米爾恩精選(九篇)
前言：一篇好文章的誕生，需要你不斷地搜集資料、整理思路，本站小編為你收集了豐富的米爾恩主題范文，僅供參考，歡迎閱讀并收藏。
第1篇：米爾恩范文
一.米切爾·恩德的作品： 《小圖釘吉姆和司機魯斯卡》、《毛毛》、《永遠講不完的故事》。
二.人物簡介：
米切爾·恩德是德國當代最優(yōu)秀的幻想文學作家 。原名為安德烈亞斯·赫爾穆特。1929年11月12日生于巴伐利亞風景如畫的山城加米什·帕騰基爾辛 。他在一個充滿文化氣息的家庭中長大，他曾活躍于南方的戲劇舞臺。然而他真正的志趣卻在于幻想文學的創(chuàng)作；他的成名作《小紐扣吉姆和火車司機盧卡斯》，榮獲了1961年德意志青少年圖書獎。他最杰出的代表作當屬《毛毛》和《永遠講不完的故事》，也因此成為德國最優(yōu)秀的幻想文學作家，在歐洲乃至全世界都產(chǎn)生了深遠的影響。
（來源：文章屋網(wǎng) ）
第2篇：米爾恩范文
【Key words】similarity； difference； onomatopoeia
Onomatopoeia originates from a word of Greek onomatopoeia， which means that the appearance of words comes from the imitation of the sound given out from some object or movement， or at least has some connection with it. There are some differences in applied scope between English and Chinese onomatopoeia， and they each have their common usage.
On the one hand， there are similarities of English and Chinese onomatopoeia. In the first place， they have similar rhetorical function. No matter English or Chinese onomatopoeia， it is a means of word-building as well as an important rhetorical means， making people feel as if they are participating and hearing. In the second place， the characteristics of absolute structure are similar. The same things in nature and human’s common feeling make different nation’s language have same onomatopoeia. Some of them are very obvious such as baba （papa）， mama （mamma）， ping pang （ping pong）， pipa （pitpat）， dingdong （dingdong）， and ha-ha （ha-ha）. In addition， they often appear in over lapping sound. In mutual translation of English and Chinese， we only need to translate the onomatopoeia which is used as independent component in original sentence into the corresponding one in target language. For example：
（1）媽媽， 我回來了！Mamma！ I’m home now.
（2）叮咚！叮咚！泉水在不停得流淌著。Dingdong！ Dingdong！ The spring is flowing.
On the other hand， there are differences of English and Chinese onomatopoeia. Firstly， we can see the differences in syntactic function. English onomatopoeia is much more active than Chinese onomatopoeia， and it is used more widely. The most obvious aspect is that it has more syntactic functions than Chinese onomatopoeia. Most of them are verb and noun， and used as subject， predicate and object， while most Chinese onomatopoeia only has the nature of adjective， and it is mostly used as attribute and adverbial， sometimes predicate. For example （Leki 117）， The beam sinks earthwards， taut and protesting， its creaks blending with the squeaking and rumbling of the grinding-wheels and the occasional grunts and signs of the camels. 大梁壓向地面， 絞緊了繩子， 發(fā)出吱吱嘎嘎與磨滾的軋軋隆隆聲， 以及駱駝偶爾發(fā)出的呼嚕嘆息聲響成了一片。
Secondly， the motivation of using onomatopoeia is also different. From the point of the inner organization of it， language is a kind of sign system. Every sign has two aspects： use what to show and to show what， which are style and content of sign. We have two kinds of it： direct onomatopoeia and indirect onomatopoeia. The former one can arise the association between sound and meaning because they are quite similar. Chinese onomatopoeia often copy sounds directly， which belongs to direct onomatopoeia while English onomatopoeia usually use some verbs and nouns to describe sounds belongs to indirect onomatopoeia. For Example：
（1）雨吧噠吧噠地落在屋頂上。The rain patters on the roof.
（2）她們嘰嘰喳喳地說話。They spoke in whispers.
Thirdly， there are also some changes in usage. Dog’s signified meanings in English and Chinese language do not have substantial difference， but they are very different in the intensive meaning. In western countries， dogs are people’s pets. They take dogs as companion and friends. While in China， the treatment the dogs receive is quite different. They are usually kept for watching the house， and they are human’s servants. From the English idiom “Love me， love my dog.” And the Chinese one “gou ji tiao qiang” （a cornered dog will do something desperate）， we can get a hint of different cultures. In addition， in English the same word for expressing animals’ sound can be used for different animals. For example， “howl” can be used for lions， tigers， jackals and wolves at the same time； while in Chinese animals’ sound is basically one for one. For example， gou fei， lang hao， he li， que zao， ma si， hu xiao， shi hou， niao zhuan， ji ti. Certainly it does not mean that there is no situation of one for two， but very few.
To sum up， in order to taste refined literature works and appreciate different poems， understand the greatest delight of the diction， enjoy aesthetic perception， mole the sentiment， and guarantee the accuracy of the accuracy of the poetry translation practice and examination， it is very necessary for us to pay attention to contrastive study on Chinese and English onomatopoeia.
References：
第3篇：米爾恩范文
To enhance plugging performance of microgels， a series of microgels with varied cationic degrees was synthesized by inverse microemulsion polymerization with acrylamide and methylacryloxylethyl trimethyl ammonium chloride as monomers. The properties and performance of cationic microgels were examined by transmission electron microscope， dynamic light scattering analysis， viscosity measurement and plugging test. The results show that cationic microgel exhibits better ability in water adsorption and viscosity enhancement than nonionic microgels. It can efficiently plug formation with permeability lower than 1200×10-3 μm2 （mD）， compared to 800 mD of nonionic microgels. The optimal cationic degree is 10%.
Key words： Cationic microgel； Polyacrylamide； Profile control
INTRODUCTION
With water-flooding reserviors matured， serious vertical and lateral heterogeneity gives rise to channeling of injection water along high permeable streaks. This results into water bypass and poor swept volume. Thus facile profile modification treatment is badly needed now than ever before.
Recently considerable attention has been paid to gel technology with varied formulations for different reservoir condition， usually including bulk injection[1]， double fluid cross-linked gel[2]， colloidal dispersion gel[3]， and pre-performed gel[4]. From these applications and the feedback of field practice， it comes out the state of art of these techniques described as follows. （1） Bulk injection has robust gel chemistry and is highly insensitive to petroleum reservoir environments and interferences， however， great efforts should be devoted to ensure indepth placement. （2） With double fluid crosslinked gel， crosslinkers like chromium acetate are apt to be adsorbed， dispersed or diluted in advance front. Consequently these adverse behaviors render that the strength of formed gel is questionable. （3） Colloidal dispersion gel treatments are economic and effective due to low polymer concentration and comparable size of polymer coil with pore scale， but its application is restricted by salt effect and fragile temperature resistence. （4） Pre-performed gel， to some extent， wins out from these four gel technique for getting rid of the other three’s shortcoming listed above. However， its complex production process including drying， grounding and meshing， multiply the cost of its applicable promotion； furthermore， the mixing of drying gel particle and injection water needs elaborated control of particle swellability.
In the 1997， the industry consortium （BP， Chevron Texaco and Nalco company） developed a novel， time delayed， and highly expanded particle system， named“Bright Water”[5]. This system composed of microgels with diameter around 0.1-3 μm synthesized by emulsion polymerization. It has been practiced for more than 85 treatments since the first application in Minas Field， Indonesia. Several successful cases have been reported in these years[6]. According to the profile-control mechanism raised by Chauveteau et al.[7]， microgels act by its swellability， viscosification and retention. Introducing cationic group in microgel can improve swellability by electrostatic repulsion between polymer chains and thus increasing viscosity of microgel solution. However， cationic microgels are seldom reported in profile control.
Based on above analysis， a series of microgels with cationic degree 0-50% （defined by the molar percentage of cationic monomer in total monomer） was synthesized by inverse microemulsion polymerization. The microgel properties including swellability and viscosity were determined. The corresponding performance in plugging test was compared with nonionic polyacrylamide microgels.
1. EXPERIMENTAL
1.1 Materials
Acrylamide （AM） and 78wt% water solution of methylacryloxylethyl trimethyl ammonium chloride（DMC） were used as monomers. Methylene bisacrylamide（MBA） as crosslinker， ammonium persulfate （APS） and sodium sulfite （SDS） as redox initiator， Span80（Sorbitan monooleate， chemically pure） and Tween60（Polyoxyethylene （20） sorbitan monostearate， chemically pure） as emulsifier were used without purification. Industrial white oil was chosen as the continuous phase.
1.2 Microgel Synthesis by Inverse Microemulsion Polymerization
The surfactant and oil with predetermined amount were mixed in a three-neck round-bottom flask equipped with stirrer， thermometer and nitrogen inlet. The reactor was placed in the 30 ℃ water bath. Then the water phase composed of DMC， AM and MBA was added. This mixture was stirred at 300rpm for 10 min to prepare microemulsion. Following 15 min nitrogen purge， the mixture was initiated with 0.01g APS/SDS. After reacting for 1h， a translucent emulsion was obtained for the below use.
1 . 3 M i c r o g e l M o r p h o l o g y a n d S i z e Characterization
Microgel morphology was observed by transmission electron microscopy （TEM， JEM-2100UHR）. Particle size and distribution were measured at 30℃ by dynamic light scattering method using Mastersizer 3000 high-speed intelligent particle size analyzer. For each sample， three tests were performed.
1.4 Viscosity Measurement
The viscosity of microgel solution was measured by Brookfield Viscometer LVDVII plus pro with ULA and SC4 spindles at 20 ℃.
1.5 Plugging Test
Sand packs were prepared by wet method described by Ding et al.[8] with 120-140 mesh quartz sand in the middle part and 80-100 mesh at both ends to prevent fine sand from leaking. After packing， three procedures were performed， as listed below： （1） inject water to get the initial pressure P0； （2） inject 0.5wt% microgel solution with slug size 0.5 pore volume （PV） and record maximum pressure P1； （3） inject water continuously and record balance pressure P2. The resistance factor （Fr） and the residual resistance factor （Frr） are calculated by P1/P0 and P2/P0， respectively. The injection rate is constantly 0.5mL/min.
