英语学习小帮助.doc

51支持前/后种观点的人 people / those in fovor of the former/ latteropinion 52有/ 提供如下理由/ 证据 have/ provide the following reasons/ evidence53在一定程度上 to some extent/ degree / in some way54理论和实践相结合 integrate theory with practice55必然趋势 an irresistible trend of近日，广州广东电白县城一对夫妇，因欠院方1500元住院治疗费，在无法筹到资金的情况下，一家四口脱光衣服徒步走上街头求助，此事被多家媒体报道后引起了广大网友的议论。 请看中国日报网的报道： 一家四口裸体上街求助 A couple with their two kids walked nude on the streets and begged for help in Dianbai county, Guangdong province on Nov 27. 11月27日，广东省电白县一对夫妇领着两个孩子裸体走上街头寻求帮助。 文中的walked nude指的就是“裸体”上街求助，nude就是指“裸体的；无装饰的”，比如in the nude （裸体；公开）、nude look（裸妆）；“裸体”还可以用bare all/bare it all来表示，bare是指“脱去；暴露”，比如bare feet（赤脚；光着脚）、navel-baring shirt（露脐装）。 这起“baring it all（裸体）求助”事件再一次折射出social assistance scheme（社会救助机制）缺失的悲哀，被逼无奈的背后，往往是rights of the weak（弱者权利）救济渠道的稀缺、失效。政府需要健全social security system（社会保障制度），疏浚救济渠道，有关部门也要主动关注peoples livelihood and their sufferings（民生疾苦），及时纾困解难。Nearly two thousand years ago, three elderly Chinese men sat in the gardens of Changle Palace, arguing about what was the greatest invention of all time. “Tools made of rock,” said one, banging his fist on the delicate carved table. “Paper,” said another, slamming the side of his hand. “No, scissors!” cried the third, making chopping movements in the air. And so a game was invented. This little tale is an invention too. We do not know exactly when Rock, Paper, Scissors was dreamed up, nor how, since in the time of Han there were fewer ways of recording the events of the day: no photographs (invented by Louis Daguerre in 1836), no sound recordings (the phonautograph was first used in 1857) and no reliable method of storing and passing on information (more of that later). But the fact that the game existed then, and did not before, means that it is an invention. It may not be a contender for the greatest of all time, but rock, paper and scissors most certainly are. Inventions, for the purposes of this debate, are tangibletechnologies and processes, rather than more nebulous things such as ideas, principles and imaginings. Children might feel that Father Christmas (first recorded in 1616) is the greatest invention of all time, but we are ruling him out. Tools fashioned of rock, or stone, were probably the earliest inventions worthy of the name. First used in the Paleolithic Age, around 2.6m years ago, they mark an essential progression, from proto-human to human. With simple tools, fashioned by pummelling one piece of rock against another to produce a sharp edge, early man began to shape the world according to his needs, to build rudimentary shelters, to hunt and flay animals for food and clothing. Just about everything else followed from there. There is virtually nothing about the way we live today that would have been possible without those first stone tools. But does longevity alone qualify stone tools for the crown? Im not convinced; theirs was a long, slow grind to efficacy, and in most forms theyve long been eclipsed. The blade, howeverof which scissors are just a manifestation, albeit an ingenious onehas been in constant use since it was first invented at the start of the Ages of Metal, some 400,000 years ago. Think of knives, swords, spears, axes, the guillotineuh-oh. Although we depend on the blade for much of what we now take for granted, from cutting up our food to making the electronics which crowd our daily life, theres a little too much of the chop and slash about blades to make them my greatest of all time. So how about the third of our Chinese gents suggestions: paper? Invented by an imperial courtier named Tsai Lun in 105AD, it was deemed so precious and important that successive Chinese dynasties kept it secret for six centuries. Not something that the Dragons of todays Den, with their greedy eyes and piles of cash, would be inclined to do. It is thanks to paper