wangyu73cn之阅读加油站(21楼为考试体会)

绿岛之旅

楼主gg好

今天做og 15 感觉文章读的云里雾里 整个就不知道他的论点是什么 觉得就是几个名词重复来重复去的 看了两遍后就做题 因为对文章没有清晰的思路 做题的时候也是稀里糊涂 但是出乎意料 错了两个 我以为全军覆没的

gg要是有时间能否帮我解释一下文章的大概思路

万分感谢

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-11-26 5:03:38编辑过]

绿岛之旅

刚刚只是对了一下答案 也没有去看og的分析 之所以还没有看 是想把我自己对文章的理解贴出来给wangyu gg 看看 帮我分析一下我的弱点再那里

Most large corporations in the United States were once run by individual capitalists who owned enough stock to dominate the board of directors and dictate company policy. Because putting such large amounts of stock on the market（这里所谓的投入到market是和前面的Most large corporations对比的吗？） would only depress its value, they could not sell out for a quick profit and instead had to concentrate on improving the long-term productivity of their companies. Today, with few exceptions, （这里表示和前面的转折，有不同的地方）the stock of large United States corporations is held by large institutions-pension funds, for example-and because these institutions are prohibited by antitrust laws from owning a majority of a company's stock and from actively influencing a company's decision-making, they can enhance their wealth only by buying and selling stock in anticipation of fluctuations in its value. A minority shareholder is necessarily a short term trader.(不知道这句话为什么冒出来 和前面有什么联系吗？) As a result,（这个地方我就看不懂 as a result 后面他是怎么推出来的？） United States productivity is unlikely to improve unless shareholders and the managers of the companies in which they invest are encouraged to enhance long-term productivity (and hence long－term profitability), rather than simply to maximize short-term profits.（这个结论从前面加深黑体 结合推出来的？提出improve productivibity 的方法？）

Since the return of the old-style capitalist is unlikely, today's short-term traders must be remade into tomorrow's long-term capitalistic investors. （这篇文章的观点？）The legal limits that now prevent financial institutions（这里指的是前面所说的institutions-pension funds？） from acquiring a dominant shareholding position in a corporation should be removed, and such institutions encouraged to take a more active role in the operations of the companies in which they invest. In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company's stock should be forced to give the public one day's notice of the intent to sell those shares. Unless the announced sale could be explained to the public on grounds other than anticipated future losses, the value of the stock would plummet and, like the old-time capitalists, major investors could cut their losses only by helping to restore their companies' productivity. Such measures would force financial institutions to become capitalists whose success depends not on trading shares at the propitious moment, but on increasing the productivity of the companies in which they invest.（最后一句对提出的方法给予肯定）

分析完这一遍 我回头又去重新做了一下题目 觉得顿时答案非常肯定了 没有犹豫 而且也全对

不过还是请gg通过我对这篇文章的理解 看看我阅读的弱点在哪里？

谢谢

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-11-26 3:48:13编辑过]

wangyu73cn

绿岛之旅都把问题停到我的加油站里了，不过这样的话，可能只有我关注了。很多人都看不到了，也不能给出多角度的回答了。所以建议还是另发新帖的好。：）

你这里有八个括号的中文内容。

第一个：不太明白说的是什么，好像没什么对比啊。

第二个，是说，除了个别例外情况，现在与以前不同了。

第三个，是说，由于现在的机构投资者不参与公司管理，只能通过看涨看跌来赚钱，所以他们注定成为短期交投的角色。

第四个，由于机构投资者只看市价波动而倒买倒卖，不关心公司管理，所以带来了不良后果。

第五个，确实是如你所说。

后面四个，我没有特殊意见。

通过以上几个问题，我看楼上好像并没有把文章的第一段看明白。还是仔细再看看把。

总之，我们做对多少题目，做错多少题目不是很重要的，而且往往也不能说明你理解就对了，所以还要认真分析，分析的线索是OG的解释。当然我只是针对OG而言，其他材料没有解释，只能自己或结合网上讨论来体会了。