2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
2.1 Microgel Morphology and Size
The morphology of 10%DMC original microgel in inverse emulsion is shown in Figure 1， where the particles are spherical and relatively uniform. The TEM photo of swollen microgels is shown in Figure 2. It can be seen from Figure 2 that the swollen microgels are a kind of particles with a tightly holden core and lightly crosslinked shell.
2.2 Viscosity
Here， relative zero shear viscosity （ηr0） is used to represent viscosity of microgel solution. To obtain ηr0， curves of solution viscosity versus mass concentrations （0.1%-1%） were determined for four type microgels. These microgels are seperately 0%， 5%， 10%， 50% cationic degree. These viscosity-shear rate curves are fitted to the Cross model[11]， which is known to provide a good description of the viscosity of colloidal suspension. The calculated ηr0 versus mass concentration （c） is shown in Figure 4. In Figure 4， ηr0 increases with the increasing cationic degree of microgels at the same concentration. The ηr0 of 0% DMC ranges from 1 to 5， while for 50% DMC it ranges from 15 to 290. The viscosity of cationic microgel is ten times that of nonionic microgels at the same concentration. And with c increasing， ηr0 sharply increases for 50% DMC while only moderately increases for 0% DMC. The increasing viscosity for higher cationic degree is attributed to electroviscous effect[12].
If plugging rate of 50% （Frr=2） is taken as the criterion for selecting microgels， the nonionic microgels are limited for use at formation permeability lower than 800 mD. The cationic microgels extend this limitation to 1200 mD. And 10% DMC microgel is the best fit for use because of its lower cost than 50% DMC microgel.
CONCLUSION
Microgels with different cationic degrees are synthesized by inverse microemulsion polymerization with AM and DMC as monomers. These microgels have a size range 50-100 nm in inverse emulsion and expand to 700 nm to 1700 nm after swollen by water. The maximum swellability is achieved at 10% DMC. The viscosity of cationic microgels is about ten times of nonionic microgels at the same concentration. In plugging test， the cationic microgels extend the permeability limitation for effective use to 1200 mD from 800 mD of nonionic microgels. 10% DMC microgel is the best fit for use because of its low cost.
REFERENCES
[1] Dai， C. L.， You， Q.， Xie， Y. H.， He， L.， Cui， Y.， & Zhao， F. L.（2011）. Case Study on Polymer Gel to Control Water Coning for Horizontal Well in Offshore Oilfield. Offshore Technology Conference， 2-5 May 2011， Houston， Texas， USA.
[2] Nanda， S.， Kumar， R.， Sindhwani， K.， & Goyal， K. （1987）. Characterization of Polyacrylamine-Cr+ 6 Gels Used for Reducing Water/Oil Ratio. SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry， 1987， San Antonio， Texas.
[3] Chang H.， Sui， X. G.， Xiao， L.， et al. （2004）. Successful Field Pilot of in-Depth Colloidal Dispersion Gel （Cdg） Technology in Daqing Oil Field. SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery， 2004， Tulsa， Oklahoma， USA.
[4] Coste， J.-P.， Liu， Y.， Bai， B.， Li， Y.， Shen， P.， Wang， Z.， & Zhu， G. （2000）. In-Depth Fluid Diversion by Pre-Gelled Particles. Laboratory Study and Pilot Testing. SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium， 3-5 April 2000， Tulsa， Oklahoma.
[5] Frampton， H.， Morgan， J.， Cheung， S.， Munson， L.， Chang， K.， & Williams， D. （2004）. Development of a Novel Waterflood Conformance Control System. SPE/ DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery Tulsa， 2004， Oklahoma， USA，.
[6] Garmeh， G.， Izadi， M.， Salehi， M.， Romero， J.， Thomas， C.， & Manrique， E. （2012）.Thermally Active Polymer to Improve Sweep Efficiency of Waterfloods： Simulation and Pilot Design Approaches. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering， 15（1）， 86-97.
[7] Chauveteau， G.， Tabary， R.， Blin， N.， et al. （2004）. Disproportionate Permeability Reduction by Soft Preformed Microgels. SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery， 17-21 April 2004， Tulsa， Oklahoma.
[8] Ding， B.， Zhang， G.， Ge， J.， & Liu， X. （2010）. Research on Mechanisms of Alkaline Flooding for Heavy Oil. Energy & Fuels， 24（12）， 6346-6352.
[9] Hoare， T.， & Pelton， R. （2007）. Functionalized Microgel Swelling： Comparing Theory and Experiment. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B， 111（41）， 11895-11906.
[10] Kiatkamjornwong， S.， & Phunchareon， P. （1999）.Influence of Reaction Parameters on Water Absorption of Neutralized Poly （Acrylic Acid-Co-Acrylamide） Synthesized by Inverse Suspension Polymerization. Journal Of Applied Polymer Science， 72（10）， 1349-1366.
第4篇：米爾恩范文
*Corresponding author.
Supported by Korea Gas Corporation.
Received 12 January 2012; accepted 15 February 2012
Abstract
There is increasing interest in micellar-polymer flooding because of the need to increase oil production from depleted and waterflooded reservoirs. Using horizontal wells for injection and production in a micellar-polymer flood process, higher sweep efficiency is expected compared with the use of conventional patterns by vertical wells. However, the use of horizontal wells is very sensitive to the well pattern designed to operate the process. This paper presents an analysis of how the overall performance of a micellar-polymer flood process in anisotropic reservoirs is influenced by the well pattern using horizontal injector and producer in different configurations.
A three-dimensional numerical simulator for fluid flow and mass transport is used to analyze the effectiveness of well combinations in micellar-polymer applications. The potential for a horizontal well application was assessed through different situations in combinations of injection and production wells and degree of reservoir anisotropy. Results from the study have demonstrated that significant amount of oil can be recovered additionally and injectivity was remarkably improved by utilizing a combination of horizontal wells. The improvement of injectivity through a horizontal injection well was higher when it was combined with horizontal producer parallel to the injector. The overall performances in anisotropic reservoirs strongly depend on the type of wells considered and the orientation of the horizontal wells with respect to the permeability directions. Combination of horizontal wells placed parallel to the low permeability direction yields the best performance. In high permeability ratio reservoirs, the presence of horizontal injectors is more significant in defining the efficiency of the micellar-polymer flood than the horizontal producers.
Key words: Micellar-polymer flood; Horizontal well; Anisotropy; Injectivity
INTRODUCTION
Micellar-polymer flooding is an enhanced oil recovery(EOR) mechanism that can be often utilized after the natural drive or waterflood mechanisms become ineffective. During micellar-polymer flooding projects, water with surfactant is injected to achieve ultra low interfacial tension (IFT) which causes to decrease the residual oil saturation trapped by capillary forces. Lowering the mobility ratio, polymeric additives are used to improve a sweep mechanism that drives the reservoir oil toward the production wells[1, 2].
The efficiency of this EOR process is dependent on a number of parameters that are specific to the field under study. Most of the micellar-polymer flooding projects use vertical wells as injectors and producers, however, horizontal wells promise greater injectivity and productivity characteristics. The higher injectivities allows surfactant-polymer slug and polymer solution to be injected at much higher rates or lower pressures in horizontal wells than in vertical wells, which leads to allowing oil to be recovered quicker or with less energy. The use of horizontal wells has been increasing very rapidly throughout the oil industry as advances in drilling techniques continue. Horizontal wells have been used primarily in problem reservoirs or to solve specific production problems including low permeability fractured formations, low-permeability gas reservoirs, unconventional gas sources such as coal-bed methane or shale, gas or water coning, and thin formations. Because the horizontal well technology is recently being applied to the production of crude oil by waterflooding or enhanced oil recovery methods, little information is available on the horizontal-well applications for chemical floods[3-5].
Although there is relatively little published information on the use of horizontal injection or production wells other than for thermal recovery[6], the need for patterns of both horizontal injection and/or production wells to increase the rate of flooding in EOR processes has been increased. In this study, a comparison of the efficiencies of both horizontal and vertical wells in micellar-polymer flooding operations is performed. The influences of reservoir anisotropy coupled with various design parameters of well patterns are also studied. The study of these effects may assist the project design engineers in choosing the most optimal operating conditions that will maximize the efficiency of the process. With the goal of identifying these conditions, the effectiveness of the horizontal and vertical wells in micellar-polymer flooding projects is examined by simulating the process numerically.
1. MATHEMATICAL THEORY
Simulation of micellar-polymer flood processes includes modeling phase behavior, oil-water IFT and as a function of surfactant concentration, surfactant and polymer concentration-dependent viscosities, salinity and permeability dependence of adsorption, shear-thinning rheology of the fluids, and permeability reduction[7]. The numerical study was performed with the UTCHEM software, which is a general reservoir simulator. Among the most advanced chemical EOR simulators, UTCHEM has proved to be particularly useful for modeling multicomponent and multiphase transport processes[8]. UTCHEM has been extensively verified by comparing to analytical solutions and experimental measurements for its ability to predict the flow of fluids through the reservoir. Thus, UTCHEM will be used in this study for simulating multi-dimensional micellar-polymer flood processes for enhanced recovery of remaining oil in the reservoir.
where κ is component index including water (κ=1), oil (κ=2), surfactant (κ=3), and polymer (κ=4); l is phase index including aquatic (l=1), oleic (l=2), and microemulsion (l=3) phases; φ is porosity;Clu is overall
concentration of component κ (volume fraction);ρk is
density of component κ [ML?3]; np is number of phases; Cκl is concentration of component κ in phase l (volume fraction); ul is Darcy velocity of phase l [LT?1]; Sl is saturation of phase l; Rκ is total source/sink term for component κ (volume of component κ per unit volume of porous media per unit time); Dκl is dispersion tensor. The overall concentration (Clu ) denotes the volume of
component κ summed over all phases.