that we know about its invention. The ability to keep a written record is the foundation of mass learning. While the alphabet was invented around 2,000BC (at the same time as another useful device, the umbrella), it wasnt easy to pass around heavy stone tablets, or to manufacture and preserve papyrus scrolls in great numbers. The invention of paper led inexorably to books, the printing press, newspapers and magazines, to sacred texts, art, photography and music scores, handed down through generations. And yet, here we are at the dawn of what may, finally, become a paperless society. Paper may cover stone, but it is cut by scissors and burned by fireanother of the foundations of our society.考研英语考研英语阅读模板（六十一） Americans today dont place a very high value on intellect. Our heroes are athletes, entertainers, and entrepreneurs, not scholars. Even our schools are where we send our children to get a practical educationnot to pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Symptoms of pervasive anti-intellectualism in our schools arent difficult to find. “Schools have always been in a society where practical is more important than intellectual,” says education writer Diane Ravitch. “Schools could be a counterbalance.” Ravitchs latest book, Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms, traces the roots of anti-intellectualism in our schools, concluding they are anything but a counterbalance to the American distaste for intellectual pursuits. But they could and should be. Encouraging kids to reject the life of the mind leaves them vulnerable to exploitation and control. Without the ability to think critically, to defend their ideas and understand the ideas of others, they cannot fully participate in our democracy. Continuing along this path, says writer Earl Shorris, “We will become a second-rate country. We will have a less civil society.” “Intellect is resented as a form of power or privilege,” writes historian and professor Richard Hofstadter in Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, a Pulitzer Prize winning book on the roots of anti-intellectualism in US politics, religion, and education. From the beginning of our history, says Hofstadter, our democratic and populist urges have driven us to reject anything that smells of elitism. Practicality, common sense, and native intelligence have been considered more noble qualities than anything you could learn from a book. Ralph Waldo Emerson and other Transcendentalist philosophers thought schooling and rigorous book learning put unnatural restraints on children: “We are shut up in schools and college recitation rooms for 10 or 15 years and come out at last with a bellyful of words and do not know a thing.” Mark Twains Huckleberry Finn exemplified American anti-intellectualism. Its hero avoids being civilizedgoing to school and learning to readso he can preserve his innate goodness. Intellect, according to Hofstadter, is different from native intelligence, a quality we reluctantly admire. Intellect is the critical, creative, and contemplative side of the mind. Intelligence seeks to grasp, manipulate, re-order, and adjust, while intellect examines, ponders, wonders, theorizes, criticizes and imagines. School remains a place where intellect is mistrusted. Hofstadter says our countrys educational system is in the grips of people who “joyfully and militantly proclaim their hostility to intellect and their eagerness to identify with children who show the least intellectual promise.”1. What do American parents expect their children to acquire in school? A The habit of thinking independently. B Profound knowledge of the world. C Practical abilities for future career. D The confidence in intellectual pursuits.2. We can learn from the text that Americans have a history of_ A undervaluing intellect. B favoring intellectualism. C supporting school reform. D suppressing native intelligence.3. The views of Ravitch and Emerson on schooling are_ A identical. B similar. C complementary. D opposite.4. Emerson, according to the text, is probably_ A a pioneer of education reform. B an opponent of intellectualism.C a scholar in favor of intellect. D an advocate of regular schooling.5. What does the author think of intellect? A It is second to intelligence. B It evolves from common sense. C It is to be pursued. D It underlies power. 