seen in the presenter’s introduction of the topic as worth listening to as it affects many people:‘a form of disability that affect all social groups seldom and are seldom out of the news ’.Shakespeare (1996:103)claims that people are socialized into thinking of disability in a medical model way.Much of what has been written about the representation (or lack of it)of disabled people in the media criticizes a reductionist approach which emphasizes medical aspects of disabled people’s lives –an emphasis which precludes viewing disability as ‘an emergent property,located temporally speaking,in terms of the interplay between the biological reality of physiological impairment,structural conditioning,and socio-cultural

M.-P .O’Malley /Journal of Pragmatics 41(2009)346–356

348

M.-P.O’Malley/Journal of Pragmatics41(2009)346–356349 interaction’(Thomas,2004:577).The one-dimensional portrayals of disabled people within popular culture are considered by Shakespeare(1997:219)as forming the‘bedrock on which the attitudes towards,assumptions about and expectations of disabled people are based’.The programme’s?rst topic being a medical condition suggests‘disability as illness’wherein illness and suffering are linked to disability and re?ected in the presenter’s lexical choice ‘diagnosed as suffering from anorexia’.The lexical choice con?rms a medical orientation within which identi?cation of pathology is emphasized and the individual is portrayed passively,as af?icted in some way,as opposed to actively experiencing events in their lives.Lexical choice in phrases such as‘suffering from’has‘‘the effect of casting disabled people in the role of victim’’(Oliver,1996:33).In essence,while the programme claims to be for and about people with disability,the discourse reveals that the stated aim is in a sense sabotaged by the talk,as the focus is primarily a medical one.A degree of tension exists in this extract between the‘individual experience of disability’(‘two people directly affected by an eating disorder’)and the‘disability as illness’perspectives(‘diagnosed as suffering from anorexia’).The presenter’s initial foregrounding of the person as experiencing an eating disorder presents an alternative to the traditional medical view of the person as passively being af?icted in some way.Contrasting perspectives emerge within the same turn.Ultimately however,it is the medical perspective that is foregrounded in the presenter’s contributions.

The Presenter Frame is further unpacked in the following more elaborate opening in the extract below:

P:hello and welcome(music30seconds)swelling in one or more joints(.)early morning stiffness(.)recurring pain or tenderness in any joint(.)inability to move the joint normally(.)obvious redness an warmth in a joint unexplained weight loss fever or weakness combined with eh joint pain(.)if you notice symptoms like these hangin around for more than two weeks say.hhh the chances are that you may suffer from arthritis(.)it’s a small word(.)for a very painful condition which affects one in seven Irish people and to?nd out more about it I’m joined by doctor Eoin Casey and on line from Mayo Mary Healy from the arthritis foundation.hhh I’ll be talking to Mary in a moment but?rst Eoin a small word but a very big problem

The opening in this extract is more elaborate than in the?rst and consists of a list of several medical symptoms ‘swelling in one or more joints(.)early morning stiffness(.)recurring pain or tenderness in any joint’.By not revealing the topic immediately,the interest of the overhearing audience may be stimulated and their attention maintained.The lexical choices here again re?ect a medical orientation where symptoms are listed as entities separate or distant from the person who may be experiencing them‘swelling in one or more joints’‘recurring pain or tenderness’,‘unexplained weight loss’.Following the elaborate introduction,the presenter then reveals the actual topic,albeit continuing in an indirect fashion with a distinct medical orientation in lexical choice(symptoms,suffer from):‘if you notice symptoms like these hanging around for more than two weeks say.hhh the chances are that you may suffer from arthritis(.)it’s a small word(.)for a very painful condition which affects one in seven Irish people and to?nd out more about it I’m joined by...’

In relation to issues of power and control,this extract is interesting in several respects.Firstly,the interaction takes place in the studio–an institutional discursive space from which institutional authority is maintained and displayed. The power of the institution in this case lies in the ways in which it can de?ne the terms of the interaction in its domain by the pre-allocation of social roles and statuses.The guests enter into this institutional space and can be seen to be oriented to these roles and statuses in the talk by ful?lling the expected roles of interviewee by responding to questions, staying on topic,not asking questions and so on.Secondly,in the extract above,the presenter introduces the?rst interviewee using his of?cial title‘doctor Eoin Casey’which places him in the position of expert and also re?ects the presenter’s orientation to the overhearing audience:a medical expert has authority to converse about a medical condition and in this sense is worth listening to.The second guest is introduced without of?cial title‘Mary Healy’and while she is aligned in the presenter’s talk with a recognized organization‘the arthritis foundation’,and therefore presented as being in a position to address the support needs of people with arthritis,the doctor is portrayed as having more power in the interaction through lexical choice and by virtue of the fact that he is interviewed?rst.Interviewing the medical expert?rst subtly reinforces a sense that the medical perspective carries greater weight than the perspective of the person experiencing the condition in question.This subtle reinforcing of the greater validity of the medical perspective would seem to be in con?ict with the programme advertising of itself as a programme‘for and about people with a disability’(www.rte.ie).The presenter’s use of the doctor’s?rst name‘?rst Eoin’suggests familiarity and a lessening of the power differential.On the one hand the doctor could be construed as holding more

power in the interaction by virtue of his status as medical expert.However,the fact that the interaction takes places in the presenter’s institutional domain means that the ultimate control over the direction of the conversation and topics that will be introduced rests with the presenter operating in either the Presenter or the Interview Frame.A brief extract later on in the same programme further re?ects issues of perceived status and power when the presenter enquires of the second guest:‘Mary would you like to ask doctor Casey anything in particular?’A similar invitation is not offered to the doctor again,reinforcing beliefs about the role of the doctor as expert and gatekeeper of important information.

2.2.2.Closings

Hutchby (1991:119)citing Schegloff and Sacks (1973)states that ‘‘conversation does not simply end,but is brought to a close.’’Unlike closings in casual conversation,closings in the radio programme,given its institutional colouring,do not need to be negotiated in any respect between the presenter and guests.Given the presenter’s institutional role,it is the presenter’s task to open and to close topics and programme sections.This re?ects the unequal nature of these interactions.The presenter must discern some point in the organization of turns structuring a topic at which a relevant or necessary bid for closing might be made.Interviewees collaborate in the closings by accepting the authority of the presenter and responding appropriately:

Dr:

certainly ah more needs to be spent on providing services for patients with arthritis P:well I think on that note we’ll we’ll be coming back to the subject of arthritis again in a future programme but for

the moment Mary Healy thank you very much for joining us and

[

G:[my pleasure

P:and doctor Eoin Casey thank you

Dr:also my pleasure thank you very much

P:

and the telephone number again for the arthritis foundation of Ireland is zero one six six one eight eight (music 5seconds)over the Christmas holidays Ruth has been delving deep into her (.)book collection and she joins me in studio to tell us what she recommends for your attention (.)Ruth Frame switches from Interview Frame to Presenter Frame occur in the achievement of closings where the presenter uses a formulaic expression to signal the closure of the interview:‘well I think on that note’and then referring to future programmes ‘we’ll we’ll be coming back to the subject of arthritis again in a future programme ’.His use of ‘we ’can be interpreted as referring,not to the guests in question but to the programme team by whom decisions about appropriate topics for programmes are made.The presenter’s thanking the guests highlights their position as guests rather than hosts and their brief responses indicate their orientation to the Presenter Frame ‘my pleasure ’and ‘also my pleasure ’.The closing having been effected smoothly,recorded music is used to mark the boundary between sections of the programme and in the introduction to the next segment,we see the Presenter Frame in operation (‘over the Christmas holidays Ruth has been delving deep into her (.)book collection and she joins me in studio to tell us what she recommends for your attention ’),orientation to the overhearing audience in (‘to tell us what she recommends for your attention ’),and turn allocation (‘Ruth ’).The introduction of the guest presenter by ?rst name,signals to the audience her status as member of the programme team and presupposes audience familiarity with the team.As presenter,he is in a position of power in terms of turn allocation,selecting who speaks and when.Turn-taking restrictions are a recognized feature of institutional discourse (Ilie,2001)and broadcast talk is recognized as public,institutional talk (Scannell,1991).The presence of turn taking restrictions seen in the Presenter Frame and also the Interview Frame con?rms that the discourse of this radio programme is institutional in nature which has implications for the interviewees’opportunities to challenge the dominant assumptions about disability in society.

The ultimate closing occurs at the programme’s end and is also the presenter’s task.In this context,the closing always occurs smoothly –interviewees who are present in studio align themselves to the closing and never interrupt the presenter or attempt to prolong the interaction.