2. NUMERICAL MODELING
In this study, investigations on the effects of reservoir anisotropy on both horizontal and vertical wells performances in micellar-polymer flooding operations have been conducted. Numerical simulation runs were conducted in a three-dimensional oil reservoir that includes the reservoir thickness, i.e., gravity and capillary forces are simultaneously considered. To simulate the performance of the micellar-polymer flood processes, a hypothetical study site of one-quarter of an injectionwell-centered five-spot is considered. The modeled system used in this study is a box-shaped reservoir with a horizontal area of 253×253 ft2 and a vertical thickness of 25. Vertically, the simulation domain consists of five layers; and each layer is discretized into 23×23 grid blocks. The outer boundary is represented as a noflow. The reservoir investigated in this study was assumed to have already been waterflooded and is a potential candidate for micellar-polymer flood. The model assumes that the reservoir is originally saturated with oil and connate water. Initial saturation of water was assumed to be uniform spatially in the reservoir at 0.50. The uniform permeability of 250 md is assumed for both horizontal and vertical directions.
Micellar-polymer flooding process considered in this study involves the injection of a surfactant-polymer slug followed by a polymer drive and chase water injection. Fluids are pumped into the injection well at constant pressure of 650 psi over a simulation period of 1,000 days. The reservoir fluids are recovered from the production well operating at a sand face pressure of 500 psia, the same pressure as the initial reservoir pressure.
In order to clarify the effects of various parameters during the flow through the reservoir, comparisons were made among results from simulations under different sce-narios of micellar-polymer flood. Different combination of injection-production well pattern and reservoir anisotropy were considered for this study. Reservoir oil, formation water, petrophysical properties of the reservoir, and injec- tion/production procedure were identical for all calculations. Input parameters for the simulations are those that define the physical properties of reservoir, fluid properties, and chemical properties, as given in Table 1.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The model evaluated the flow of brine associated with surfactant and/or polymer and oil through a reservoir during the process. To understand the effects of various parameters on the oil recovery, simulation was performed with the injection sequence of micellar-polymer flooding followed by waterflooding. Volumetric fraction of surfactant in the injecting fluid is 0.03 during 0 to 180 days. Polymer concentration is 0.05% during 0 to 180 days, 0.025% during 180 to 360 days, and 0 % for remaining period in the chase water.
Several cases were studied in which the sensitivity of oil recovery and injection rate to the well configuration(well type and length) was determined. Performance of micellar-polymer flooding with vertical wells was determined by comparing the oil recovery and injection rate from a base case with the oil recovered from the various micellar-polymer floods over production period. 3.1 Well Types
Extensive simulations were undertaken to investigate the feasibility and compare applicability of micellar-polymer flood through vertical and horizontal wells. The objective of this parametric study is to investigate the effect of horizontal well orientation on the overall performance of micellar-polymer flooding projects using different injector/ producer combinations. The ratio of horizontal well length to reservoir length was 0.52, which corresponds to well length of 132 ft. During this part of the investigation, the following nine injection and production well combinations are considered:
(1)First combination (VzIVzP): vertical injector and vertical producer (base case)
(2)second combination (VzIHxP): vertical injector and horizontal producer along the x-direction
(3)third combination (VzIHyP): vertical injector and horizontal producer along the y-direction
(4)forth combination (HxIVzP): horizontal injector along the x-direction and vertical producer
(5)fifth combination (HxIHxP): horizontal injector along the x-direction and horizontal producer along the x-direction
(6)sixth combination (HxIHyP): horizontal injector along the x-direction and horizontal producer along the y-direction
(7)seventh combination (HyIVzP): horizontal injector along the y-direction and vertical producer
(8)fifth combination (HyIHxP): horizontal injector along the y-direction and horizontal producer along the x-direction
(9)sixth combination (HyIHyP): horizontal injector along the y-direction and horizontal producer along the y-direction
Figure 1 presents a schematic representation of these combinations.
Results of the calculations for isotropic reservoirs are shown and compared in Figure 2 for various combinations of vertical and horizontal floods. As presented in the figure, the oil recovery and injection rate are highly influenced by the well patterns. It can be seen that the predicted values from the reservoir simulation illustrate higher oil production and lower water production from horizontal micellar-polymer flooding.
The fifth and ninth combinations yield the highest additional production to the base case. This is expected since these combinations adopted only horizontal wells for injection and production and the producer and the injector have the same orientation. With horizontal wells aligned to the same orientation, areal sweep patterns are a lot closer to line-drive geometry the production will be maximized during the early injection period. The other combinations including horizontal wells also show markedly better performances than the base case as presented in Figure 2. The improvement of oil recovery can be attributed to the higher injection rate and larger area open to flow and resulting improved sweep efficiency in horizontal wells than that of vertical wells.
Figure 2(b) compares the results of injection rate for different injector-producer combinations, against the performance of the first combination which is considered as the base case. This comparison indicate that horizontal well floods result in the much higher rate compared to an equivalent five-spot flood at the same pressure. At early time, the presence of horizontal injectors seems to be more beneficial than the presence of horizontal producers. Conversely, the presence of horizontal producers is more beneficial than the presence of horizontal injectors after water breakthrough.
The combination of horizontal injector and producer shows the highest injection rate. The injection rate in HyIHyP at the same operating pressure would be about 6.1 times higher than that for the base case, which represents a significant improvement in injectivity and high effectiveness to sweep the reservoir oil over values attained by the model of vertical wells. The result implies that the same volume of fluid can be injected at much lower pressure, in turn. The higher injectivities allowed by horizontal injection wells can help to alleviate substantially less injectivity of a vertical injection well. The higher injectivity associated with horizontal wells can also help to mitigate the effects of chemical and thermal degradation of injecting fluids.
Figure 3 depicts oil saturation of the middle layer for five different well patterns including VzIVzP, VzIHxP, HxIVzP, HxIHyP, and HxIHxP after 410 days of injection. The sweep efficiency advantage of horizontal well flooding patterns would be observed best for horizontal injector and horizontal producer aligned to the same orientation. Analyzing the results presented in Figure 3, the swept region did not cover the entire area of the layer with vertical injector or producer. In cases of horizontal injector and producer, the flood front covered almost the entire region. The pore volumes injected for the well patterns are 0.43, 0.79, 0.49, 1.36, and 1.08 for VzIVzP, VzIHxP, HxIVzP, HxIHyP, and HxIHxP, and cumulative oil recoveries are 0.32, 0.51, 0.33, 0.59, and 0.60, respectively. The highest sweep efficiency was obtained for a pattern HxIHxP in which injected fluid and the produced fluid are flowing by two parallel horizontal wells. This type of well pattern is called inverted line drive pattern and has the advantage of using the entire length of the horizontal section for sweep. As compared to the sweep patterns that developed between vertical wells, areal sweep patterns are closer to line-drive geometry in horizontal wells.
3.2 Reservoir Anisotropy
This parametric study is to examine the performances of horizontal and vertical well combinations in micellarpolymer flooding a reservoir that exhibits anisotropic permeability characteristics. In the runs considered, the ratio of permeability of the reservoir along the x-direction to the permeability of the reservoir along the y-direction is assigned to be 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0, keeping the geometric mean constant. Nine different well combinations are also considered during this parametric study.
Figure 4 shows the change in cumulative oil recovery when the first combination is replaced by the second through the ninth combinations summarized above. When the horizontal wells are placed parallel to the low permeability direction or orthogonal to the high permeability direction, the horizontal combination yields the best performance. The overall performance of the combinations considered in this parametric study strongly depends on the type of wells considered and the orientation of the horizontal wells with respect to the permeability directions.
For permeability ratio less than 1.0 or higher permeability to the y-direction, combinations with horizontal well along with x-direction performs better. Due to the rapid and better sweep efficiency, the cumulative oil recovery of HxI and/or HxP remained remarkably higher. The results in Figure 4(a) indicate that HxIHyP, HyIHxP, and HxIHxP provide increment of 44%, 54%, and 73% more oil than VzIVzP does. Comparing the performances of HxIHyP and HyIHxP, the reservoir performance is more strongly influenced by injection well up to 230 days, then by production well. Comparing Figure 2 and Figs. 4 (a) and (b), one can observe a higher oil recovery and a less difference in oil recovery among cases for smaller ratio of permeability.
Results in Figs. 4(a) and (b) also show that the advantages of combinations of horizontal injection and production wells for micellar-polymer flooding are greatest for patterns aligning orthogonal to high permeability direction. Therefore, equivalent (or better) water injection and oil production rates can be achieved in anisotropic reservoirs with far fewer horizontal wells along proper direction than with vertical wells. The smaller the permeability ratio, the larger difference in oil recovery was observed. For example, differences in oil recovery between VzIVzP and HxIHxP for kx/ky = 1.0, 0.5, and 0.25 are 57%, 64%, and 73%, respectively. Although individual horizontal wells cost much more, the total drilling costs could be less than for vertical-well patterns because fewer wells are drilled at the wider spacing.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the studies carried out in this work in order to evaluate the oil recovery efficiency of a micellar-polymer flooding process with various combinations of horizontal and vertical wells, the following conclusions are drawn. Because of the improved injectivity and the potential for increased recovery by better sweep efficiency, the use of horizontal wells during micellar-polymer flooding could offer remarkably significant benefits as compared to the results obtained in a conventional pattern processed by vertical wells. Regardless whether the formation exhibits isotropic or anisotropic permeability characteristics, it is essential to place the horizontal producers and injectors parallel to each other to obtain better performance efficiency than the vertical well combination. A very favorable injectivity and sweep occur when two opposed horizontal wells parallel in the pattern are used for injection and production. Compared to five spot patterns with vertical wells, the combination of parallel horizontal wells can increase oil recovery by 40% and injectivity by as much as a factor of two.
In anisotropic reservoirs, the oil recovery will be maximized when the horizontal producers and injectors are orthogonally placed to the high permeability direction. In high permeability ratio reservoirs, the presence of horizontal injectors parallel to the low permeability direction becomes more dominant in defining the efficiency of the micellar-polymer flood than the horizontal producers.
REFERENCES
[1] Thomas, S., & Farouq Ali S. M. (2001). Micellar Flooding and ASP-Chemical Methods for Enhanced Oil Recovery, J. Canadian Petrol. Tech., 40(2), 46-52.
[2] Hirasaki, G. J., Miller, C. A., & Puerto, M. (2008). Recent Advances in Surfactant EOR, IPTC 115386, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. September 21-24, Denver, CO.