语篇概述本文节选自American School Board Journal美国学校董事会杂志2001年1月一篇题为Nurturing the Life of The Mind：If Schools Dont Value Intellect，Who Wi l？（培养思想生活，如果学校都不注重才智，谁还会重视？）的文章。文章主要使用了引证方法论述了美国学校轻视才智的倾向，并探讨了其危害性及根源。文章总体结构分为四个部分。第一段至第三段：指出不注重才智的现象在美国学校中普遍存在，而学校没有起到应有的抗衡反才智主义的作用，并剖析学校轻视才智的危害。第四段至第五段：引用历史学家的观点指出了反才智主义的历史根源。第六段：比较了才智和先天智力的不同，并指出应受到赞赏的是才智而非先天智力。第七段：指出学校依然怀疑才智的现状，并引用霍夫斯塔特的话语，表达作者对助长这种风气的学校管理者的讽刺。试题精解1【答案】C【题干与选项释义】美国的父母期望他们的孩子在学校里面学到_A 独立思考的习惯。 B 渊博的世界知识。C 从事未来职业的实用技能。 D 追求才智的信心。【考点透析】事实细节题【答案解析】根据题干中的关键词American parents expect定位到文章的第一段第三句话：即使是学校也只是我们送孩子去接受实用教育的地方，而不是让他们为了知识而去追求知识的地方。选项C为此句中to get a practical education的同义改写，因此为正确答案。2【答案】A【题干与选项释义】 从原文中我们可以得知美国的历史历来是_A 贬低才智。 B 赞成才智主义。 C 支持学校改革。 D 压制天分。【考点透析】事实细节题【答案解析】根据题干中的关键词have a history of定位到第四段后半部分霍夫斯塔特说，自我们的历史之初，我们对民主化和大众化的渴望就驱使我们排斥任何带有精英优越论味道的东西。实用性、常识以及天分这些素质一直被视作比可以从书本里学得的任何东西都高贵。精英优越论味道的东西以及书本里面学到的东西等同于才智，可见美国有史以来就是反对才智主义的。因此，正确答案是选项A。3【答案】D【题干与选项释义】 瑞维兹和爱默生对学校的看法是_A 完全相同的。 B 类似的。 C 互补的。 D 相反的。【考点透析】事实细节题【答案解析】根据题干中的关键词Ravitch and Emerson定位到第二段和第五段。第二段Ravitch认为学校始终处于实用重于才智的社会之中，而它本来可以是一种抵消的力量。而他在著作中得出结论，美国学校绝对没有抵制美国人对才智追求的厌恶。由此可见，Ravitch批评学校没有起到抵制美国人对才智追求的厌恶的作用，即认为学校应该追求才智。第五段中提到Emerson认为学校教育和严格的书本学习限制了孩子们的天性。“我们被关在中小学和大学的朗诵室里十年或十五年，最后出来满肚子墨水，却啥都不懂。”本段说明爱默生认为学校压制人的天性，追求才智的学校是不正确的。因此可以判定：二人意见刚好相反，所以选项D为正确答案。4【答案】B【题干与选项释义】 根据本文，爱默生可能是一位_A 教育改革的先驱。 B 才智主义的反对者。 C 赞成才智的学者。 D 正规学校教育的倡导者。【考点透析】推理判断题【答案解析】根据题干中的关键词Emerson定位到第五段中爱默生的观点：学校教育和严格的书本学习限制了孩子们的天性，也就是说，他是反对才智主义的，因此选项B为正确答案。5【答案】C【题干与选项释义】本文作者怎么看待才智?A 它没有智力重要。 B 它从常识发展而来。 C 它是必须被人们追求的东西。 D 它是权利的基础。【考点透析】观点态度题【答案解析】根据全文分析，第一段作者说今天的美国人不很看重intellect，第二段引用教育学作家Diane Ravitch的观点来说明这一点，第三段作者表明自己的态度：“鼓励孩子们排斥精神生活使得他们极易被剥削和控制。不能批判地思考、捍卫自己的思想、理解他人的观点，他们就不能充分地参与我们的民主”。而且引用作家Earl Shorris的话来说明如果不这么做，国家将“沦为二流国家”。至此，我们可以看出，作者是支持intellect的，故正确答案为选项C。作者本人并没有比较intellect和intelligence谁优谁劣，所以选项A被排除。同样常识和权利，文章中虽然提到了，但是并没有对它们与才智的关系进行探讨，因此排除选项B、D。核心词汇intellect n. 才智 思维能力entertainern. 专业演员，表演者entrepreneurn. 企业家pursuev. 追赶,寻求 从事，忙于symptomn. 征兆，症候 症状pervasiveadj. 普遍的，到处弥漫的counterbalance n. 平衡（力），抗衡（力） 抵消（力）distasten. 厌恶vulnerableadj. 易受攻击的，脆弱的explotiationn. 利用，剥削 （资源等的）开发，开采resent v. 对表示愤恨，怨恨privilege n. 特权，特免populistn. 平民主义者practicalityn. 实际性，实用性transcendentalistadj. 超验主义的 先验论的rigorous adj. 严格的，严厉的restraint n. 抑制，克制exemplify v. 例证preservev. 保持，维持 保护，维护innateadj. 天生的，固有的reluctantlyadv. 不情愿地，勉强地contemplativeadj. 沉思的manipulate v.（尤指用权势或不正当手段）操纵，控制ponder v. 沉思，考虑theorizev. 作理论上说明 作理论推定militantly adv 激进地，好斗地hostilityn. 敌意，敌对proclaimv. 声明,宣布identify v. 认同长难句解析1. Even our schools are where we send our children to get a practical educationnot to pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge【结构分析】本句的主干是Even our schools are where，主语为our schools，其中表语是由where引导的表语从句充当。在表语从句中，破折号后面的内容是补充说明前面从句中to引导的目的状语。【全句翻译】即使是学校也只是我们送孩子去接受实用教育的地方，而不是让他们为了知识而去追求知识的地方。2. Encouraging kids to reject the life of the mind leaves them vulnerable to exploitation and control. Without the ability to think critically, to defend their ideas and understand the ideas of others, they cannot fully participate in our democracy.【结构分析】第一个句子的主语由动名词短语encouraging kids to reject the life of the mind充当，谓语是leaves，宾语是them ，vulnerable to exploitation and control是宾语them的补语。第二个句子是一个简单句，介词结构Without the ability作状语，其中三个动词不定式to think、to defend、（to） understand都作ability的定语。【全句翻译】鼓励孩子们排斥精神生活使得他们极易被剥削和控制。不能批判地思考、捍卫自己的思想、理解他人的观点，他们就不能充分地参与我们的民主。3.