P:and that’s it for this week if you wish to contact us you can telephone zero one two zero eight two zero three

ninety (.)or you can email us at tomasd@rte(.)ie .(.)or you can write to us at outside of the box RTE radio one Dublin four (.)until next time bye bye

M.-P .O’Malley /Journal of Pragmatics 41(2009)346–356

350

M.-P.O’Malley/Journal of Pragmatics41(2009)346–356351 2.3.Interview Frame:live and recorded interviews

The topic for the programme having been established in the Presenter Frame,a frame switch occurs from the Presenter Frame to the Interview Frame.The introduction of guests which occurs in the Presenter Frame is signi?cant to the type of interview that emerges.According to Scannell(1991:11)‘‘there is nothing in the discourses of radio...that is not motivated,that is not intended to generate inferences about what is being said by virtue of how it is being said’’.Guests are consistently introduced as possessing either?rst hand experience or expert knowledge of the topic in question.These introductions foreshadow an informational interview with implications for the construction of disability in this context.Although the introductions foreshadow an informational interview,the scope of the interviewees’contributions is narrowed to focus almost exclusively on medical matters as seen in the extracts below:

P:ahm when were you?rst diagnosed with MS

P:so how did you hear about that and how did you notice there was something wrong

P:yeah and did what was the verdict at the time when the doctors came to you and said okay we’ve now established what it is you have MS and what stage were you at did they say(.)what to do what not to do Interviewees are never introduced in relation to an opinion or position on a focal matter even when they may be reasonably expected to have an opinion–for example on the issue of access to public buildings.Such introductions would allow for greater latitude in terms of putting the challenges experienced by disabled people on the agenda.From that perspective,it is interesting to note that in the15programmes sampled,only one interview could be described as putting opinions on what it means to be disabled,unequivocally on the agenda when the interviewee states‘what I have is an impairment I don’t have a disability un-until society fails to accommodate my needs.’In this instance,a debate interview did not emerge(as might be expected),as the interviewer maintained neutrality by asking only questions that sought factual information,e.g.‘and ahm I believe you’ve just been appointed to do bit o work over the next few years here in Dublin(.)with ah the new professorship of disability studies is that right’.The interviewee was given space to present his opinions on the social and medical models of disability but the interviewer did not actively engage in discussion of these opinions which might be reasonably expected from a programme whose stated aim suggests alternatives to traditional views of disabled people.

The interviewer’s purpose in the context of this radio programme about disability appears to be to extract information from interviewees in order to inform the overhearing audience about topics such as medical conditions, their symptoms and treatments;personal experience of disability and medical conditions;support groups that are available;and disability speci?c issues such as access to public buildings.The majority of questions in the data are information seeking questions.Questions that seek to explore more personal experiences can be found but they are the exceptions rather than the rule.Therefore,it appears that the overarching Programme Frame limits co-construction of the experience of disability and results in the sabotaging of the programme’s stated aim:to be‘for and about people with disability’(www.rte.ie).

Sweeney(2005)examines one to one radio interviews with people described as‘disabled achievers’.Two taboos are addressed in the interviews:disabled people’s sexuality and disabled people’s feelings about the notion of‘cure’for disability.The interviewees’shifting perspectives concerning theses issues is explored by an interviewer who is blind since birth.The type and style of questions asked highlighted the diversity of individual experiences and perspectives on disability held by disabled people.Sweeney(2005:197)claims that the interviewer established rapport with the interviewees,‘‘grounded arguably in their shared identities as disabled people’’.While a certain amount of factual information would be expected in a programme about disability in order to answer possible questions of the overhearing audience,an almost exclusive focus on facts precludes re?ection of what is a hugely diverse and varied experience.Furthermore,questions that elicit largely factual information constrain the possibility of alternatives to the dominant disempowering models of disability from entering the discourse.

As in casual conversation,the interviewer casts himself in the role of relatively uninformed recipient but the third turn receipt objects that feature in casual conversation are absent in this context(Heritage,1985).The extract below illustrates these features of the discourse of the Interview Frame where the presenter controls the interview through the use of chains of question–answer sequences.

Q

P:well can I ask you what are the different ways of categorizing a person who is an amputee R M:

.hhh well the two main ways Dave are that you have people who have lost a limb through trauma falling such as falling off the back of a motorbike or having a forklift truck maybe roll into them (.)in a factory .hhh or ah (.)through ah medical problems such as diabetes or (.)ah vascular or cancer or something like that and that would tend to be older people .hhh and they are probably the majority of amputees C +NQ P:well we’ve moved a long way now from the days of Long John Silver and the wooden leg that people

see in the old movies or whatever (.)what actually is an arti?cial limb like

The presenter,operating in the Interview Frame asks a question ‘what are the different ways of categorizing a person who is an amputee.’In this instance,the directness of the question is mitigated somewhat by the use of ‘well can I ask you’.The question re?ects a medical orientation where the focus is on the categorization of people according to one physical feature –the absence of a limb as opposed to any exploration of the experience of being a person who has experienced amputation of a limb.At the same time,tension between a medical model orientation and the ‘individual experience of disability’perspective surfaces in the presenter’s lexical choice of ‘a person who is an amputee’which foregrounds the person rather than the disability.

The interviewee provides a multi-unit response in which medical information is foregrounded in lexical choice:‘trauma ...diabetes ...vascular or cancer’.Medical terms are used to describe a personal experience and the interviewee in his response is silent in terms of personal experience.This interviewee has been invited to the programme as someone with ?rst hand experience of having a limb amputated and he makes this explicit later in the interview by describing himself as:‘I’m an above knee left leg amputee ’,again re?ecting a medical model of disability.The movement between medical and more personal ways of representing the experience of events that happen to the body re?ect the complex,individual nature of the experience of disability –a complexity which is prevented from being revealed fully by the nature of the presenter’s questions and comments which are in turn constrained by the Programme Frame.The interviewee’s use of the presenter’s ?rst name is unusual and can be interpreted as lessening the power differential,albeit https://www.wendangku.net/doc/ed1380247.html,ing ?rst names resembles casual conversation more than interview talk but the presenter’s ensuing comment (‘well we’ve moved a long way now from the days of Long John Silver and the wooden leg that people see in the old movies or whatever (.)’)which functions as an introduction to his next question,reaf?rms that this is indeed an interview (‘what actually is an arti?cial limb like’)..

Question within the Interview Frame are designed to elicit information that may be of interest for an overhearing audience.Questions include for example:

‘can we enjoy all the traditional Christmas fare and still look after our health’

‘disability federation of Ireland John (.)big name (.)is that a big organization as well’

could you tell me more about what is commonly called NF’ ‘there are alternative treatments as well aren’t there’

When questions within the Interview Frame focus on an element of personal experience,the interviewer consistently maintains neutrality in his subsequent turn by returning to information seeking questions.This feature is seen in the extract below which is representative of a pattern throughout the data.The ?rst question seeks to elicit personal experience of arthritis.The interviewee’s turn is multi-unit,charting the course of her experience over 25years.The interviewer’s next question returns to safer ground –access to services,with the perspective of personal experience falling between the frames.

Q1:

P:well Mary’s listening to this (.)Mary you’re chairperson of the Mayo branch of the arthritis foundation .hhh how does the arthritis affect you Q2P:and being in Mayo I mean how easy is it to access services and treatment for arthritis

The nature and frequency of questions that focus exclusively on factual information function to preserve the neutrality of the presenter’s role so that the talk is distanced from the life experiences of the guests.The presenter’s role involves providing a channel through which information can be provided to the overhearing audience and he works through the talk to maintain that neutrality.This feature contrasts with the radio interviews of Sweeney’s (2005)study where the topics are taboo and the structure of the interviews permits a complex representation of the experience of

M.-P .O’Malley /Journal of Pragmatics 41(2009)346–356

352

M.-P.O’Malley/Journal of Pragmatics41(2009)346–356353 disability–a representation which is not facilitated to develop in Outside the Box.Fairclough(2001)suggests that when the more powerful participants constrain contributions by selecting particular discourse types,they are also involved in a self-constraint.‘Once a discourse type has been settled upon,its conventions apply to all participants, including the powerful ones’(Fairclough,1989:39).While more powerful participants can allow varying degrees of latitude to less powerful participants,this does not occur in the context of these conversations about disability. Interviewees’accounts of their experiences are constrained by questions that focus largely on eliciting factual information.While interviewees are given space to reveal personal information,the presenter’s role in its current format results in formulations that summarise the information considered important for the overhearing audience before he proceeds to the next question.The presenter’s role therefore does not allow for any real engagement with the person’s story and in terms of constructing alternative views of disability,nothing novel or challenging to the status quo emerges.Such an alternative view as proposed by Shakespeare(1996),in which disability is seen as an aspect of the human condition,part of the continuum of life experience,is not facilitated to emerge,in spite of this being a programme for and about people with disability.