[3] Taber, J. J., & Seright, R.S. (1992). Horizontal Injection and Production Wells for EOR or Waterflooding. SPE 23952 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Conference. March 18-20, Midland, TX.
[4] Dakhlia, H., Wu, W., Lim, M. T., Delshad, M., Pope, G. A.,& Sepehrnoori, K. (1995). Simulation of Surfactant Flooding Using Horizontal Wells. CIM 95-82, Petroleum Society of CIM 46th Annual Technical Meeting. June 7-9, Banff, Alberta, Canada.
[5] Westermark, R. V., Schmeling, J., Dauben, D. L., Robinowitz, S., & Weyland, H. V. (2006). Application of Horizontal Waterflooding to Improve Oil Recovery from Old Oil Fields. SPE 99668 SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery. April 22-26 Tulsa, OK.
[6] Shedid, S. A. & Abbas, A. A. (2000). Comparison of Chemical Steam Floods Through Vertical and Horizontal Wells. CIM 65482 SPE/Petroleum Society of CIM International Conference on Horizontal Well Technology. November 6-8, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
[7] Fadili, A., Kristensen, M.R., & Moreno, J. (2009). Smart Integrated Chemical EOR Simulation. IPTC 13762 International Petroleum Technology Conference. December 7-9, Doha, Qatar.
第5篇：米爾恩范文
“嗨，哥哥也在這啊”夕雅正在不二家的花園里欣賞著，正碰巧看到了做到草地上的不二“呵呵，夕雅也來了？”依舊微笑，佩服佩服
“哥哥，知道嗎？我一直很想要一個跟哥哥一樣的BF呢”這點她可沒有說謊哦，至少她現(xiàn)在這么認為“是嗎？”“恩，恩，唉？哥哥，嘿嘿……我想到了一個不錯的惡作劇呢，不過需要哥哥稍稍的配合一下。嗯？好不好嘛”
-——————————————青學————————————————
“謝謝你哦，米爾”“不用客氣，為主人帶路是應該的”“呵呵”真是多虧了米爾，因為昨天的惡作劇行動，我就沒有讓不二哥哥送我去青學，可哪知，我根本是個路癡。幸好有米爾給我?guī)?，要不我根本找不到青學，唉！~算了，先去我的新教室吧。說起來好像和龍馬一班啊?！扳忊忊彙?/p>
“同學們好”
“老師好”
剛剛上課，但貌似老師忽略了一個人，他正在睡覺呢。不說也知道是誰吧，真是的，才早晨就睡著了
“同學們，今天咱們班要轉(zhuǎn)來一個新同學。她叫觀丘夕雅”（惡搞之一）等老班說完我走上講臺，在黑板上寫下了自己的名字“我叫觀丘夕雅，請多多指教”，等我鞠完一個45°的躬后，朝下一看，好多人議論我啊“我一定要把這個女孩追到手”“她好可愛哦”“哇塞，真漂亮耶”…。.
切，什么嘛？一個帥哥也沒有，一群草癡，我要是被他們追到手，不就白姓不二了？哼！
“觀丘同學，你就坐到龍馬旁邊吧”老班指著睡得很香的龍馬，我輕輕走過去，怕吵醒了他。
——————————-男——子——網(wǎng)——球——部 ————————————
“喂，周助（惡搞之…二吧）我在這，來到男子網(wǎng)球部后（米爾帶的路）我一眼就看到了不二“嗨，夕雅”
“我靠，她是誰??？竟然叫不二學長周助？”
“三八”
“切，不二怎么會看上她啊？”
我沒理會那些女花癡憤怒的目光，跑過去抱住了不二的脖子“照計劃行事”我在下來的那一瞬間說“你終于來了”
“嘻嘻，”
“不二竟然抱那個女生”
“那女的還想活吧，不怕惹上露琴？”
第6篇：米爾恩范文
【Key words】PPP； TBL； teaching methods
1.Introduction
These days， many different teaching methodologies are applied in English Language Teaching.Teachers have a great numbers of ideas to use in the classroom.However， the time of a class is limited and precious， so teachers should compare and analyze the methodology that they use in the classroom.This essay first focuses on comparing and contrasting two teaching methods， which are PPP and TBL.PPP， according to Thomas （2013）， involves language being presented by the teacher a it in order to accomplish the task that has been set before them. （Larsen-Freeman & Anderson， 2011， p.150）.Then the essay will discuss how PPP and TBL impact upon tnd practiced and produced by the student.In contrast， Task-based Learning （TBL） is a methodology in which students acquire the language that need when they needeachers and learners.It will also look at the strengths and weakness of these two methodologies.
2.The similarities and differences between PPP and TBL
PPP and TBL， as two common teaching methodologies， share some similarities.Firstly， both PPP and TBL teaching methods can activate learners’ language knowledge.Specifically， at the last stage of presentation-practice-production method， “here the students are asked to use the new language in sentences of their own.” （Harmer， 2007， p.65）.Similarly， the teacher will set a task in TBL teaching， “the aim of the task was to encourage students to activate a range of language functions and structures...” （Nunan， 2004， p.21）.Thus， learners’ language knowledge can be activated by using language.Secondly， the context is given in the process of PPP teaching， as well as TBL teaching.In PPP procedure， “the teacher introduces a situation which contextualises the language to be taught.”（Harmer， 2007， p.64）.It means that at the beginning of the PPP teaching， the language is placed in clear situational contexts.This happens in the TBL procedure.Willis （1996） suggests that TBL includes three basic stages：the Pre-task， the Task cycle and the Language focus.It can be seen that the task runs through the TBL teaching process， and the learner has to think about the task in the specific context， so both PPP and TBL give the clear context to learners.
PPP， on the other hand， differs from TBL in significant aspects.According to Harmer （2007）， PPP is teacher-centered and fits uneasily with more humanistic and learner-centered framework.Clearly， the teacher controls the class and the learner is dependent on the teacher to new languages.Conversely， according to Brandon （2013）， TBL is a learner-centered methodology.Learners learn to discover features in language， and they can use language they learn from other lessons and sources.Another difference is that PPP focuses on accuracy while the focus of TBL approach is fluency.Harmer （2007） points out that the teacher corrects any mistakes he or she hears from the learner during PPP procedure.In contrast， in a lesson which use TBL method， “the focus of the lesson is the task， not the structure.”（Harmer， 2007， p.71）.Only when the task has clear outcomes will the teacher discuss the language that the learner uses.Plus， TBL method is more flexible than PPP method， so that the language expose in TBL is rich and varied.“The language comes out of what learners know/ can do / want to do， and out of the task.” （Willis， 1996， p.61）.PPP， conversely， is more controlled and only allows learners to use the language given by the teacher.The language expose， therefore， is limited.
3.The influence on teachers and learners
Turning to the issue that how PPP impacts teachers and learners， preparing a lesson with PPP method is easy for teachers， because the materials used for the lesson are ordered from simple to difficult.The framework of PPP is simple and allows teachers to control the pace of the lesson.It seems that PPP has no negative effect on teachers.As observed at the high school in China （2013）， learners may feel comfortable as they are producing the new language accurately in the class.But after a few lessons， learners will often not be able to produce the language correctly or even will not produce it at all.Besides that， it shows that there are other merits and demerits in PPP procedure.Harmer （2007） considers that PPP is extremely effective in a focus-on-form lesson， especially at lower levels.But he adds that PPP becomes less useful when the learner has already known a lot of language， and therefore may not meet the needs of the learner.Further more， PPP does not motivate learners， because it does not give opportunities to learners to work out the language form by themselves.
The TBL， however， impacts teachers and learners in different ways.It is not easy for teachers to choose a task that is appropriate to the level of learners and based on learners’ needs.In a word， TBL teachers face complex challenges.The greatest influence on learners is that their interests in learning a language is stimulated.They can control the communication and discover the language by themselves.That is also one of the advantages of TBL.“The goal of the task provide the main motivation； students generally want to achieve the task outcomes which involves them in playing games or solving a problem.” （Willis， 1996， p.60）.Larsen-Freeman & Anderson （2011） also demonstrate that students are motivated by doing tasks that related to the real world.Moreover， the skills required in TBL are integrated.Task refers to “activities involving any of the four language skills.” （Ellis， 2003， p.7）.In the process of completing the task， the four language skills， included listening， speaking， reading and writing skills， can be improved.However， Ellis （2003） attempts to analyze how complex is TBL for teachers and learners.It seems likely that the lesson structure is not suitable for low level learners and inexperienced teachers.
4.Conclusion
In conclusion， by comparing and contrasting， PPP and TBL share some similarities， but also the two methodologies differ from each other in significant aspects.In addition， both PPP and TBL have their strengths and weaknesses.PPP may be used more widely by English teachers， whereas it is challenging for teachers to manage the task-based class.Nevertheless， it turns out that TBL is more effective in encouraging learners to work together and acquire language through using it.Teachers can set up different task in TBL teaching in order to let learners improve the four skills， which are listening， reading， writing and speaking.Moreover， “task-based instruction can help to encourage students to use the target language actively and meaningfully.” （Larsen-Freeman & Anderson， 2011， p.160）.Since motivation is one of the vital aspects of education， TBL should be considered an effective method for language teaching and it should be increasingly used in schools.
Reference：
[1]Ellis，R.（2003）.Task-based Language Learning and Teaching.Oxford： Oxford University Press.
[2]Harmer，J.（2007）.The practice of English language teaching.Harlow： Longman.
[3]Larsen-Freeman，D.& Anderson，M.（2011）.Techniques & Principles in Language Teaching.Oxford： Oxford University Press.
