考研备考辅导考研英语阅读理解冲刺重点预测25篇 第9篇

考研英语阅读理解冲刺重点预测25篇 (第9篇)第9篇 （版权所有，违者必究！鉴于有部分辅导机构不经过同意就把具有独立知识产权的作品公然转载并声称是他们自己作品的案例，再次特别声明：本博客所有文字材料仅供考生下载作自身的学习用途，任何形式的转载必须征得的授权，保留对所有文字作品的法律权利！） The idea that shopping is the new politics is certainly seductive. You probably go shopping several times a month, providing yourself with lots of opportunities to express your opinions. If you are worried about the environment, you might buy organic food; if you want to help poor farmers, you can do your bit by buying Fairtrade products; or you can express a dislike of evil multinational companies and rampant globalisation by buying only local produce. Sadly, its not that easy. There are good reasons to doubt the claims made about three of the most popular varieties of “ethical” food: organic food, Fairtrade food and local food. People who want to make the world a better place cannot do so by shifting their shopping habits: transforming the planet requires duller disciplines, like politics.Organic food, which is grown without man-made pesticides and fertilisers, is generally assumed to be more environmentally friendly than conventional intensive farming. However, farming is inherently bad for the environment: since humans took it up around ,000 years ago, the result has been deforestation on a massive scale. But following the “green revolution” of the 60s greater use of chemical fertiliser has tripled grain yields with very little increase in the area of land under cultivation. Organic methods, which rely on crop rotation, manure and compost in place of fertiliser, are far less intensive. So producing the worlds current agricultural output organically would require several times as much land as is currently cultivated. There wouldnt be much room left for the rainforest.Fairtrade food is designed to raise poor farmers incomes. It is sold at a higher price than ordinary food, with a subsidy passed back to the farmer. But prices of agricultural commodities are low because of overproduction. By propping up the price, the Fairtrade system encourages farmers to produce more of these commodities rather than diversifying into other crops and so depresses pricesthus achieving, for most farmers, exactly the opposite of what the initiative is intended to do. And since only a small fraction of the mark-up on Fairtrade foods actually goes to the farmermost goes to the retailerthe system gives rich consumers an inflated impression of their largesse and makes alleviating poverty seem too easy.Surely the case for local food, produced as close as possible to the consumer in order to minimise “food miles” and, by extension, carbon emissions, is clear? Surprisingly, it is not. A study of Britains food system found that nearly half of food-vehicle miles (ie, miles travelled by vehicles carrying food) were driven by cars going to and from the shops. Most people live closer to a supermarket than a farmers market, so more local food could mean more food-vehicle miles. Moving food around in big, carefully packed lorries, as supermarkets do, may in fact be the most efficient way to transport the stuff.Whats more, once the energy used in production as well as transport is taken into account, local food may turn out to be even less green. Producing lamb in New Zealand and shipping it to Britain uses less energy than producing British lamb, because farming in New Zealand is less energy-intensive. And since the local-food movement looks suspiciously like old-fashioned protectionism masquerading as concern for the environment, helping poor countries is presumably not the point.