One interview in the corpus stands out as containing a departure from the information seeking questions format that is typical in the programme.It is a live interview with a couple,exploring their experience of disability and relationships.The scene is set in the Presenter Frame:

P:Grace is a wheelchair user because of an accident involving a bicycle(.)about fourteen years ago she met Keith Hanlon(.)both are archers so perhaps it was inevitable that they.hhh should be willing targets for Cupid’s arrows(.)and we have the result of that as well we have baby Ruana who’s with us in studio as well(.)Grace forgive the corny introduction there but was it love at?rst sight

Disability is put on the agenda from the outset‘Grace is a wheelchair user’.The presenter begins with a broad focus on the circumstances of the couple’s meeting and early relationship.It is Keith who introduces the topic of disability and presents it as unproblematic(‘I suppose it it just makes no difference if if you see something you like you go for it anyway so’):

K:and ah I turned round to look to see what was happening the next thing wheelchair comes out of the car and I sort of go uh oh but(.)I suppose it it just makes no difference if if you see something you like you go for it anyway so

Gradually the presenter,now in the Interview Frame,narrows the focus to the relevance of Grace’s disability to the relationship:‘dating somebody and you’re a wheelchair user Grace so(.)does that(.)bring in different problems of going out to the cinema or restaurants or did you(?)anything like that’.The presenter repeatedly presents being a wheelchair user as potentially problematic through questions about the restrictive or negative impact of being a wheelchair user on various aspects of the couple’s life.His attempts to construct disability as a problematic aspect of the relationship can be seen in the extracts below.The interviewees repeatedly resist the interviewer’s assumptions and assert that Grace being a wheelchair user is unproblematic:

P:dating somebody and you’re a wheelchair user Grace so(.)does that(.)bring in different problems of going out to the cinema or restaurants or did you(?)anything like that

G:we just went ahead and(.)went out where ever we wanted we had no(.)misgivings about you know

G:and Keith was never shy about you know

P:[mm

G:[giving me a hand or asking somebody to move or you know if anything was in the way(.)it was(.)he was very much in in your face if you if something was

P:(laughs)

K:no I’m not

G:(laughs)if something wasn’t right or whatever

K:the the should be no stopping like you get out and you do what you want to do

In the extract above,following the presenter’s question which frames being a wheelchair user as problematic in the context of a relationship‘dating somebody and you’re a wheelchair user Grace so(.)does that(.)bring in different

problems of going out to the cinema or restaurants or did you (?)anything like that’,Grace and Keith present their experience as unproblematic:‘we just went ahead and (.)went out where ever we wanted we had no (.)misgivings about you know ’and ‘the the should be no stopping like you get out and you do what you want to do ’.

The presenter however continues to pose questions that re?ect a view of disability as problematic or dif?cult and the interviewees continue to resist this view and present the experience as not necessarily problematic as seen in the extract below:

P:

did anybody ever say it to you Keith you know (.)you’re going out with somebody in a wheelchair like you know you’re taking on an awful lot here d’you know what you’re getting yourself involved in K:well actually strangely enough my mother said it to me (.)and ah it it only through her own concern you know do

do I know what I’m gettin meself in for an the plain answer to it was yes

In the extract above the presenter again poses a question that re?ects a view of disability as problematic ‘did anybody ever say it to you Keith you know (.)you’re going out with somebody in a wheelchair like you know you’re taking on an awful lot here d’you know what you’re getting yourself involved in’and again Keith resists this formulation of their experience ‘do do I know what I’m gettin meself in for an the plain answer to it was yes’.This dance of perspectives continues throughout the interview with the uniqueness of individual experience being continually emphasized through the interviewees’repetition of the unproblematic nature of their experience.In the extract below,the presenter has introduced the topic of pregnancy and disability.His lexical choices re?ect a problematic view of disability (‘being pregnant in a wheel chair did that in itself bring more problems’)while Grace’s response puts forward an alternative viewpoint based on her ?rst hand experience (‘it worked out much easier than I thought you know’and ‘but it was ?ne really’).

P:

was that more dif?cult because of having a disability and (.)being pregnant in a wheel chair did that in itself bring more problems G:it was (.)I thought (.)it was going to be much harder but it worked out much easier than I thought you know was

(.)I had a lot of fear at the start how am I going to be able to transfer from the bed onto the chair an back into the car or whatever ahm (.)it did get a bit harder at the end but it was ?ne really

In the extract above,the participants continue to negotiate their perspectives on disability.The interviewer’s questions re?ect a view of disability as problematic while the interviewee’s response presents an alternative construction on the basis of direct experience.The interviewer has moved away from information seeking questions to an impairment based stance.The interviewees consistently resist his construction and present the reality of their individual experience as unproblematic.This constitutes quite a departure from the established dominant assumption of disability as lack or dif?culty and is an example of oppositional discourse introduced by interviewees drawing on their conversational resources in responding to the presenter’s questions in order to challenge dominant assumptions about disability.Although the interviewer does not comment on their responses but proceeds to the next question,the interviewees succeed in challenging the status quo .

3.Concluding remarks

This study attempts to capture the ways in which institutional discourse and constructions of disability interact.The micro-structure of the talk of a radio programme whose stated aim is to be ‘for and about people with disability’(www.rte.ie )is analysed to this end.As Scannell (1991)points out,radio talk has a double articulation.The talk that takes place between interviewers and interviewees is a communicative interaction between those participating in the talk and at the same time is designed to be heard by an absent audience.Consequently,the talk has listenable properties built into it.These listenable properties are identi?able in the Presenter Frame where the presenter controls proceedings by welcoming the audience,introducing the topics for the programme,introducing guests in a manner which construes them as possessing authority to comment on the topic and as worth listening to,closing topics,and bringing the programme to a close.The Interview Frame consists of live and recorded interviews which are characterized by being presenter controlled;they consist mainly of Question–Answer sequences which seek to elicit factual information.The emphasis on facts,and a distinctly medical orientation in the talk,result in discourse that

M.-P .O’Malley /Journal of Pragmatics 41(2009)346–356

354

M.-P.O’Malley/Journal of Pragmatics41(2009)346–356355 perpetuates the status quo wherein a one-dimensional view of disabled people’s lives is communicated.The stated aim of the programme is therefore sabotaged by the discourse(as frame theory demonstrates),with the complexity of the experience essentially falling between the frames.

Interviewees’responses are multi-unit and it is in these contributions that the diversity of experiences of disability is revealed.Interviewees describe their varying experiences of disabilities and various medical conditions.Their accounts re?ect the uniqueness of their subjective experience,display a sensitivity to language used to talk about disability,and bring the experience into the open;breaking the silence of institutional discourse by putting their experience on the record.Lupton and Seymour(2003:248)claim that people with disabilities are‘‘typically represented as Other,as visible evidence of the frail and constraining body and as constant reminders of mortality.’’In the context of this particular radio programme,the portrayal of people with disabilities as Other is ultimately perpetuated because the Presenter Frame and the Interview Frame preclude joint exploration of disability. Transcription conventions and abbreviations:

Adapted from Jaworski(2003)

[overlapping speech

(.)brief pause

.hhh audible in-breath

hhh.audible out-breath

(?)unclear text

sa-incomplete word

Q:question

NQ:new question

R:response

C:comment

F:formulation

H:headline

P:presenter

GP:guest presenter

I:interviewee

References

Barnes,Colin,1992.Disabling Imagery and the Media.The British Council of Disabled People,U.K.

Bednarek,Monika,2004.Frames revisited–the coherence-inducing function of frames.Journal of Pragmatics37,685–705.

Dornelles,Clara,Garcez,Pedro,2001.Making sense of nonsense:fabrication,ambiguity,error and clari?cation in the organization of experience in ordinary conversation.Journal of Pragmatics33,1707–1730.

Fairclough,Norman,https://www.wendangku.net/doc/ed1380247.html,nguage and Power,2nd ed.Longman,London.

Goffman,Erving,1981.Forms of Talk.University of Pennsylvania Press,Philadelphia.

Goffman,Erving,1986.An Essay on the Organization of Experience.Northeastern University Press,Boston.

Heritage,John,1985.Analyzing news interviews:aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience.In:van Dijk,T.(Ed.),Handbook of Discourse Analysis:Discourse and Dialogue,vol.3.Academic Press,London,pp.95–119.

Hutchby,Ian,1991.The organisation of talk on talk radio.In:Scannell,P.(Ed.),Broadcast Talk.Sage,London,pp.119–137.

Jaworski,Adam,2003.Talking bodies:invoking the ideal in the BBC naked programme.In:Coupland,J.,Gwyn,R.(Eds.),Discourse,the Body, and Identity.Palgrave,London,pp.151–177.

Jaworski,Adam,Coupland,Nikolas,1999.The Discourse Reader.Routledge,London.

Lupton,Deborah,Seymour,Wendy,2003.‘I am normal on the Net’:disability computerised communication technologies and the embodied self.In: Coupland,J.,Gwyn,R.(Eds.),Discourse,the Body,and Identity.Palgrave,London,pp.246–266.

Oliver,Mike,1994.Politics and Language:Understanding the Disability Discourse.MA in Disability Studies Programme,Shef?eld. Oliver,Mike,1996.De?ning impairment and disability:issues at stake.In:Barnes,Colin,Mercer,Geof(Eds.),Exploring the Divide.The Disability Press,Leeds,pp.29–54.