第7篇：米爾恩范文
On July 6, 2005, prior to the 58th DPI/NGO Annual Conference, the China NGO for International Exchanges, a newly established coalition composed of all the Chinese NGOs having acquired consultative status with UN ECOSOC and other national Chinese NGOs, held a Chinese NGOs Forum for the 58th DPI/NGO Annual Conference in Beijing. Mr. Ramu Damodaran, Chief of the Civil Society Service in the Outreach Division of the UN/DPI and Sr. Joan Kirby, Chair of the Executive Committee of the 58th DPI/NGO Annual Conference together with more than 70 representatives from over 20 Chinese NGOs participated in this Forum. Officials from the Foreign Affairs Ministry and Civil Affairs Ministry attended the Forum and gave supportive address to the meeting. Revolving around the theme of “Our Challenges: Voices for Peace, Partnerships and Renewal” and closely linking their own practical work, the participants elaborated their views, put forward recommendations and voiced initiatives on how to give full play to their advantages and mobilize resources to accomplish the MDGs in China and throughout the world by 2015. Sr. Joan Kirby and Mr. Ramu Damodaran delivered informative and encouraging speeches extending warm welcome for the Chinese NGOs to participate more in the UN DPI/NGO activities in their own way.
The introduction of MDGs offered a framework for international cooperation for common development and is of vital importance for the realization of a safer and more peaceful world. The international community, especially the developed countries should concretely implement their aid obligations, fulfill their international commitment of gradually increasing the ODA up to 0.7% of their GDP respectively and work hard to eliminate regional disparities. The developing countries should stipulate national development strategies suitable to their own national conditions and realize the development objectives by making the best use of their own resources. The United Nations should intensify cooperation and partnership with the civil society. The NGOs from all over the world should shoulder their historical responsibility to monitor, assist and urge their governments to work harder to fulfill the MDGs. The participants reached the following consensus on poverty relief, environmental protection, medical care and health, science and technology, peace and security, employment and some other issues:
1. Governments, especially those from the developed countries, shall encourage and fund more NGOs to take part in poverty relief actions, turning from material aids only to capacity building so that the impoverished people could pull themselves out of poverty by their own efforts.
2. Governments shall spare no efforts in propelling the strategy of sustainable development. The NGOs shall help and monitor the governments so as to abridge the governments and the general public in achieving the MDGs.
3. Establishing a trans-national and trans-regional MDG Project Management Information System (MDGPMIS) supported by each participating country with the UN as its core, an MDG Project Decision Support System (MDGPDSS), an MDG Project Distance Training System (MDGPDTS), and an MDG Project Resource Monitoring System (MDGPRMS) to facilitate and speed up the implementation of MDGs. Setting up multi-institutional and cross-sector regional technical centres with the aid of the internet. Giving low-income countries the “MDG fast track” status and connecting these countries first with the information system and increasing development aid to them as well.
4. It is necessary to pay attention to and work for development of the family and the society in a coordinated way, to promote harmony and happiness in the family and to encourage the family to make contributions to the society. All social circles and sectors shall attach importance to strengthening dialogue and cooperation with the youth and their organizations, increase input to youth undertakings and care about the physical and psychological health of the younger generation.
5. It’s essential to reinforce vocational education and training as well as vocational guidance and job introduction so that service could be provided to the vulnerable groups of people in the society that earnestly need to find jobs and optimize their employment conditions. Employment of the surplus labour force in urban and rural areas and rational distribution of human resources could be solved.
6. Efforts shall be increased to strengthen the management over cultural heritages and resources, not only be developing, but also protecting them.
7. The international community needs cooperation instead of confrontation. Big powers shall shoulder their obligations to the international community in terms of peace, security and development.
8. Medical professional cooperation and training is essential for reducing maternal and neonatal mortality rate.
9. The Chinese NGOs are willing to make use of their unique advantages in each area and make tangible contributions to the accomplishment of the MDGs in China and throughout the world. We welcome the emerging opportunities for dialogue and partnership among the NGOs, member states and the UN system.
第8篇：米爾恩范文
*Corresponding author.
Received 17 October 2014; accepted 18 December 2014
Published online 26 January 2015
Abstract
Teachers’ corrective feedback has been the focus for some time in SLA. The study， based on the framework of teaching focus， corrective feedback and learner uptake by these researchers， explores how teachers’ corrective feedback is related to focus on instruction. The research method is a corpus-based approach， which relies on computer and corpus tool―Antconc 3.2.0w and Repetition Tool. The findings show that （a） MF Instru. invites the most CFSs， followed by F&M Instru. and FF Instru. respectively; （b）When teachers correct students’ errors， they pay much more attention to form-focused errors （FF errors） than to meaning-focused errors （MF errors）; grammatical errors attract the most attention whichever the instruction it is; in MF Instru. and F&M Instru.， though MF errors occupy a small proportion of all the errors， their number is larger than that of phonological errors and lexical errors; （c） In general， the majority of feedback type after FF errors （phonological， grammatical and lexical errors） is recast， whereas the majority of feedback type after MF errors is Negotia.C; as it is related to instruction types， in FF Instru.， teachers prefer to use Negotia.C to follow phonological and lexical errors， and recast to follow grammatical errors; in MF Instru.， teachers prefer to use recast to follow FF errors （phonological， grammatical and lexical errors）; in F&M Instru.， teachers prefer to use recast to follow phonological errors， Negotia.C to follow grammatical errors， and both Negotia.C and recast are preferred after lexical errors; （d） Negotia.C invites the most learner repair， followed by Expli.C and recast respectively; As it is related to instruction types， Negotia.C brings about the highest repair rate， and recast leads students to produce the lowest rate of repair in FF Instru.， MF Instru. and F& M Instru. as well.
Key words： Corrective Feedback Sequence （CFS）; Instruction focus; Error types; Feedback types; Uptake types
Xu， J. （2015）. A Study on Middle School English Teachers’ Corrective Feedback in Different Instructions. Canadian Social Science， 11（1）， <Page>-0. Available from： http：///index.php/css/article/view/6105
DOI： http：///10.3968/6105
INTRODUCTION
Feedback in L2 classroom lies at the core of research on teacher-student and student-teacher interaction in L2 classroom （Chaudron， 1988）.Corrective feedback and/or learner’s uptake have been hotly studied in the field of SLA classroom in foreign countries. For instance， Lyster （1998） explores the relationship among error types， feedback types and immediate learner repair （uptake） in four French immersion classrooms at the elementary level. It is necessary and meaningful to think about the question―how teacher s’ corrective feedback is related to teaching focus or focus of instruction. According to different teaching focuses， instruction can be divided into three types―form-focused instruction （FF Instru.）， meaning-focused instruction （MF Instru.） and both-form-and-meaning-focused instruction （F&M Instru.）.
Concerning of corrective feedback， a number of terms have been used， including “feedback”， “repair”， and “correction”. “Feedback” serves as a general cover term for the information provided by listeners on the reception and comprehension of the message. “Repair”is a somewhat narrower term used to refer to attempts to deal specially with linguistic errors; it constitutes an attempt to supply “negative evidence” in the form of feedback that draws the attention of the listeners to the errors they have made （Ellis， 1994， pp.583-584）. In this paper， corrective feedback is used as a general cover term to refer to various ways used by teachers to point out how close their attempt at English is to some form of Standard English.
Few empirical classroom researches have been carried out except for Tang （2005）， Shi （2005）， and Zhao （2005）. But all of the above three are carried out in limited English classrooms. Can these research findings apply to general English classrooms？ What is the general picture of teachers’ corrective feedback and its relationship with learner’s uptake in Chinese EFL middle school classrooms？ Will the focus of instruction （form-focused vs. meaning-focused vs. both-form-and-meaning- focused） have any influence on teacher’s corrective feedback？ In order to provide answers to the above questions， the author carries out a study on 155 lessons transcripts with the help of corpus tools.
1. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
As the general direction of the study is to investigate the relationship between teachers’ corrective feedback and the focus of instruction， the research question of the present study may go as follows： How is teachers’ corrective feedback related to focus of instruction？ According to different focuses， instruction is divided into three types： form-focused instruction （FF Instru.）， meaning-focused instruction （MF Instru.） and both-form-and-meaning-focused instruction （F&M Instru.）. The research question can be divided into the following four sub-questions：
（a） How often does corrective feedback occur in the three instructions？
（b） What type of error does corrective feedback aim at in each instruction？
（c） How is feedback type associated with error type in each instruction？
（d） How is feedback type associated with learner’s uptake type in each instruction？
The four sub-questions of the main research question are presented in form of figure as follows：
Figure 1
Framework of the Research Questions
In Figure 1， ① refers to the first sub-question， investigating the relationship between instruction types and corrective feedback in terms of frequency; ② refers to the second sub-question， investigating what type of error teachers correct in each instruction; ③symbolizes the third sub-question， focusing on what types of feedback is likely to go after what type of error in the three instructions respectively; ④ refers to the last sub-question， investigating the association between feedback types and uptakes types in each instruction.
2. RESEARCH METHOD AND TOOL
The corpus of this study contains 155 lessons. Among the 155 lessons， 88 are given by the junior middle school teachers in the years of 1997， 2004， 2006， 2007， 2008 and 2009; 67 are taught by the senior middle school teachers in the years of 1996， 2006， 2009， 2010 and 2011. The 155 lessons of classroom teaching have been included in the Corpora of English Education in China （CEEC）， which is built by the School of Foreign Studies of South China University， under the leadership of Professor He Anping. The 155 lessons in the present study are saved in the computer with the file name as EFLCT. It includes two sub-corpuses： JMSCT （junior middle school classroom teaching） and SMSCT （senior middle school classroom teaching）.
The present study mainly utilizes Antconc 3.2.0w and Repetition Tool as its research tool. The Repetition Tool was designed by the technician， Mr. Yang， in School of Foreign Studies in South China Normal University to extract the repetition segment. Under the title of File， such contents could be found： Choose File， Clear All， Clear Partially， Setting， Confirm and Cancel. Antconc 3.2.0w is a free corpus search tool， which contains seven main programs called Concordance， Concordance plot， File View， Clusters， Collocations， Word List and Keyword List. Concordance can be used to search any word or phrase in context. The distribution of the search word can be shown in Concordance plot in the form of chart. The whole text can be seen in File view. Cluster and Collocation can be used to display the words or phrases that go together with the search word. Wordlist can be used to make a list of words in alphabetical or frequency order. Keyword list can display the keyword of the text by comparing the text with another text. The present study requires the use of the function of concordance and file view.