注（1）：本文选自Economist，/注（2）：本文习题命题模仿对象：第13题模仿2000年真题Text 1第13题；第45题分别模仿99年真题Text 1第4题和Text 4第4题。1In the authors eyes, the view of seeing shopping as a political event is _.A very helpfulB not practicalC simply nonsenseD quite harmful2 According to the author, what may be the chief reason the disadvantage of organic food?A It cannot yield enough foodB It is involved with some kind of political event.C It is directly responsible for the global deforestation.D It is not necessarily environment-friendly.3Which of the following is TRUE according to the author?A Most benefit from fair-trade fool goes to farmers.B Fairtrade food encourages farmers to grow as many different produces as possible.C Fairtrade food fails to fulfill its original design.D Fairtrade food can effectively involve consumers to help reduce poverty.4The authors attitude towards the issue of local food seems to be _.A approvingB objectiveC indifferentD ironic5 It could be inferred from the text that _.A local food might increase, instead of decrease, carbon emissions.B fairtrade food can encourage people to be more generous.C local food helps to save energy used in transportation.D local food aims against the practice of trade protectionism.篇章剖析本文是一篇议论文，主要讨论了所谓的三种“道德食品”有机食品、公平贸易食品和本地食品实际上并没有起到积极的作用，反而是消极的作用。第一段简单说明了对于这三种食品的普遍想法；第二段分析了有机食品对于农业发展的负面作用；第三段分析了“公平贸易食品”的不公平性；第四、五段通过分析和实际例子说明了所谓的本地食品只是贸易保护主义的幌子。词汇注释seductive sidQktiv adj. 诱人的 compost kRmpRst n. 混合肥料, 堆肥organic R:Anik adj. 器官的, 有机的 subsidy sQbsidi n. 补助金, 津贴rampant rAmpEnt adj. 猖獗的, 蔓生 fraction frkFEn n. 小部分, 片断ethical eWikEl adj. 伦理的, 伦理学的 inflate infleit vt. 使膨胀, 使得意pesticide pestisaid n. 杀虫剂 largesse lB:dVes n. 慷慨fertiliser fE:tilaizE n. 肥料(尤指化学肥料) alleviate Eli:vieit vt. 减轻(痛苦等), 缓和 (情)inherent inhiErEnt adj. 固有的, 内在的 emission imiFEn n. 散发, 发射deforestation di9fRristeiFEn n. 采伐森林 lorry lRri n. 卡车triple tripl v. 增至三倍 masquerade 9mAskEreid vi. 化装; 冒充, 伪装难句突破By propping up the price, the Fairtrade system encourages farmers to produce more of these commodities rather than diversifying into other crops and so depresses pricesthus achieving, for most farmers, exactly the opposite of what the initiative is intended to do.主体句式 The Fairtrade system encourage farmers to rather than 结构分析 本句结构复杂：首先，句子开头的状语与后面的内容存在因果关系；其次，句子的主体是在对两方面的问题进行比较，由rather than连接着两个部分；而最后破折号后面的部分是一个长定语，与前面的内容又存在因果关系。在阅读的时候，一定要先理清主次，然后把各部分之间的修饰和限定等关系看清楚，才不至于出错。句子译文 通过提高价格，公平贸易体系鼓励农民生产更多的“公平贸易产品”，而不是生产多样性的农产品，因此将导致价格下跌这样一来，对于大多数农民来说，最终的结果正与他们的预期相反。题目分析1B. 推理题。文章第一段最后一句话中称“人们希望让世界变得更加美好，但要实现这个愿望，仅仅依靠改变购物习惯是不可能的改变世界还是要靠比较乏味的方式，比如政治”，这说明认为把购物作为政治活动的观点是不实际的。2D. 细节题。文章第二段中提到有机食品的环保性并不比传统农业更强，而反而可能由于其推广而增加对于农田的需求，最终导致对环境的破坏，因此答案为D。A错误的原因是，只要有足够的农田，通过生产有机食品也能够满足需求。C错误的原因是有机食品的生产到目前为止还不是去森林化的主要原因。3C. 细节题。文章第三段开头指出“公平贸易食品旨在提高贫困农民的收入”，但是通过分析发现大部分利润都被零售商赚走了，因此公平贸易食品在实践中没有实现其原来的设计目标。4D. 态度题。文章最后一句话中指出“本地食品运动看起来更像传统贸易保护主义一种经过了掩饰的形式”，所以可以看出对本地食品运动的描述语气充满了讽刺的意味。5A. 推理题。文章第四段开头提到，“本地食品”的目的在于通过缩短运输里程来减少二氧化碳的释放，但在经过一番分析之后，得出的结论是“因此本地食品越多，可能就意味着“食品运输里程”越长”，因此答案为A。参考译文有人把购物看成是一种新的政治活动，这种观点的确很有吸引力。你每个月可能都得购物好几次，因此你也就有了很多机会表达你的见解。如果为环境问题感到担忧，你也许会购买有机食品；如果希望帮助贫困农民，你可以通过购买公平贸易食品来尽绵薄之力；抑或，如果想对邪恶的跨国公司和猖獗的全球化表示反感，你就可以购买本地食品。可惜事情并不是那么简单。我们有充分的理由怀疑有关这三种欢迎的“道德食品”的主张。人们希望让世界变得更加美好，但要实现这个愿望，仅仅依靠改变购物习惯是不可能的改变世界还是要靠比较乏味的方式，比如政治。由于有机食品生产过程中不使用人造的杀虫剂和肥料，因此人们一般都想当然地认为有机食品的环保性比传统的集约型农业更为明显。不过，农业在本质上就是人类的一项破坏环境的活动：自从约1万1千年前人类开始从事农业以来，一直都在对森林进行大规模的破坏。但是随着