Ross,Karen,2001.All ears:radio,reception,and discourses of disability.Media,Culture,and Society23,419–437.

Scannell,Paddy,1991.The relevance of talk.In:Scannell,P.(Ed.),Broadcast Talk.Sage,London,pp.1–13.

Shakespeare,Tom,1996.Disability,identity,and difference.In:Barnes,C.,Mercer,G.(Eds.),Exploring the Divide.The Disability Press,Leeds, pp.94–113.

Shakespeare,Tom,1997.Cultural representations of disabled people:dustbins for disavowal?In:Barton,L.,Oliver,M.(Eds.),Disability Studies: Past,Present,and Future.The Disability Press,Leeds,pp.217–233.

Sweeney,Brian,2005.BBC radio four and the experiential dimension of disability.Disability and Society 20(2),185–199.

Tannen,Deborah,1993a.What’s in a frame?Surface evidence for underlying expectations.In:Tannen,D.(Ed.),Framing in Discourse.OUP,

Oxford,pp.14–56.

Tannen,Deborah,1993b.Interactive frames and knowledge schemas in interactions:examples from a medical examination/interview.In:Tannen,D.

(Ed.),Framing in Discourse.OUP,Oxford,pp.57–76.

Thomas,Carol,2004.How is disability understood?An examination of sociological approaches.Disability and Society 19(6),569–583.

Mary-Pat O’Malley lectures in linguistics and speech and language impairments in the Speech and Language Therapy degree programme at the University of Ireland Galway.Prior to commencing in NUI Galway she worked as a speech and language therapist in a variety of health care settings.Research interests include discourse and silence in medical settings,the body and society,with particular interest in discourses of cosmetic surgery,narratives of health,illness,and disability,and multiculturalism in speech and language therapy.M.-P .O’Malley /Journal of Pragmatics 41(2009)346–356

356

amongbetween的区别用法全

among between为近义词，皆可表示“在……之间”，但用法大不相同，现归纳比较如下： 一、among一般用于三者或三者以上的“在……中间”，其宾语通常是一个表示笼统数量或具有复数意义的名词或代词。 His house is hidden among the trees． 他的房子隐藏在树林之中。 She sat among the children． 她坐在孩子们中间。 二、between一般指两者之间，其宾语往往是一个具体数目的人(物)，或者是由and连接的两个具体的人(物)。 There was a fight between the two boys． 这两个男孩间发生了一场格斗。 I am sitting between my parents． 我正坐在我父母中间。 三、把两者以上的为数不多的人或事物单独地看待，用and连接时，要用between；把两者以上的人或事物看成一群、一堆或一组而不是个体时，要用among。 Switzerland lies between France,Italy,Austria and Germany． 瑞士位于法国、意大利、奥地利和德国之间。 The old man’s cottage lies among the trees． 老人的小木屋在树林中。 四、between也可用于三者以上的事物之间，强调一物与数物之间的关系。 The small village lies between the three mountains．

小村庄位于三座大山之间。 I saw something lying between the wheels of the train． 我看见火车轮子之间有什么东西。 五、涉及人或事物之间的区别以及人或事物之间的关系时，一般要用between。 We must find out the difference between the three companies. 我们必须查清这三家公司之间的区别。 The relations between various countries are very important. 各国之间的关系是很重要的。 六、表示“由于……合作的结果”时，要用between。 Between them they landed the fish． 他们协力把鱼拖上了岸。 Between the five companies the project was soon completed． 在五家公司的齐心协力下，这项工程不久就完成了。 七、当and连接三者或三者以上的人(物)而仍然强调两者的并列时，常用between。 The hospital lies between a river and hills． 医院坐落在一条河与群山之间。 The park lies between a road and the woods． 公园位于一条马路与树林之间。 八、在divide,share等表示“分享”之类的动词之后。若接一个表示三者或三者以上的复数名词时，用among或between均可。 The father divided his money among/between his three sons。

四年级一件难忘的事400字作文【五篇】

四年级一件难忘的事400字作文【五篇】 四年级一件难忘的事400字精选作文篇一 在童年里有许许多多的事情就像在海滩上捡贝壳，有绚烂的笑，是开心的往事；有黯淡的，像是勾起一段伤心的往事，都使我非常难忘。 早晨，风和日丽，我去帮妈妈和爸爸买早餐，等我去到早餐店，我发现早餐店旁有一大群人，我带着好奇心走去，让我大吃一惊，我发现那有一位老奶奶绊倒在地上。 我心想：为什么一位老奶奶搬绊倒在地上，但每一个人都无动于衷，还围观老奶奶，真是不尊重老人！我气得暴跳如雷，我就问我旁边的大人：“你们为什么不扶老奶奶”那人就说：“因为最近在新闻里，有很多老人成心绊倒在地上让路人扶起她。”谁知老人就说：扶起他的人是推他的人。老人还说：赔我钱。我听完就有一点不敢拉老奶奶了。 这时，一位青年人走过来，马上扶起老奶奶，旁边的人说，那个青年人真笨，青年人就说：“难道金钱比生活还重要吗？”青年人问奶奶要紧吗？奶奶说，不要紧，谢谢你，小伙子。青年人就说不用谢，说完就走了，我看到青年人的身影，我觉得很惭愧。 这一件事使我非常难忘，假如社会的人都献出一点爱心，那么社会就是充满爱心的。

四年级一件难忘的事400字精选作文篇二 每一个人都有自己最难忘的事，我最难忘的事就是三年级那次集体打连响儿。 记得那一次我们拿着漂亮的连响儿，排着整齐的队伍，伴随着美好的音乐，踏着坚决的步伐，熟练地打了起来。 看到这样整齐划一的队伍，我不由心生骄傲：看来我的努力还是没有白费呀！但放眼又一望，我们四周可以说是人山人海，有无数双眼睛正盯着我们，我心里不知从哪里来了一种莫名的紧张，我头上冒着冷汗，腿不由的发着抖。就在这一霎时，我做错了一个动作，登时，我感觉所有人的目光都投向了我一个人，我这颗本来就不平静的心，现在显得更加紧张了、更加不安了，我一下子都不知该干什么了，我真想有一个洞，让我钻到洞里去，我以前打的是那么灵敏，可现在却有气无力，仿佛有一个小精灵把我这活泼的精神给夺走了，经过漫长的煎熬，我好不容易才等到了结束的那一刻。 我回家把这件事告诉我妈妈，妈妈说：想做好一件事就要加倍的努力，不要认为自己会做了就可以了，妈妈的这次教导，将使我一生受益。 四年级一件难忘的事400字精选作文篇三 我家有各种各样的陶瓷器皿，比如：碗，花瓶，勺子，水杯等。它们形态各异，五彩缤纷。它们站在一起，仿佛都在展示自己曼妙的

人教版四年级(上册)数学专项训练

人 教 版 四年级（上册） 数 学 基 础 知 识 专 项 训 练

人教版四年级上册数学基础知识填空题专项训练 １、由5个千万、4个万、8个十和9个一组成的数是（），读作（），取近似值到万位约是（）。 2、406000000读作（），这个数中的6在（）位上，表示（），改写成用万作单位是（）。 3、一周角=（）平角=（）直角。 4、367÷23把23看作（）来试商比较方便。 5、下午3：00时针和分针夹成的最小角是（）度。 6、在数位顺序表中，从右起第四位是（）位，这个数的计数单位是（），如果这个数位上的数字是8，8表示（）。 7、5个一百万、4个十万、2个千和4个一组成的数是（）。读作（），它有（）个计数单位。 8、在9、8中间添（）个0，这个数才是九千万零八。 9、一个数加上2的和比最小的五位数多1，这个数减2是（ 10、在数位顺序表中，从右起第四位是（）位，这个数的计数单位是（），如果这个数位上的数字是8，8表示（）。 11、5个一百万、4个十万、2个千和4个一组成的数是（）。读作（），它有（）个计数单位。 12、在9、8中间添（）个0，这个数才是九千万零八。 13、一个数加上2的和比最小的五位数多1，这个数减2是（） 14、120分米=（）米 540秒=（）分 72小时=（）天 132个月=（）年 15、计量角的单位是（）。（）是量角的工具。 16、角的大小要看两边（），（）越大，角越大。 17、线段有（）个端点。把线段的一端无限延长，就得到一条（），把线段的两端无限延长，就得到一条（），它（）端点。 18、过一个点可以画（）条直线，过两点可以画（）条直线。 19、按照从大到小的顺序排列下面各数 88000 80800 80008 80080 ________________________________________________ 20、把锐角、平角、钝角、直角、周角按下列顺序排列。 （）＞（）＞（）＞（）＞（） 21、4293÷4口，要使商是二位数，口可以填（）