The main methods are that first， based on the previous studies， establish the framework to analyze CFS; then， randomly choose 20 lessons to do a pilot study to conclude the search words and use corpus tool― Antconc 3.2.0w and Repetition Tool to pick out the CFSs. After picking out the CFSs， further analysis has been done for instruction types―form-focused instruction （FF Instru.）， meaning-focused instruction （MF Instru.） and both-form-and-meaning-focused instruction （F&M Instru.）， error types―phonological error， grammatical error， lexical error and meaning-focused error （MF error）， feedback types―explicit correction （Expli.C）， recast and negotiation of form （Negotia.C）， and uptake types―repair and needs-repair.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The research data of corrective feedback sequence （CFS） will be analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively from different angles so that the present study can objectively reflect the relationship between teachers’ corrective feedback and instruction types. The relationship between teachers’ corrective feedback and instruction types will be reflected in terms of the frequency of CFSs in each instruction， in terms of target of corrective feedback in each instruction， in terms of the relationship between feedback types and error types in each instruction， in terms of the association between feedback types and uptake types in each instruction. Therefore， students’ error types， teachers’ specific ways of feedback and learner’s uptake types respectively in form-focused instruction （FF Instru.）， meaning-focused instruction （MF Instru.） and both-form-and-meaning- focused instruction （F&M Instru.） are accordingly classified and analyzed in the following.
3.1 Frequency of CFS in Three Instruction Types
The present study identifies 596 teacher’s CFSs distributed in the three instructions： FF Instru.， MF Instru. and F&M Instru.. This section will concentrate on the relationship between corrective feedback and instructions in terms of the frequency of CFSs in the three instructions. Of the 596 CFSs， 72 are located in FF Instru.， 344 are spotted in MF Instru.， and the rest 180 lie in F&M Instru.. Table 1 shows the frequency of CFSs in FF Instru.， MF Instru. and F&M Instru..
Table 1
Frequency of CFSs in the Three Instructions
Occurring times Percentage （%）
FF instru. 72 12
MF instru. 344 58
F&M instru. 180 30
Total 596 100
Figure 2
Percentage of CFSs in the Three Instructions
Table 1 and Figure 2 indicate that 58% of the CFSs are found in MF Instru.， 30% are found in F&M Instru.， and 12% are found in FF Instru.. The Chi-square test of Table 2 indicates that the number of CFSs found in the three instructions is significantly different （x?=1.888×102， df=2， p=.000< .05）. The pairwise study of the frequency of the CFSs in the three instructions shows that the number of CFSs found in MF Instru. is significantly larger than that found in FF Instru. （x?=1.778×102， df=1， p=.000< .05）; the number of CFSs found in F&M Instru. is significantly larger than that found in FF Instru. （x?=46.286， df=1， p=.000< .05）; the number of CFSs found in MF Instru. is significantly larger than that found in F&M Instru. （x?=51.328， df=1， p=.000< .05）.
The analysis above reflects that MF Instru. invites the most CFSs， followed by F&M Instru. and FF Instru. respectively. FF Instru. invites the fewest CFSs.
3.2 Error Types of CFS in Three Instruction Types
This section focuses on the target of corrective feedback in FF Instru.， MF Instru. and BF Instru. respectively， that is， what type of error teachers tend to correct in each instruction. As has been mention in Chapter Three， the present study identifies two main types of errors： form-focused error （FF error） and meaning-focused error （MF error）. Table 2 shows the search result in the collected data.
Table 2
Distribution of Error Types
Error types Occurring times Percentage
FF error 488 82 %
MF error 108 18%
Total 596 100%
Table 2 indicates that the teachers usually notice more FF errors （82%） than MF errors （18%） when students’ output contains trouble source. The Chi-square test of Table 2 indicates that the number of FF errors is significantly larger than that of MF errors （x?=2.423×102， df=1， p=.000<.05）. Table 3 shows the search results related to the three instructions.
Table 3
Distribution of Error Types in Each Instruction
FF instru. MF instru. BF instru.
n % n % n %
FF error 72 100 270 78 146 81
MF error 0 0 74 22 34 19
Total 72 100 344 100 180 100
Table 3 indicates that when teachers in different instructions offer corrective feedback， they usually notice more FF errors than MF errors. In FF Instru.， all errors repaired by the teachers are FF errors. In MF Instru.， 78% of the errors corrected by teachers are FF errors and in F&M Instru.， 81% of the errors repaired by teachers are FF errors.
Since FF errors can be subdivided into three types： phonological error， grammatical error， lexical error， further study will be carried out to investigate the difference among phonological， grammatical， lexical and MF errors in each instruction. Tables 4-6 show the distribution of the four error types in FF Instru.， MF Instru. and BF Instru. respectively.
Table 4
Distribution of Error Types in FF Instru.
Occurring times Percentage （%）
Phonological error 29 40
Grammatical error 29 40
Lexical error 14 20
MF error 0 0
Total 72 100
Figure 3
Percentage of Error Types in FF Instru.
Table 4 and Figure 3 indicate that in FF Instru.， no MF errors are found， and of FF errors， grammatical errors occupy as large number as phonological errors， and larger number than lexical errors. A SPSS test is carried out to test the effect. The main effect of the error types in FF Instru. is significant （x?=26.889， df=1， p=.000< .05）. Pairwise analysis of the FF errors reveals that the teachers notice more phonological errors and grammatical errors than Lexical errors （x? =5.233， df=1， p=.022<.05）.
Table 5
Distribution of Error Types in MF Instru.
Occurring times Percentage （%）
Phonological error 40 12
Grammatical error 191 55
Lexical error 39 11
MF error 74 22
Total 344 100
Figure 4
Percentage of Error Types in MF Instru.
Table 5 and Figure 4 indicate that in MF Instru.， grammatical errors occupy a much larger number than phonological errors， lexical errors and MF errors， and MF errors are about twice as many as phonological errors and lexical errors. SPSS test result indicates that the main effect of error types is significant （x? =1.802×102， df=3， p=.000< .05）. Pairwise analysis of the four error types shows that the teachers notice more grammatical errors than phonological errors （x?=98.706， df=1， p=.000< .05）， lexical errors （x? =1.005×102， df=1， p=.000< .05）， and MF errors （x?=51.657， df=1， p=0.000< 0.05）， more MF errors than phonological errors （（x?=10.140， df=1， p=0.001< 0.05） and lexical errors （x?=10.841， df=1， p=.001< .05） ，while the teachers’ notice of phonological errors and lexical errors has no significant difference （x?=0.013， df=1， p=.910> .05）.
Table 6
Distribution of Error Types in F&M Instru.
Occurring times Percentage （%）
Phonological error 10 6
Grammatical error 116 64
Lexical error 20 11
MF error 34 19
Total 180 100
Figure 5
Percentage of Error Types in F&M Instru.
Table 6 and Figure 5 indicate that in F&M Instru.， grammatical errors occupy a much larger number than phonological errors， lexical errors and MF errors， MF errors are about three times as many as phonological errors， and lexical errors are about twice as many as phonological errors. SPSS test result indicates the main effect of the four types of error is significant （x?=1.558×102， df=3， p=.000< .05）. Pairwise analysis of the four error types shows that the teachers notice more grammatical errors than phonological errors （x?=89.175， df=1， p=.000< .05）， lexical errors （x?=67.765， df=1， p=.000< .05） and MF errors （x?=44.827， df=1， p=.000<.05）， more MF errors than phonological errors （x?=13.091， df=1， p=.000< .05）， while the teachers’ notice of phonological errors and lexical errors has no significant difference （x?=3.333， df=1， p=.068>.05）， and the teachers’ notice of MF errors than lexical errors has no significant difference （x?=3.630， df=1， p=.057>.05）.
The analyses above show that when teachers correct students’ errors， they pay much attention to FF errors. Detailed analysis shows that grammatical errors attract the most attention whichever the instruction it is; no MF errors are found in FF Instru.， and in MF Instru. and F&M Instru.， though MF errors occupy a small proportion of all the errors， their number is larger than that of phonological errors and lexical errors. The next part will focus on the relationship between students’ error types and teachers’ feedback types.
3.3 Relationship Between Feedback Types and Error Types
In this section， the relationship between feedback types and error types respectively in FF Instru.， MF Instru. and F&M Instru. will be investigated. Feedback types consist of explicit correction （Expli.C）， recast， and negotiation of form（Negotia.C）， and error types are divided into MF errors and FF errors which can be further divided into the phonological error， grammatical error and lexical error. Therefore， the three feedback types （Expli.C， recast， and Negotia.C） and the four error types （phonological， grammatical， lexical and MF error） are studied in this part. Tables 4-7 shows the distribution of error types across feedback types in the
data.
Table 7
Distribution of Feedback Types across Error Types
Phonological error （n=79） Grammatical error （n=336） Lexical error （n=73） MF error （n=108） Total （n=596）
Expli.C 15 19% 23 7% 6 8% 12 11% 56 9%
Recast 41 52% 184 55% 36 49% 14 13% 275 46%
Negotia.C 23 29% 129 38% 31 43% 82 76% 265 45%
Figure 6
Percentage of Feedback Types Across Error Types
Table 7 and Figure 6 show that the majority of feedback type following phonological errors and grammatical errors are recast （52%， 55% respectively）， the majority of feedback types following lexical errors are recast and Negotia.C （49%， 43% respectively）， and the majority of feedback type following MF errors is Negotia.C （76%）.
In FF Instru.， the teachers offer 72 tokens of corrective feedback to 72 FF errors. The 72 tokens of corrective feedback following initial errors are distributed across the 3 feedback types as follows： 13 tokens are Expli.C， 23 tokens involve recasting and 36 tokens are Negotia.C. The distribution of feedback types across error types in FF Instru. are showed in Table 8 and Figure 7.
Table 8
Distribution of Feedback Types Across Error Types in FF Instru.
Phonological error Grammatical error Lexical error Total
Expli.C 7 24% 4 14% 2 14% 13 18%
Recast 7 24% 15 52% 1 7% 23 32%
Negotia.C 15 52% 10 34% 11 79% 36 50%
Total 29 100% 29 100% 14 100% 72 100%
Figure 7
Percentage of Feedback Types Across Error Types in FF Instru.
