Language

Language is and should be a living thing, constantly enriched with new words and forms of expression. But there is a vital distinction between good developments, which add to the language, enabling us to say things we could not say before, and bad developments, which subtract from the language by rendering it less precise. A vivacious, colorful use of words is not to be confused with mere slovenliness①. The kind of slovenliness in which some professionals deliberately indulge is perhaps akin② to the cult③ of the unfinished work, which has eroded most of the arts in our time. And the true answer to it is the same that art is enhanced, not hindered, by discipline. You cannot carve satisfactorily in butter.

The corruption of written English has been accompanied by an even sharper decline in the standard of spoken English. We speak very much less well than was common among educated Englishmen generation or two ago.

The modern theatre has played a baneful part in dimming our appreciation of language. Instead of the immensely articulate dialogue of, for example, Shaw （who was also very insistent off good pronunciation）, audiences are now subjected to streams of barely literate trivia④, often designed, only too well, to exhibit "lack of communication", and larded with the obscenities and grammatical errors of the intellectually impoverished. Emily Post once advised her readers: "The theatre is the best possible place to hear correctly-enunciated speech." Alas, no more. One young actress was recently reported to be taking lessons in how to speak badly, so that she should fit in better.

But the BBC is the worst traitor. After years of very successfully helping to raise the general standard of spoken English, it suddenly went into reverse. As the head of the pronunciation unit coyly put it: "In the 1960s the BBC opened the field to a much wider range of speakers." To hear a BBC disc jockey talking to the latest ape-like pop idol is a truly shocking experience of verbal squalor⑤. And the prospect seems to be of even worse to come. School teachers are actively encouraged to ignore little Johnnys incoherent grammar, atrocious spelling and haphazard punctuation, because worrying about such things might inhibit his creative genius.

Notes：

①slovenliness n. 不修边幅，马虎

②akin a. 同族的，相似的

③cult n. 崇拜

④trivia n. 琐事

⑤squalor n. 肮脏；悲惨

41. The writer relates linguistic slovenliness to tendencies in the arts today in that both_________.

A. occasionally aim at a certain degree of fluidity

B. from time to time show concern for the finishing touch

C. appear to shun perfection

D. may make use of economical short cuts

42. What does the writer say has happened to spoken English today? ___________.

A. Writing problems are not reflected in poor oral expression.

B. On the whole, people dont mind making mistakes.

C. Educated Englishmen now are less communicative than they were in the past.

D. Like written English, it has undergone a noticeable change for the better.

43. What effect is the modern theatre said to have had on language? ___________.

A. It has become an important factor in reform.

B. It has made us more aware of subtleties in language.

C. It has exerted a welcome and positive influence.

D. It has had a ruinous effect.

44. The author says that the dialogue in Shaws plays is noted for___________.

A. refined presentation of Shaws ideas

B. remarkable outspokenness

C. being outstandingly well expressed

D. insistence on good pronunciation

45. Many modern plays, the author finds, contain speeches which___________.

A. are incoherent and linguistically objectionable

B. are far too difficult for most people to follow

C. unintentionally shock the audience

D. deliberately try to hide the playwrights intellectual inadequacies