2018初中英语词汇之among与between的用法区别

2018初中英语词汇之among与between的用法区别 一般说来，among 用于三者或三者以上的在中间，其宾语通常是一个表示笼统数量或具有复数(或集合)意义的名词或代词；而between 主要指两者之间，其宾语往往是表示两者的名词或代词，或者是由and 连接的两个人或物： They hid themselves among the trees. 他们躲在树林中。 There was a fight between the two boys. 这两个孩子打过一次架。 Im usually free between Tuesday and Thursday. 我通常在星期二与星期四之间有空。 在下列情况，between 可用于三者： (1) 当两个以上的人或物用and 连接时： between A, B and C 在A、B和C 之间 (2) 涉及事物之间的区别或各国之间的关系时： the difference between the three of them 他们三者之间的区别 the relations between various countries 各国之间的关系 (3) 表示由于合作的结果时： Between them they landed the fish. 他们协力把鱼拖上了岸。

(4) 在divide, share 等表示分享之类的动词之后，若接一个表示三者或三者以上的复数名词时，用among 和between 均可：He divided his money among [between] his five sons. 他把钱分给了5 个儿子。

关于难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

关于难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇 【导语】每个人都有难忘的事，我当然也不会例外。下面是小编为大家整理的关于难忘的一件事四年级作文，仅供参考，欢迎大家阅读。 关于难忘的一件事四年级作文一 六岁那年，发生了一件令我难忘的事情——在商场里我差点儿走丢了！ 那天，天气很冷，我们一家人去商场买东西。买完后，我们在一楼闲逛。走着走着，我松开了妈妈的手，跑去看一款造型独特的吸尘器，当回过头时，爸爸妈妈已经走得无影无踪了。商场里人很多，我非常害怕，心想：“妈妈也一定急坏了！怎么办？” 我在商场里转了一圈，越来越害怕、恐惧，忽然，我想起爸爸的车在路边停着，干脆就“守株待兔”吧！所以就跑去爸爸的车旁边等。过了一会儿，爸爸妈妈终于找到我了，妈妈冲过来，一把把我紧紧地搂进怀中，口里不停的说：“吓死妈妈了，妈妈腿都软了！”然后又语无伦次的夸我聪明，没瞎跑，唉！我心里就像打翻了五味瓶一样，说不出的'滋味儿！ 从那以后，我再也不敢轻易放开妈妈的手了。 关于难忘的一件事四年级作文二

一个美丽的晚霞中，那七元五角的事使我永刻不能忘怀。 我背着书包回了家，对妈妈和蔼地说：“妈咪，我回来了！哦，对了妈咪，老师吩咐我们要买一支黑笔，您可不可以给我两块半。”说完，妈咪点了点头，从黑纹色的包里拿出了两块半，我拿起了钱就往商店里奔驰去。 从商店里拿起了一支晶亮的黑笔，到收银台付了钱，就发现了里头还藏了个五元，我的贪婪之心有苏醒了。付了钱后就在半路上犹豫到底要不要把这五元给妈咪呢？在犹豫时就看见了一个小妹妹，她看见前面的叔叔掉了十元钱，就还给了那个叔叔，我就在想，连一个比我还小的妹妹都那么听话，我不能落后，就跑回了家，把五元还给了妈咪。 做人要道德，道德只是个简单的是与非的问题，实践起来却很难，把五元还给妈咪，一个人要是从小就受到这样的教育的话，就会获得道德实践的勇气和力量。 关于难忘的一件事四年级作文三 在我的脑海里发生过许多难忘的事情，但是有一件事令我记忆犹新，那是发生在去年的一件事。 那是一天下午我在我在学校上学的时候，我借了刘利娜的语文作业抄，下课了，我抄完了。就和女同学玩橡皮筋。正在这时候周老师来了，我们吓得腿都软了。 在回家得路上我心里忐忑不安，心想这样做对不对呢？

2020年四年级数学上册解决问题专项综合练习

2020年四年级数学上册解决问题专项综合练习 1. 某小学学生向汶川地震灾区踊跃捐款，请根据下图填空． （1）______年级的捐资金额最多，是______元． （2）六个年级捐资金额这组数据的中位数是______元． （3）二年级捐资金额是四年级捐资金额的______%． （4）四年级捐资金额比五年级少______%． 2. 特快列车每小时行170千米,普通列车每小时行107千米 （1）特快列车40小时行多少千米？ （2）普通列车40小时行多少千米？ 3. 2010年第六次全国人口普查显示，我国人口总数大约是1339720000 人，读横线的数。 4. 如图是广本汽车销售店2013年一月至五月的销售情况统计图．

请你根据上图，完成以下的填空： （1）______月的销售量最少． （2）二月份的销售量比一月份多______台． （3）五月份的汽车销售量是三月份的______%． （4）四月份的汽车销售量比二月份增加了______%． 5. 下图显示的是某班20人在“献爱心”活动中捐图书的情况，该班级人均捐了多少册书？ 6. 小强拆了甲、乙两架纸飞机，下面是这两架飞机前5次试飞情况的统计图． （1）估一估，前5次试飞，哪一驾纸飞机飞行的距离远一些？ （2）第6次试飞，甲飞机的飞行距离是21米，乙飞机的飞行距离是10米．在图中画出表示这架纸飞机第6次试飞飞行距离的直条，并计算这架纸飞机6次飞行距离的平均数各是多少．

7. 早餐店炸油饼，油锅一次最多能炸2张饼，炸熟一张饼要4分钟（正反面各2分钟）．如果一个客人要9张饼，早餐店老板最快多少分钟可以把油饼给他？ 8. 某机床厂各车间男、女工人统计图． 看上面的统计图回答下面的问题． （1）三个车间共有工人______人，其中女工共______，男工共______人．（2）三个车间平均每车间有______人． （3）第三车间男工人数比第二车间男工人数多______ %． 9. 学校进行团体操表演，每行站20人，正好站24排．如果要站成16排，那么每行需要站多少人？ 10. 50枚棋子围成圆圈，编上号码1、2、3、4、…50，每隔一枚棋子取出一枚，要求最后留下的枚棋子的号码是42号，那么该从几号棋子开始取呢？ 11. 估一估，哪个算式的商最接近圈中的数，画上“√”。 先估算出每个圆中的四个算式的商是多少，再比较一下，看哪个算式的商最接近圈中的数。 12. 小红在计算一个数乘2.5时，忽略了2.5的小数点，得到的结果是75，正确的结果是多少？

英语地点介词的正确使用方法

英语地点介词的正确使用方法 地点介词主要有at ，in，on，to，above，over，below，under，beside，behind ，between。它们的用法具体如下： 1、at （1）at通常指小地方：In the afternoon，he finally arrived at home。到下午他终于到家了。 （2）at通常所指范围不太明显，表示“在……附近，旁边”：The ball is at the corner。球搁在角落里。 2、in （1）in通常指大地方：When I was young，I lived in Beijing。我小时候住在北京。 （2）在内部：There is a ball in in the box。盒子里有只球。 （3）表示“在…范围之内”（是从属关系）： Guangdong lies in the south of China。深圳在中国的南部。 3、on

（1）on主要指“在……之上”，强调和表面接触： There is a book on the table。桌上有一本书。 （2）表示毗邻，接壤（是相邻关系）： Canada lies on the north of America 加拿大在美国的北边（与美国接壤）。 4、to 主要表示“在……范围外”，强调不接壤，不相邻。 Japan is to the east of China。日本在中国的东面。 注意： （1）at 强调“点”，on 强调“面”，in 强调“在里面”，to 表示“范围外”。 （2）on the tree：表示树上本身所长着的叶子、花、果实等 in the tree：表示某物或某人在树上 on the wall：表示在墙的表面，如图画、黑板等 in the wall：表示在墙的内部中，如门窗、钉子、洞、孔 5、above