Table 8 and Figure 7 show that in FF Instru.， no MF errors are found; 52% of the phonological errors are treated with Negotia.C， and 24% is treated with recast and Expli.C respectively; 52% of grammatical errors are treated with recast， 34% are treated with Negotia.C， and 14% are treated with Expli.C; 79% of the lexical errors are treated with Negotia.C， 14% are treated with Expli.C， and 7% are treated with recast.
The analyses above indicate the following patterns in FF Instru.： The majority of feedback type following phonological errors is Negotia.C， the majority of feedback type following grammatical errors is recast， and the majority of feedback type following lexical errors are Negotia.C.
In MF Instru.， the teachers provide the students with 344 corrective feedback moves. The 344 corrective feedback moves following initial errors are distributed across the three feedback types as follows： 26 tokens are Expli.C， 185 tokens are recast， and 133 tokens are Negotia.C. A comparison of the distribution of these feedback types across different error types is showed in Table 9 and Figure 8.
Table 9
Distribution of Feedback Types Across Error Types in MF Instru.
Phonological error Grammatical error Lexical error MF error Total
Expli.C 7 17% 9 5% 3 8% 7 9% 26
Recast 28 70% 124 65% 26 67% 7 9% 185
Negotia.C 5 13% 58 30% 10 25% 60 82% 133
Total 40 100% 191 100% 39 100% 74 100% 344
Figure 8
Percentage of Feedback Types Across Error Types in MF Instru.
Table 9 and Figure 8 show that in MF Instru.， 70% of phonological errors are treated with recast， and 17% are treated with Expli.C， and 13% are treated with Negotia.C; 65% of grammatical errors are treated with recast， 30% are treated with Negotia.C， and 5% are treated with Expli.C; 67% of lexical errors are treated with recast， 25% are treated with Negotia.C， 8% are treated with Expli.C; 82% of MF errors are treated with Negotia.C， 9% are treated with Expli.C and recast
respectively.
The analyses above indicate the following pattern in MF Instru.： The majority of feedback type following phonological errors， grammatical errors and lexical errors are recast while the majority of feedback type following MF errors is Negotia.C. That is to say in MF Instru.， when correcting FF errors， teachers tend to apply recast， and when MF errors are treated， Negotia.C is much more preferred.
In F&M teachers have provided the students with 180 corrective feedback moves. Among them， 17 tokens are Expli.C， 67 tokens are recast， and 96 tokens are Negotia.C. A comparison of the distribution of theses feedback types across different error types is showed in Table 10 and Figure 9.
Table 10
Distribution of Feedback Types Across Error Types in F&M Instru.
Phonological error Grammatical error Lexical error MF error Total
Expli.C 1 10% 10 9% 1 5% 5 15% 17
Recast 6 60% 45 39% 9 45% 7 20% 67
Negotia.C 3 30% 61 52% 10 50% 22 65% 96
Total 10 100% 116 100% 20 100% 34 100% 180
Figure 9
Percentage of Feedback Types Across Error Types in F&M Instru.
Table 10 and Figure 9 show that in F&M Instru.， 60% of phonological errors are treated with recast， 30% are treated with Negotia.C， and 10% are treated with Expli.C; 52% of grammatical errors are treated with Negotia.C， 39% are treated with recast， and 9% are treated with Expli.C; 50% of lexical errors are treated with Negotia.C， 45% are treated with recast， 5% are treated with Expli.C; 65% of MF errors are treated with Negotia.C， 20% are treated with recast， and 15% are treated with Expli.C.
The analyses above indicate the following pattern in F&M Instru.： The majority of feedback type following phonological errors are recast， the majority of feedback type following grammatical errors and lexical errors is recast and Negotia.C， and the majority of feedback type following MF errors are Negotia.C.
To sum up， the majority of feedback type following phonological errors and grammatical errors are recast， the majority of feedback types following lexical errors are recast and Negotia.C， and the majority of feedback type following MF errors are Negotia.C. As it is related to instruction types， in FF Instru.， teachers like to use Negotia.C to follow phonological errors and lexical errors， and recast to follow grammatical errors. In MF Instru.， teachers like to use recast to follow FF errors （phonological， grammatical and lexical errors） and Negotia.C is such as to follow MF errors. In F&M Instru.， teachers like to use recast to follow phonological errors， Negotia.C to be followed grammatical errors， and both Negotia.C and recast are preferred after lexical errors. When MF errors are handled， Negotia.C is a lot more preferred.
3.4 Relationship Between Feedback Types and Learner’s Uptake Types
4.3 presents a general picture of the relationship between feedback types and error types in FF Instru.， MF Instru. and F&M Instru. respectively. This part will focus on the relationship between feedback types and uptake types respectively in FF Instru.， MF Instru. and F&M Instru.. As the above mentioned， uptake is divided into two types： repair and needs-repair. Tables 4-11 display the results of examining the relationships between feedback types and uptake types.
Table 11
Distribution of Uptake Types Across Feedback Types
Repair Needs-repair Total
Number Percentage （%） Number Percentage （%）
Expli.C 31 55 25 45 56
Recast 92 33 183 67 275
Negotia.C 216 82 49 18 265
Total 339 57 257 43 596
Figure 10
Percentage of Uptake Types Across Feedback Types
Table 11 and Figure 10 demonstrate that recast， the most popular feedback type， brings about the lowest repair rate （33%）. The next one is Expli.C， the percentage of repair is 55%. The feedback type with the highest repair rate is Negotia.C， 82% of learner utterances following this type of feedback moves involved in uptake. In general， 57% of all feedback moves elicit repair， while 43% follow with needs-repair.
Tables 12-14 show the distribution of repair and needs-repair across feedback types in each instruction.
Table 12
Distribution of Uptake Types Across Feedback Types in FF Instru.
Repair Needs-repair Total
Number Percentage （%） Number Percentage （%）
Expli.C 9 70 4 30 13
Recast 12 52 11 48 23
Negotia.C 29 81 7 19 36
Total 50 69 22 31 72
Figure 11
Percentage of Uptake Types Across Feedback Types in FF Instru.
Table 12 and Figure 11 demonstrate that in FF Instru.， Negotia.C， which has been used the most frequently， brings about the highest repair rate （81%） as well. The next one is Expli.C， the percentage of repair is 70%. The feedback type with the lowest repair rate is recast， with the repair rate of 52%. In general， 69% of all feedback moves elicit learner repair， while 31% follow with the
needs-repair.
Table 13
Distribution of Uptake Types Across Feedback Types in MF Instru.
Repair Needs-repair Total
Number Percentage （%） Number Percentage （%）
Expli.C 12 46 14 54 26
Recast 44 24 141 76 185
Negotia.C 110 83 23 17 133
Total 166 48 178 52 344
Figure 12
Percentage of Uptake Types across Feedback Types in MF Instru.
Table 13 and Figure 12 show that in MF Instru.， the repair rates after recast and Expli.C are much lower than Negotia.C. Recast， though used most frequently， brings about the lowest repair rate （24%）. Expli.C， with the repair rate of 46%， comes after Recast. The feedback type with the highest repair rate is Negotia.C， with the repair rate of 83%. In general， 48% of all feedback moves elicit learner repair， while 52% follow with needs-repair.
Table 14
Distribution of Uptake Types across Feedback Types in F&M Instru.
Repair Needs-repair Total
Number Percentage （%） Number Percentage （%）
Expli.C 10 59 7 41 17
Recast 36 54 31 46 67
Negotia.C 77 80 19 20 96
Total 123 68 43 32 180
Figure 13
Percentage of Uptake Types Across Feedback Types in F&M Instru.
Table 14 and Figure 13 display that in general， 68% of all feedback moves in F&M Instru. elicit learner repair， while 32% in F&M Instru. follow with needs-repair. To be more specific， the feedback type with the highest repair rate is Negotia.C， 4/5 of the learner utterances following this type of feedback moves involve repair. The feedback type with the second highest repair rate comes to Expli.C， with the repair rate of 59%. Recast， which has been used much more frequently than Expli.C， brings about the lowest repair rate （54%）.
The analyses above suggest that in general， recast， which has been most frequently used， brings about the lowest repair rate; the feedback type with the highest repair rate is Negotia.C. The repair rate of the three feedback types in each instruction occur in accordance with the repair rate of the three feedback types in general， that is， in the three instructions， Negotia.C brings about the highest repair rate， followed by Expli.C and recast respectively. The total repair rate in MF Instru. （48%） is lower than that in FF Instru. （69%） and F&M Instru. （68%）. Interestingly， the repair rates of Negotia.C in the three instructions are close to one another （81% in FF Instru.， 83% in MF Instru.， 80% in F&M Instru.）， the repair rates of Expli.C （59%） and recast （54%） in F&M Instru. are very close to each other， and the repair rates of Expli.C （46%）， recast （24%） and Negotia.C （83%） are strongly different from one another in both MF Instru..
CONCLUSION
The present study has focused on the issue： how teacher’s corrective feedback is related to the focus of instruction. According to different focuses， instruction can be grouped to three types： form-focused instruction （FF Instru.）， meaning-focused instruction （MF Instru.） and both-form-and-meaning-focused instruction （F&M Instru.）. The following conclusion can be drawn from the results and discussions of the previous chapter.
Firstly， MF Instru. invites the most CFSs， followed by F&M Instru. and FF Instru. respectively. This finding goes against the statement by Jack Richards （1986） that error correction should be avoided in communication unless error hinders communication process. That is， teachers offer feedback without taking instruction focus into consideration.
Secondly， when teachers correct students’ errors， they pay much more attention to FF errors than to MF errors. In MF Instru. and F&M Instru.， though MF errors occupy a small proportion of all the errors， their number is larger than that of phonological and lexical errors. Grammatical errors attract the most attention whichever the instruction it is.
Thirdly， recast and Negotia.C is much more preferred than Expli.C as a whole. When error types are taken into consideration， the majority of corrective feedback type following phonological and grammatical errors is recast， the most feedback types following lexical errors come to recast and Negotia.C， and the majority of feedback type following MF errors are Negotia.C. As it is related to instruction types， in FF Instru.， Negotia.C is more frequently used than Expli.C in general; teachers prefer to use Negotia.C to follow phonological and lexical errors， and recast to follow grammatical errors. In MF Instru.， recast is most frequently utilized， followed by Negotia.C and Expli.C respectively; teachers like to use recast to follow FF errors （grammatical， phonological and lexical errors）， and Negotia.C is such as to follow MF errors. In F&M Instru.， recast and Negotia.C are more frequently used than Expli.C; teachers prefer to use recast to follow phonological errors， Negotia.C to be followed grammatical errors， and both Negotia.C and recast are preferred after lexical errors. When MF errors are handled， Negotia.C is much more preferred than Expli.C and recast.
