|
TOOTOO的阅读方法： 其實RC題目設計定位處和錯誤答案設計也有一定的方向...我POㄧ部分給你參考吧....閱讀排除法相對容易沒有CR這麼複雜.... Active Reading 1. 閱讀每句後思考概念，閱讀每段後思考段落主題，閱讀整篇後思考每段功能、作者態度及主旨。閱讀重在理解不是在快速看完。 2. 句子結構複雜提取主詞、動詞、受詞理解優先（尤其是首段前兩句、各段首句和末段末句），太多單字不懂跳過修飾語、形容詞或副詞，甚至跳過插入句
閱讀注意 1. 出現的人物以及其觀點、立場 2. 作者是否表達觀點、立場，是否有建議 3. 出現的人物及作者觀點、立場之差異 4. 轉折詞（However、Ironically）和態度詞（fail to、overlook、ignore、distort、extreme、mistake、faulty、unconvincing）、強調字眼（over-xxx、under-xxx、does V、outweigh），作者出現詞（indeed） 5. 專有名詞或”xxx”出現位置 6. 段落大意（承接上段或轉折或另起新概念）及各觀點、人物、專有名詞出現位置（定位） 7. 清楚理解第一段前兩句、各段首句、末段最後一句概念（考主旨題） 8. 若有舉例了解舉例的功用及目的（考功能題） 9. 有問句注意問句功用，並且注意找出答案 10. 注意發現或研究結果（found、research、conclude），以及解釋或解答（possible explanation、answer）（考細節題） 11. 列舉多項內容注意其位置（考except題） 12. 時間點及該時間點所出現概念；時間修飾詞（recent、conventional、traditional）可能表新舊觀念對照 13. 注意讓步詞（although、despite），代表兩個觀點（可能含作者觀點）一致同意部分（通常是兩觀點立場不同）（考agree題） 14. 作者預期的反對（考功能題） 15. 注意unlike、contrast，考兩者不同之處（細節題）
技巧: 1. 主旨題：文章看到按時間排序答案常出現a historical change，theory原文需有確實提到，某人推論或立場不代表是theory；注意修飾詞unexpected、well-known、first原文是否有提到，通常出現錯 2. 細節題定位：定位問題元素出現的句子就是答案，答案為該句子的改寫 3. 推論題定位：定位問題元素出現的句子依連接詞或副詞判定所屬觀念區塊，答案可能為定位處前後句改寫，或者該定位句倒過來解釋 4. 作者態度題：作者絕對不會否定自己（出現否定作者答案錯） 5. 定位注意:1. 答案一般（非一定）出現在該名詞在文章中第一次出現的地方；2. 答案基本不可能出現在該名詞第一次出現的該段以外的地方
排除: 1. 主旨題排除compare、reconcile開頭（advocate、support支持概念似乎也沒有正確過） 2. 文章沒說明沒出現過的元素、觀念 3. 與問題定位不同段落的觀念 4. 與定位處不同觀念區塊或沒提到的答案 5. 原文沒說到的極端單字（first、only、最高級、all、whenever、new） 6. 無關比較，沒根據比較級（more adj、adj-er、little） 7. 無根據推論關係、因果連結（because of、because、in order to、result from），就是任意結合兩段文章沒提到的關係、因果（就像CR的conclusion題不可任意推論） 8. 與文章內容態度不同答案
9. 牛頭對馬嘴答案，把文章出現過的內容移花接木，不同段落觀念移花接木 順便示範一篇RC總結...總結時除了訓練定位...還要培養對錯誤答案的敏感性 Essay #6. 145 (21972-!-item-!-188;#058&00145-00)
Colonial historian David Allen's intensive study of five communities in seventeenth-century Massachusetts is a model of meticulous scholarship on the detailed microcosmic level, and is convincing up to a point. Allen suggests that much more coherence and direct continuity existed between English and colonial agricultural practices and administrative organization than other historians have suggested. However, he overstates his case with the declaration that he has proved "the remarkable extent to which diversity in New England local institutions was directly imitative of regional differences in the mother country."
Such an assertion ignores critical differences between seventeenth-century England and New England. First, England was overcrowded and land-hungry; New England was sparsely populated and labor-hungry. Second, England suffered the normal European rate of mortality; New England, especially in the first generation of English colonists, was virtually free from infectious diseases. Third, England had an all-embracing state church; in New England membership in a church was restricted to the elect. Fourth, a high proportion of English villagers lived under paternalistic resident squires; no such class existed in New England. By narrowing his focus to village institutions and ignoring these critical differences, which studies by Greven, Demos, and Lockridge have shown to be so important, Allen has created a somewhat distorted picture of reality.
Allen's work is a rather extreme example of the "country community" school of seventeenth-century English history whose intemperate excesses in removing all national issues from the history of that period have been exposed by Professor Clive Holmes. What conclusion can be drawn, for example, from Allen's discovery that Puritan clergy who had come to the colonies from East Anglia were one-third to one-half as likely to return to England by 1660 as were Puritan ministers from western and northern England? We are not told in what way, if at all, this discovery illuminates historical understanding. Studies of local history have enormously expanded our horizons, but it is a mistake for their authors to conclude that village institutions are all that mattered, simply because their functions are all that the records of village institutions reveal.
Question #17. 145-03 (22018-!-item-!-188;#058&000145-03)
According to the passage, which of the following was true of most villages in seventeenth-century England?
(A) The resident squire had significant authority. (B) Church members were selected on the basis of their social status within the community.
文章沒說明沒出現過的元素
(C) Low population density restricted agricultural and economic growth.
文章沒說明沒出現過的元素
(D) There was little diversity in local institutions from one region to another.
沒根據比較級
(E) National events had little impact on local customs and administrative organization. 沒根據比較級
a high proportion of English villagers lived under paternalistic resident squires
Question #18. 145-05 (22064-!-item-!-188;#058&000145-05)
The passage suggests that Professor Clive Holmes would most likely agree with which of the following statements?
(A) An understanding of seventeenth-century English local institutions requires a consideration of national issues. (B) The "country community" school of seventeenth-century English history distorts historical evidence in order to establish continuity between old and new institutions.
無根據推論關係、因果連結
(C) Most historians distort reality by focusing on national concerns to the exclusion of local concerns.
與定位處無關或沒提到的答案
(D) National issues are best understood from the perspective of those at the local level. (E) Local histories of seventeenth-century English villages have contributed little to the understanding of village life. English history whose intemperate excesses in removing all national issues from the history of that period have been exposed by Professor Clive Holmes.
Question #19. 145-07 (22110-!-item-!-188;#058&000145-07)
It can be inferred from the passage that the author of the passage considers Allen's "discovery" (see highlighted text) to be
(A) already known to earlier historians (B) based on a logical fallacy (C) improbable but nevertheless convincing (D) an unexplained, isolated fact (E) a new, insightful observation We are not told in what way, if at all, this discovery illuminates historical understanding.
Question #20. 145-08 (22156-!-item-!-188;#058&000145-08)
The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
(A) substantiating a claim about a historical event (B) reconciling two opposing ideas about a historical era (C) disputing evidence a scholar uses to substantiate a claim about a historical event (D) analyzing two approaches to scholarly research and evaluating their methodologies (E) criticizing a particular study and the approach to historical scholarship it represents | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2009-3-11 12:30:00
楼主