四年级难忘的一件事作文400字

每个人的每一天都充满着快乐、伤心、害怕或者难过，并且会有一些难忘的事情。你难忘的一件事是什么呢？下面是小编和大家分享的“四年级难忘的一件事作文400字”，一起来看看吧，希望大家喜欢。 四年级难忘的一件事作文400字（一） 虽然我才上四年级，但是我的生活里也有很多难忘的事。我就给大家讲一件让我难忘的事吧。有一次爸爸让我做大米饭，给我留下了深刻的印象。 那天中午，爸爸对我说：“今天中午你来帮妈妈做大米饭吧，正好也锻炼锻炼。”我听了以后高兴地说：“好啊，小菜一碟。”说完以后我就开始动手了。我先把大米放在盆里淘干净，再倒进锅里，放在炉子上就到客厅去看我喜欢看的电视去了。在我看得正高兴的时候，忽然就闻到厨房里传出来一股烧糊的味儿来。我一看表，已经过去了半个小时了，我马上跑进厨房，把锅端下来。打开锅盖，就看见了变黑的锅底。可我没有放弃，又做了一次。 我又把米淘干净倒进锅里以后，我又去写作业去了。过了一会儿，我又闻到了那股烧糊的味道。我跑到厨房一看，锅底又黑了。这一看，我的眼泪都快掉下来了，这可怎么办啊？这时候，爸爸来了，对我说：“不用哭，做什事都要专心，再来一次。”我点了点头。第三次，我终于把大米饭做熟了，看见自己的成果，我感到很高兴。 这件事让我明白了：做什么事都要专心致志，不能三心二意。 四年级难忘的一件事作文400字（二） 今天，是我和姐姐第一次去买菜。 妈妈给了我们钱，说：＂要注意安全哦。＂我们说：＂知道了。＂ 一路上，我的心在扑通扑通地跳。来到菜市场，我都目瞪口呆了，各种各样的蔬菜放在我面前，有西兰花、芫茜、冬瓜……还有许多嘈杂声呢！ 我回忆起妈妈要我买的菜，哦！要买鱼。我走进市场左看看，右望望，嘿，找到了！我走过去，正准备对卖鱼的叔叔说话，一位阿姨便先说了一步。阿姨买完了鱼，我又准备说，谁知，又有一位阿姨要买。5分钟过去了，我还没买到，我着急了，对着叔叔大声说：＂叔叔，请给我一块鲜鱼肉！＂叔叔笑眯眯地说：＂你要多少呀？＂＂4元。＂我回答说。叔叔弄好了鱼，用袋子好了给我，我付了钱并说了一声＂谢谢＂就走了。 我又想到要买菜，对了，还有芫茜！我找到了买我所需要的地方，就跟那位婆婆要了一点。当我走出市场时，天空下起了牛毛似的雨，我跟姐姐说：＂我们快走吧！＂接着，我们骑着自行车，飞快地奔回家。 骑到半路，雨就更大了，我们到了一棵树下遮雨，但是好久都不见天空好转。为不拖延时间，我和姐姐顶着风冒着雨冲回家。

四年级上册数学专项练习

薄弱环节专项全练全测(一) 数与代数【薄弱点一】大数读、写的准确性 一、读出或写出下列各数。(8分) 30050082 读作：______________________ 3960400090 读作：______________________ 一千零四十万四千零二十写作：________________ 七千零三亿零二十万零五写作：________________ 二、求近似数。(8分) 1．省略万位后面的尾数。 16493560≈9528641≈ 2．省略亿位后面的尾数。 2709546312≈9953364778≈ 三、选择。(6分) 1．下面三个数中，一个0也不读出来的是( )。 A．50000800 B．50080 C．5008000 2．下面各数中，用9，8，7，5，0这五个数字组成的最接近8万的数是( )。 A．89750 B．80579 C．85079 3．74□7600000≈75亿，□里最大能填( )。 A．8 B．9 C．7 【薄弱点二】乘、除法计算的准确性 四、改错。(12分)

五、笔算下面各题，带※号的要验算。(24分) 240×38＝207×40＝※360×50＝ 380÷70＝ 694÷72＝※633÷21＝ 【薄弱点三】用乘、除法知识解决问题的正确性 六、解决问题。(34分) 1．一块长方形草坪的面积是120平方米，改建后，长扩大到原来的4倍，宽扩大到原来的3倍，改建 后草坪的面积是多少？(8分) 2．某花店在教师节到来之际，搞促销活动：每盆月季花16元，买3盆送1盆。 照这样计算，买4盆花，每盆比原来便宜多少钱？(8分) 3．一根木头长15米，把它平均分成5段，每锯一段需8分钟，锯完一共要花多少分钟？(8分) 4．一辆长途客车6小时行了348千米。照这样的速度，它12小时可以行多少千米？(10分) 解法1：先求客车1小时行驶多少千米，再求12小时可以行驶多少千米。 解法2： 先求12小时中有几个6小时，再求几个348千米是多少。 【薄弱点四】合理安排时间 七、小红家来了客人，她要沏茶招待客人。(8分) 找茶叶：1分钟沏茶：3分钟接水：1分钟洗杯子：2分钟洗水壶：2分钟烧水：10分钟 应该怎样安排时间才能使所用时间最短？至少要多长时间？

四年级作文 一件难忘的事

大年三十，踩气球 白雪皑皑的夜晚，从一间小屋里传出了阵阵欢快的笑声。那是大年三十，人们正忙着发压岁钱。只见家人们从裤兜里掏出一张比一张大的钱，塞到满怀欣喜的孩子们的手里。我们拿着钱就去买了许许多多的气球。 我们一家人开始给气球打气。我们不知疲惫地打了一个又一个。不一会儿，整整地堆满了一间大房子。气球的颜色和形状各不相同，有大的、有小的、红的、绿的、白的……在灯光的照耀下，非常漂亮。 我挑了一些漂亮点儿的气球，挂了起来，把客厅装扮得像春节联欢晚会现场一样光彩亮丽。时钟刚好走到12点时，我便急得像上锅的蚂蚁一样，立即跳向气球堆。“啪啪……”气球发出响亮的爆炸声。这清脆的爆炸声吸引了爸爸妈妈和弟弟的围观。他们被我那热乎劲儿感染了，也过来跟我一起踩气球。“噼噼啪啪……”一阵响，就像放鞭炮一样，既吓人又好玩。清脆的爆炸声给热闹的夜晚增添了一份别具一格的色彩。 不一会儿，整整一屋的气球就只踩剩一个了。我上前去一踩，没想到它竟然跑了，气得我张牙舞爪直瞪眼，恨不得一脚把它踩扁。我那滑稽的举动惹得爸妈们突地大笑起来。我不服气，气鼓鼓的又跑上去，对着气球狠狠地一踩，心想这回肯定能踩扁它。可谁知，我一个不小心，脚下一滑，便跌坐在气球上。“啪……”完了，气球在我的屁股上炸开了花。这下子，可把我的爸妈们逗得更乐了。 欢快的笑声在小屋的四周回荡，也回荡在我生命的旋律中…

捉螃蟹 记得去年冬天的一个早晨，天气晴朗，阳光明媚，我和表妹一起到河边的沙滩上捉螃蟹。 河里的水非常的少，到处都是石头。螃蟹，就藏在这些奇形怪状的石头下面。我们一边沿着岸边走，一边翻着旁边的石头。突然，表妹发现了一只螃蟹，激动万分地对我说：“哥哥，这块石头下面好像藏了一只螃蟹。”我们连忙轻轻地走过去，慢慢地蹲下去，小心翼翼地把石头搬开，快速伸过手去捉它，没想到螃蟹用两只大钳子把我的手狠狠地夹住了，痛得我脸都涨红了。我赶紧用力的把手往外一甩，才摆脱掉这该死的螃蟹。“呀！流血了！”表妹惊呼道。我低头一看，才发现是自己的手被螃蟹夹了一条大口子，直流血。我淡然地擦擦手说没事，可怎知表妹被我那流血直流的手吓得大哭起来。忍者疼痛，我迅速一抓，就把螃蟹扔进了瓶子里，表妹立即破涕为笑。 我们终于捉了一只螃蟹，心里有说不出的高兴，我那鲜红的手指和表妹那还挂着晶莹泪珠的脸，在阳光下，闪闪发光……

四年级数学上册专项练习

填空题 1、当除数是34时，试商时可以把除数看作( )，这样初商容易偏( )。 2、（）个26相加的和是468；（）比12个15多20。 334＝21），这时被除数是（）。 4、在括号里填上合适的数。 480秒=（）分540厘米=（）分米624时＝（）日 5、我们戴的红领巾上有一个（）角，两个（）角。 6、钟面上，分针转动360度，相应地时针转动（）度。 从3：00走到3：15，分针转动了（）度。 6点时，时针和分针所组成的角是（）度，是（）角， 3点时，时针和分针所组成的角是（）度，是（）角。 7、把“78÷26=3，26+3=29”合并成一个综合算式是（）。 8、在5○1÷58中，如果商的最高位在十位上，○中最小填（），还可以填（）。如果3□2÷36的商是一位数，□里的数最大可以填（），最小可以填（）。在算式□17÷53中，要使商是两位数，□最小填（）；要使商是一位数，□最大填（）。 9、在公路上有三条小路通往小明家，它们的长度分别是125米、207米、112米，其中 有一条小路与公路是垂直的，那么这条小路的长度是（）米。 10、李阳从1楼到3楼用了12秒，她从一楼到六楼需要（）秒。 11．二百零六亿八千万写作（），改写成用“万”作单位的数是（）万，用“亿”作单位这个数的近似数是（）亿。 12．2个千万、7个万、8个百和5个十组成的数是（），这个数读作（）。 13．由6、7、5、1、0组成的最大数是（），最小数是（）。14、计算除法时，错将除数36看成63，结果得到商12。请你帮他算一算，正确的商应该是（）。