Fourthly， in general， recast， the most popular feedback type， brings about the lowest repair rate， while the feedback type with the highest repair rate is Negotia.C. The repair rate of Expli.C， recast and Negotia.C in the three instructions ranks in the same order as in the general situation， that is， Negotia.C invites the most repair， followed by Expli.C and recast respectively in FF Instru.， MF Ibstru. and F&M Instru..
PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATION
The findings of the present study seem to suggest the following two pedagogical implications：
First， when offering corrective feedback， teachers should take focus of instruction into consideration. In meaning-focused instruction （MF Instru.）， teachers should allow certain linguistic deviation to go uncorrected so long as the error does not impede the flow of communication. When teaching focuses on form accuracy， teacher had better use negotiation of form （Negotia.C） to encourage students’ correction in the provision of corrective feedback. It may not be effective for teachers to offer recast after students’ errors. Besides， the learners are capable of correcting themselves if they are given sufficient time and their attention is called upon to the form.
Second， teachers should conduct more activities which aim at accuracy as well as fluency and communication， in which the learner may have more opportunities to speak in the target language and also have more chances to commit errors which inform teachers of their learning stage and help them diagnose learning difficulties， because the analysis in 4.4 have indicated that the errors treated in the instruction focusing on both form and meaning get higher rate of uptake than in the one only focusing on meaning. As we know， communication is the goal of language teaching and at the same time it should be part of the learning process. In doing so， the learners can make formally learnt language more automatically available; they can acquire language subconsciously during meaningful communication， and when they are making effort to communicate， they develop strategies of communication which help them to learn.
REFERENCES
Chaudron， C. （1988）. Second language classrooms： Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press.
Ellis， R. （1994）. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Jack， C. R.， & Rodgers， T. S. （1986）. Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Lyster， R. （1998a）. Recast， repetition and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. SSLA， 20， 51-81.
Shi， G. （2005）. Teachers’ error correction and students’ acception in English class. Foreign Language and Literature， 4， 242-248.
Tang， J. Y. （2003）. Teachers’ error correction’s impact on the students’ acquisition uptake in English class （Master’s Thes）. South China Normal University.
Zhao， C. （2005）. Teachers’ corrective feedback of different level of English teaching―A Study based on corpus. Journal of PLA Foreign Languages Institute， 3， 35-44.
第9篇：米爾恩范文
雙胞胎兄弟出生隔8天 弟救哥一命化險為夷
一名來自百慕大的孕婦，日前在加拿大哈利法克斯一家醫(yī)院產(chǎn)下雙胞胎兄弟，但兩兄弟出生時間相隔8天，被稱為“奇跡雙胞胎”。據(jù)報道，埃多娜懷孕18周時，雙胞胎哥哥埃米爾羊膜囊破裂，埃多娜被迅速送往醫(yī)院。在埃多娜入院2周后，埃米爾出生。接著埃多娜的宮縮減弱了，弟弟埃塞似乎很喜歡待在媽媽的子宮里。醫(yī)師擔心把埃米爾的胎盤留在子宮內(nèi)會使埃多娜感染，于是進行手術(shù)。在哥哥出生后8天，弟弟終于出生了。創(chuàng)造這一奇跡的大功臣是埃塞，很有可能是他挽救了哥哥的生命。埃多娜說：“實際上，是埃塞撐起我的子宮，讓埃米爾可以繼續(xù)成長?！蹦壳?，這對雙胞胎還在新生兒重癥監(jiān)護室里，狀況良好。
點評：這哥兒倆在娘胎里就不離不棄，長大后，肯定更會生死相依吧。
6歲小孩想當宇航員 向白宮請愿增經(jīng)費
由于自小夢想成為一名宇航員，6歲的康納?約翰遜目前在“白宮請愿網(wǎng)站”上發(fā)起了一項請愿活動，請求白宮為美國宇航局增加經(jīng)費。康納解釋，之所以有這樣的夢想，是因為他覺得太空有太多新奇的東西。直到最近，康納聽說美國國會威脅削減美國宇航局的經(jīng)費，減少空間探索項目。在他看來，這極有可能威脅他“未來的職業(yè)生涯”，于是，他決定幫助美國宇航局，讓白宮收回決定?？导{已成功拿到了近15000個簽名，但簽名要超過10萬個，白宮才會回應他的提案。雖然這是個艱巨的任務，但康納很樂觀，認為自己能夠完成使命。
點評：孩子的夢想永遠令人敬畏，因為它有實現(xiàn)的無限可能。
科技
葡萄牙西邊發(fā)現(xiàn)海底金字塔 疑似亞特蘭提斯遺跡
失落的亞特蘭提斯帝國傳說一直是個謎團，日前，在葡萄牙西邊的亞速群島，一名漁夫以聲吶探測法，在特塞拉島和薩歐米格島之間，發(fā)現(xiàn)了這座高度有60米、寬達8000米的海底金字塔，它位于海面下40米，四面棱線剛好朝向正東、正西、正南與正北，和吉薩的大金字塔類似，發(fā)現(xiàn)者認為這絕對不是自然形成的。這座海底金字塔會不會是所謂“失落的帝國”――亞特蘭提斯的遺跡呢？在發(fā)現(xiàn)海底金字塔消息傳出之后，這里也讓考古學家和古文明的研究者更加好奇。
點評：失落的文明古國，永遠令人好奇。
手機藍光能給大腦提神 比咖啡因靈？
藍光最近得到了一個壞名聲，那就是影響睡眠。報道稱，入睡前使用智能手機和其他電子設備會影響睡眠，因為它們發(fā)出的光會產(chǎn)生一種抑制褪黑激素的化學物質(zhì)，從而控制人體的生物鐘。然而日前披露的一項研究表明，藍光也有一些優(yōu)點，那就是在正確的時間里使用，可以使大腦更加清醒。瑞典中部大學的研究人員比較了咖啡因和藍光對大腦的影響，發(fā)現(xiàn)它們都有積極的作用。有趣的是，人們暴露在藍光下，大腦功能的測試表現(xiàn)更為出色。在相同條件下，使用更多咖啡因的測試人員則表現(xiàn)不佳。研究表明，藍光可以提高認知能力，如記憶、警覺性和反應時間。這項技術(shù)將可以用于醫(yī)學治療。
點評：以后玩手機就更有理由了。可是，這靠譜嗎？
萌寵
貓頭鷹攜鉆戒“潛逃”險壞新人婚事
結(jié)婚戒指隨貓頭鷹從天而降，這樣的婚禮是不是很特別？日前，英國一對新婚夫婦在婚禮上讓一只貓頭鷹充當拿戒指的“花童”，但就在婚禮當天，這只鳥兒卻耍起了“脾氣”。這對來自英國蘭開夏郡的夫妻名叫克萊爾和安德魯?波德。為了讓婚禮顯得“與眾不同”，他們租了一只名叫“麗蘿”的谷倉貓頭鷹，并在婚禮當天讓麗蘿從空中飛落并獻上婚戒。但這只鳥兒在婚禮現(xiàn)場并沒有聽話地落在紅毯上，而是飛到了房梁上不肯下來。幸運的是，在馴鳥人的幫助下，他們最終用小雞將麗蘿哄了下來。丈夫安德魯說，他的妻子是《哈利?波特》的忠實粉絲，她想將這一點體現(xiàn)在他們的婚禮上，所以想到了貓頭鷹。這對夫妻還說，這一插曲讓他們的婚禮著實令人難忘。
點評：這貓頭鷹是想搶頭條的節(jié)奏嗎？是不是想把戒指送給另一只呢？
臺灣獼猴殺雞儆人？
宜蘭一家養(yǎng)雞場為阻止獼猴侵入雞舍偷吃飼料，特別加設圍籬，未料裝設后兩天內(nèi)竟有50多只雞遭屠殺，雞脖也被扭斷，損失近3萬元。養(yǎng)雞場主人氣憤地說：“一定是猴子要報復我！故意虐殺雞，甚至排成雞尸堆挑釁?！币颂m冬山鄉(xiāng)的養(yǎng)雞場主人江佩琳說，周日上午與兒子到養(yǎng)雞場察看時，發(fā)現(xiàn)養(yǎng)雞場角落有20只雞的尸體，除脖子被扭斷，身上還有被咬的傷口，由于養(yǎng)雞場設有圍籬，野狗進不來，當時就懷疑兇手是猴群，但因找不到證據(jù)，只能認賠，沒想到隔天養(yǎng)雞場又有30幾只雞在雞舍遭到集體屠殺。
點評：都說殺雞給猴看，俺偏要殺雞給人看。嗚嗚，誰讓你不讓俺吃東西來著？
奇趣
新加坡建筑師打造水上全景漂浮屋
日前，新加坡建筑師Myitr Malcew為法國浮動結(jié)構(gòu)開發(fā)公司H2ORIZON設計出一種水上全景漂浮屋，為人們帶來不一樣的海上居住享受。這種漂浮屋是建造在一個有浮力的平臺上，有兩間臥室、兩間浴室、一個大客廳和一個有吧臺的廚房，外面有一個大露臺。整個房子靠幾根柱子支撐，并且全部是玻璃落地窗，這使得屋頂看起來像是漂浮在上面。這種漂浮屋的結(jié)構(gòu)非常靈活，屋主可以根據(jù)自己的喜好把房子停靠在任何地點。它最獨特的設計點是無論屋主選擇在哪里停駐，它都可以讓屋主擁有超級美麗的全景視野。但屋外可移動的屏風和木質(zhì)可滑動的面板又可以保護屋內(nèi)居民的隱私。
點評：只有想不到，沒有做不到。在水上住著，肯定夠浪漫。
美國女子追求另類 在眼中植入白金飾物