15．一个边长24厘米的正方形面积是（）平方厘米。 16、把两道算式组成综合算式，再用递等式计算。 14×2=28 21×4=84 10×5=50 28-15=13 200-84=116 30＋50=80 （）（）（） 选择、判断题 1、30度的角被投影仪投到屏幕上时角就变大了。（） 2、570÷40＝14……1。（） 3、在方向板上，北和西南之间夹角是135°。（） 4、在同一平面内，两条直线不是相交就是平行。（） 5、在同一平面内，两条直线不是平行就是垂直。（） 6、4个同样大的正方体可以拼成一个较大的正方体。（） 7、在10倍的放大镜下看15度的角就变成了150度。（） 8、六位数一定比七位数小。（） 9、平角就是一条直线，周角就是一条射线。（） 10、三位数除以两位数，商不可能是三位数。（） 11、三位数除以两位数，商最多是两位数。（） 12、过一点能画无数条直线。（）13．两条直线相交成直角时，这两条直线就互相垂直。（）14．观察物体时，在同一位置看到相同的形状可能有不同的摆法。（）15、两条不相交的直线叫做平行线。（） 1、在4□7÷46的商是两位数，□中的数最小是（）。 ①7 ② 6 ③5 2、想使物体从斜面上向下滚动时尽可能地快，下面的选项中，木板与地面的夹 角是（）度最符合要求。 ①20 ②38 ③10 ④80

难忘的一件事作文400字四年级_1

难忘的一件事作文400字四年级 难忘的一件事作文400字四年级 最令我难忘的一件事，就是偷吃四色小辣椒了，那四色辣椒的滋味，真是难以形容，令人难忘。在我家楼下有一个小菜园，那里是爷爷的乐园，他每天都会去那，乐呵呵地给他种的蔬菜浇水。在这个菜园里，有白菜、罗卜和辣椒。最引起我主意的就是辣椒了。爷爷种的不是一般的辣椒，是四色小辣椒。四色小辣椒是一种能变色的小辣椒，在每个季节变一种色，春天是绿色、夏天是黄色、秋天是紫色、冬天是红色，非常神奇。一天我在楼下散步，当时正是秋天的一个。我走到菜园时，看见里面的小辣椒，紫紫的，看起来很好吃。心想：着么紫的小辣椒难道还会辣吗？肯定能好吃，心中便有了一种想法，摘一个尝一尝，反正爷爷也不在。我以飞一般的速度跑了过去。用手一拽，边摘了下来。我像得了一件宝贝似的，小心翼翼地捧着四色小辣椒，向家跑去。到了家，见没人，才放了心。跑进厨房把四色小辣椒洗干净，然后把放四色小辣椒放进嘴里嚼，不嚼不要紧，一嚼可坏了。顿时，舌头、喉喽就像要喷火一样，辣的我说不出话来。我跑到水

龙头前大口大口的喝起水来。这才好点，没想到这四色小辣椒比别的辣椒辣上十倍。这件事一直刻在我的心头，甩也甩不掉呢。 四年级:戴恋佳 难忘的一件事作文400字四年级 最令我难忘的一件事，就是偷吃四色小辣椒了，那四色辣椒的滋味，真是难以形容，令人难忘。在我家楼下有一个小菜园，那里是爷爷的乐园，他每天都会去那，乐呵呵地给他种的蔬菜浇水。在这个菜园里，有白菜、罗卜和辣椒。最引起我主意的就是辣椒了。爷爷种的不是一般的辣椒，是四色小辣椒。四色小辣椒是一种能变色的小辣椒，在每个季节变一种色，春天是绿色、夏天是黄色、秋天是紫色、冬天是红色，非常神奇。一天我在楼下散步，当时正是秋天的一个。我走到菜园时，看见里面的小辣椒，紫紫的，看起来很好吃。心想：着么紫的小辣椒难道还会辣吗？肯定能好吃，心中便有了一种想法，摘一个尝一尝，反正爷爷也不在。我以飞一般的速度跑了过去。用手一拽，边摘了下来。我像得了一件宝贝似的，小心翼翼地捧着四色小辣椒，

最新四年级数学上册单元专项练习

第一单元专项练习 一、填空。 （2）从个位起，往左第五位是（）位，第（）位是亿位，万位的左面第一位是（）位，最高位是百亿位的数是（）位数。 （3）在854006007中，“8”在（）位上，表示（），“5” 在（）位上，表示（），“6” 在（）位上，表示（）。 （4）10个10亿是（），10个（）是一千万，（）个一千万是一亿。（5）四十六万八千零四十是由（）个十万，（）个万，（）个千和（）个十组成，它写作（）。 （6）十位上和千位上都是4的五位数中，最大的数是（），最小的数是（）。它们相差（）。 （7）最小的七位数是（），最大的六位数是（），它们的和是（），差是（）。 （8）一个十一位数，最高位是6，第七位是8，最低位是3，其余各位是0，这个数写作（），读作（），四舍五入到亿位写作（）。 （9）一个九位数，最高位和最低位上的数字都是6，十万位上的数字是5，其余数位上的数字都是0，这个数写作（），读作（）。（10）由五个千万，六个万，七个百和八个十组成的数写作（）。二、写出或读出下列各数。 八万三千零八写作（）；一千零一十万二千写作（）；六亿零七千写作（）； 五百六十亿零三万写作（）；814200读作（）； 108078000读作（）；200003050读作（）；603000004读作（）； 三、在○里填上“＞” “＜”或“＝”。（8分）

84亿○8400000000 639925○64亿 790000○709999 3404万○30440000 8888788○8887888 79018万○8亿 1101万○11010000 9999899○9998999 四、判断题。 （1）一千一千地数，数十次是一万。（） （2）最大六位数与最小六位数相差1。（） （3）两位数共有九十个。（） （4）8亿是8位数。（） （5）984650改写成万作单位约98万。（） 五、选择题。 （1）最高位是万位的数是（）。 A.五位数 B.六位数 C.七位数 D.十位数 （2）比10000少1的数是（）。 A.9000 B.9900 C.9009 D.9999 （3）八个千和八个十组成的数是（）。 A.800080 B.808 C.8080 D.8800 （4）把594900四舍五入到万位约是（）万。 （5）A.60 B.59 C.61 D.595 （5）李村去年工农业纯收入六百四十万零七十元，写作（）元。 A.64070 B.6407 C.6400070 D.640070 （6）四十、四万、四亿组成的数是（）。 A.4000040040 B.400040040 C.400004040 D.4000004004 （7）比最小的九位数少1的数是（）。 A.99999999 B.999999999 C.1000000001 D.9999999 六、把下列各数改写成用“万”或“亿”作单位的数。 230000=（）万 36700000=（）万 635000000=（）万

on,acrossfrom,nextto或between…and练习和辨析

用on, across from, next to或between…and 完成下列句子。 1. 学校在书店的对面。 The school is ____ the bookshop. 2. 我坐在他旁边。 I sit ____ him. 3. 我们把这个书桌放在床和椅子之间。 Let’s put the desk ____ the bed ____ the chair. 4. 墙上有一些画。 There are some pictures ____ the wall. [Key: 1.across from 2.next to 3.between；and 4.on] 【辨析】这几个词语均用来表示位置，但用法有别。 ⑴on 作介词，常用于表示方位和地点，侧重指紧贴着某物，意为“在……上面”。 例如： 在教师的讲桌上有一些花。 There are some flowers on the teacher’s desk. There is a map of China on the wall. 墙上有一张中国地图。 注意：在美式英语中，表示“在街上”用介词on，但在英式英语中，则常用 介词in。例如： The Greens live on(in) Wall Street. 格林一家住在华尔街上。 Their house is on(in) that street. 他们家就在那条街上。 ⑵across from 相当于介词，在美式英语中表示“在……的对面；在……的对侧”， 表示此含义时，在英式英语中也可以只用across。例如： The pay phone is across from the library. 公用电话就在图书馆的对面。 Can you see the shop across from the river? 你能看到河对岸的商店吗？ ⑶next to 相当于介词，意为“紧挨着，紧靠着”。例如： There is an airport next to the park. 有个机场紧挨着那个公园。 The pay phone is next to the post office. Go along and turn left, you’ll see it. 公用电话紧挨着邮局。你向前走，往左拐就能看到它。 ⑷between…and 意思是“在……和……之间”，用于表示两者间。between是介 词，后接人称代词时，该人称代词必须用宾格形式。例如： The library is between the hotel and the supermarket. 图书馆在旅馆和超市之 间。 You sit between him and me. 你坐在我和他之间。 注意：between 后面也可以接代表两者的复数名词或代词。例如： The video arcade is between two shops. 电子游戏中心在两个商店之间。 They are twins. I can’t tell the difference between them. 他们是双胞胎，我看不出他们之间的区别。

四年级难忘的一件事400字作文

大家都经历过让自己难忘的事，究竟是哪件事让你印象深刻至今难忘呢？下面是小编整理的“四年级难忘的一件事400字作文”，仅供参考，欢迎阅读，希望对大家有所帮助。 四年级难忘的一件事400字作文（一） 我已在世上度过了十个春秋，在我的记忆里，好多事已随着时间的流逝变得模糊啦，可是有件事像是烙在了我的脑海里，使我怎么也忘不掉。 记得那是一年夏天，天热的出奇，我和爸爸妈妈去文化宫玩，当时我穿着一件小背心和一条小短裤，鞋子走起路来还会发出“吱吱”的响声，我和爸爸妈妈坐在凳子上乘凉，我看到一群鸽子飞来，好美呀！有白的有灰的，可鸽子为什么又叫和平鸽呢？我疑惑的问爸爸，爸爸说：“传说在古代的时候，鸽子可以传递消息，因为鸽子象征着和平象征着祖国美好的未来，所以鸽子又叫和平鸽。”哦！原来是这么回事，那我就要犒劳犒劳它们啦，我买了一包玉米去喂鸽子，有一只鸽子很丑，好象是安徒生笔下的丑小“鸽”，可是，它并没有为它自己的丑而感到自卑，当我喂它们食物时它也和别的鸽子来抢食物，它的嘴啄一粒，就慢慢的吞下去，那样子真有趣，等它吃饱了，它就用翅膀盖住身子和头在那睡上了大觉！我喜欢上了那只“灰小鸽”，喜欢它那种自信，喜欢它那种乐观向上，喜欢它那种永不放弃。 每当我一看到鸽子，我就想起那只“灰小鸽”这也就成了我记忆最深的一件事，因为它使我明白了一个做人的道理，要自强-自信-自立！ 四年级难忘的一件事400字作文（二） 在我的成长历程里，有许多让我难忘的事，但它们都如过眼云烟，但今年暑假的这件事最让我刻骨铭心。 不知道从什么时候起，我的眼睛变的斜视，虽然不影响视力，但是却不美观。到医院去检查医生说：“需要做个小手术，不然长大后就不好做了。” 于是爸爸和奶奶带我到沈阳爱尔医院去做手术。在做手术之前经过一系列的检查后，准备做手术，爸爸和奶奶都很担心，妈妈也很挂念我，一个接一个的电话打过来，问我害怕吗？我还听见她在电话里哭了。其实，我很兴奋，一点也不害怕，因为我终于等到了那一刻，走进了手术室后，医生给我打上了麻醉针，我就什么也不知道了，美美的睡了一觉，当我醒来的时候，爸爸已经守护在我的床边，问长问短，我觉得很幸福。这时候妈妈又一个电话追来问我做的怎么样，爸爸说：＂做得很成功＂，妈妈心里的一块石头终于落地了。 第二天，打开纱布，我照镜子发现只是眼睛又红又肿，但是一点也不疼，在爸爸和奶奶的精心照顾下我终于出院了。 我觉得我很勇敢，我想大声对爸爸妈妈说：“我长大了，不要太为我担心了。” 四年级难忘的一件事400字作文（三） 今年暑假，社区组织我们参加“老少共读一本书《跨越时代的呼唤----焦裕禄》”活动。

高考英语 between…and… 的用法

------精品文档!值得拥有！------ 2012高考英语between…and…的用法 （1） I’ll phone you between lunch and three o’clock. 我将在午餐后三点钟以前给你打电话。 He felt something between laughter and anger. 他既觉得好笑，又感到气愤。 (2) 由于……和……(表示原因)。如： Between the noise outside and lack of sleep, he couldn’t concentrate. 由于外面的噪音加上睡眠不足，他无法专心。 注：between...and 不仅可连接两者，也可连接三者。如： Luxemburg lies between France, Germany and Belgium. 卢森堡位于法国、德国和比利时之间。 Between cooking, writing and running the farm he was kept very busy. 他又是做饭，又是写作，还要打理农场，忙得不可开交。 (3) 用于习语：between ourselves [you and me] 仅你我知道的秘密。如： Between ourselves, I don’t think he will live much longer. 咱们私下说说，他活不久了。 Between you and me, he’s not very reliable. 这是只有你我之间才说，他不是很可靠。 ------珍贵文档!值得收藏！------

最难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇

最难忘的一件事四年级作文3篇 这件事，使我终生难忘。给了我鼓励与力量；给了我信心与希望，它已深深地印在我心里，伴我成长。下面是小编为大家整理的最难忘的一件事四年级作文，仅供参考，欢迎大家阅读。 最难忘的一件事四年级作文一今天我在家里找东西的时候，看到了一张照片，照片上一个小男孩拉着一个小购物车站在超市门口，开心地笑着。使我陷入了回忆。 哪天妈妈让我一个人去超市购物，我高兴的一蹦三尺高，因为那可是我长到现在从来没有过的事情啊！我拉着妈妈给我的小推车，走进了超市的大门。我先把我的小车车存在超市的储物台，就在超市里找了一个公用车车，推进了超市。超市里的东西真多，看得我琳琅满目。我第一个要买的东西是四盒0.5的铅，我找来找去都没找到，最和终于在文具类的下面，找到了0.5的铅。但是我又左右为难了有两种前一种是彩铅后一种不是彩铅。彩铅稍微贵一点，普通的铅不是很贵。我先来想去，最后买了彩铅，因为就贵几毛钱吗，还是一漂亮为主吧。 后来我又买了许多其他的东西，就去收银台付钱了。我先把我卖的所有东西放到收银台上，等收银的阿姨算完了

钱，统一结账。这次买的钱是40元，我给了阿姨100元，阿姨给我找了60元。等我把所有东西装进我带来的小车车，就回家了 通过这次买东西，我收获了自立。 最难忘的一件事四年级作文二在我的记忆里，我的童年有许多许多难忘的事，但其中有一件事更是让我最难忘。 这件事现在想起来，我都觉得很好笑——那就是掉牙!我换第一颗牙时，是妈妈带我去医院，医生给我打了麻药，把还没有松动的牙硬生生的给拔了下来，听医生说不拔就会影响新牙的`生长。等换第二颗牙时，我才深深地体会到了换牙的滋味。先是牙齿有点松动，吃东西时觉得有点碍事，但又好像不影响什么。于是我有事没事的就用舌头摇摇它，也不疼，心里总想它早早掉了就好了，可它偏偏好像快掉了，但又牢牢的不掉。渐渐的它越来越来松动了，我都感觉到好像就只有那么一点点肉连着它了，可它还是不掉。 有一天中午，妈妈做了我最爱吃的红烧排骨，我高兴地大吃了起来，正美美地吃着，突然，我咬到了块硬硬的东西，我以为我咬到了骨头，结果吐出来一看，是带着血的小白牙，其实这样掉牙一点儿都不疼，但是它掉得可真不是时候，那香喷喷的排骨是不能吃了，真是让我遗憾。 这件事虽然已经过去了很久，但这次掉牙的经历却让我

人教版四年级数学上册期末考试卷

四年级数学（上册）期末考试试题 一、填空题（22分） 1. 四十五亿七千五百万写作( )，改写成用亿作单位的数是( )，省略亿后面的尾数的近似数是( )。 2. 两个数相除，商是56，余数是0.3，若被除数和除数同时扩大100倍，商是( )余数是( )。 3、写出下面各数的近似数.。 （1）省略万位后面的尾数1746003≈35482954≈ （2）省略亿位后面的尾数3708500000≈9964000000≈ 4、有一个七位数，减去1就变成六位数，这个七位数是（）。 5、比较大小。 527023○4969200 160000000○16亿180÷12○180÷15 150×2○15×20 6、712÷42，除数可以看成（）来试商，它的商是（）位数。 7、如图，已知∠1=60o，∠2=（），∠3=（），∠4=（） 2 1 3 8、一个数除以73商是6，且有余数，余数最大是（）。 4 9、甲数是乙数的3倍，甲数除以乙数的商是（）；如果甲数缩小5倍，要使商不变，乙数应当（）。 二、想一想，下面的说法对不对？对的打“√”，错的打“×”。（6分） 1、长方形是特殊的平行四边形。……………………（） 2、两个锐角的和一定比直角大。……………………（） 3、一个三位数除以两位数，商可能是一位数，也可能是两位数。…（） 4、估算3198÷39的结果约是100。………………………………（）。 5、638÷27=22…44 ……………………………………（）。 6、直线的长度是射线的两倍。…………………………………（）。 三、选择题(8分) 1. 下面各数中，一个零也不读出来的是( ) A 202200 B 200220 C 202020 2. 在一个整数的末尾添上两个“0”，原来的数就( ) A 扩大2倍 B 缩小2倍 C 扩大100倍 D 缩小100倍 3. 在有余数的除法中，除数和余数比较( ) A 除数比余数大 B 余数比除数小 C 除数和余数一样大 4、下列图形中，具有稳定性的是（）。 A、长方形 B、平行四边形 C、三角形 5、一个数除以13，商是103，余数是11，这个数是（）。 A、1339 B、1328 C、1350 6、382770000000≈（）亿 A、38277 B、3828 C、383 7、一个数，亿位和千位上都是7，其余各位上都是0，这个数写作（） A、700070000 B、700007000 C、700700000 8、9÷3=（9×3）÷（3×3）成立的依据是（）。 A、商不变的性质 B、乘除法的关系 C、小数的性质 四、计算我能行。（30分） 1、直接写出得数。（12分） 7×10= 360×2= 480÷60= 78÷13=