Most large corporations in the United States were once run by individual capitalists who owned enough stock to dominate the board of directors and dictate company policy. Because putting such large amounts of stock on the market（1、这里所谓的投入到market是和前面的Most large corporations对比的吗？） would only depress its value, they could not sell out for a quick profit and instead had to concentrate on improving the long-term productivity of their companies. Today, with few exceptions, （2、这里表示和前面的转折，有不同的地方）the stock of large United States corporations is held by large institutions-pension funds, for example-and because these institutions are prohibited by antitrust laws from owning a majority of a company's stock and from actively influencing a company's decision-making, they can enhance their wealth only by buying and selling stock in anticipation of fluctuations in its value. A minority shareholder is necessarily a short term trader.(3、不知道这句话为什么冒出来 和前面有什么联系吗？) As a result,（4、这个地方我就看不懂 as a result 后面他是怎么推出来的？） United States productivity is unlikely to improve unless shareholders and the managers of the companies in which they invest are encouraged to enhance long-term productivity (and hence long－term profitability), rather than simply to maximize short-term profits.（5、这个结论从前面加深黑体 结合推出来的？提出improve productivibity 的方法？）

Since the return of the old-style capitalist is unlikely, today's short-term traders must be remade into tomorrow's long-term capitalistic investors. （6、这篇文章的观点？）The legal limits that now prevent financial institutions（7、这里指的是前面所说的institutions-pension funds？） from acquiring a dominant shareholding position in a corporation should be removed, and such institutions encouraged to take a more active role in the operations of the companies in which they invest. In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company's stock should be forced to give the public one day's notice of the intent to sell those shares. Unless the announced sale could be explained to the public on grounds other than anticipated future losses, the value of the stock would plummet and, like the old-time capitalists, major investors could cut their losses only by helping to restore their companies' productivity. Such measures would force financial institutions to become capitalists whose success depends not on trading shares at the propitious moment, but on increasing the productivity of the companies in which they invest.（8、最后一句对提出的方法给予肯定）

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-11-26 11:07:42编辑过]

绿岛之旅

谢谢 wangyu

下次我再有问题就另开帖子好了

我觉得我的问题就是  不能很好的把文章的每句话连贯起来 他们之间的内部联系不能很好的体会到

再次谢谢无私的wangyu

bettyamen

Thank you, wangyu. I will try. Another problem is that if I try to stare at PC screen too long time, suppose 4 hours, I must get to sleep, too tired. Right now I force myself all day long to stick on screen. is that correct

wangyu73cn

问：

Another problem is that if I try to stare at PC screen too long time, suppose 4 hours, I must get to sleep, too tired. Right now I force myself all day long to stick on screen. is that correct.

答：

那是不是你的身体状况不太好啊。要注意按时睡眠，并适当锻炼身体。我当时就经常做做广播体操，挺好的。同时不要太紧张，放松下来，坚持4个小时还是挺容易的。不行，可以喝红牛试试，我考试时就喝了。建议大家也尝试一下，注意这有些科学的成分，应该是很重要的建议啊。当然，要是效果不好就算了。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-1-8 9:23:56编辑过]

瑜珑

我真的很佩服很佩服你．也很感动．

wangyu73cn

问：

我想请教一下关于阅读提高的问题! 我其实考过两次了,第一次阅读遇到JJ,基本都有把握,估计错5道以内吧,第二次就菜了呀! 所以我还是想按nn们的方法__总结OG来进行第三次的复习,但是我对于总结还是比较模糊,尽管看过别人很多经验,自己还是不知道怎么去总结的,可能时间不够了,我大概总结20篇左右吧,每个题材几篇,你觉得怎么样呢?或者总结GWD的阅读会不会好一点? 你能否让我看看你的总结呀?我真的不知道怎么下手!

答：

我非常希望能够给你帮助，但我确实没有对阅读进行过总结。只是看的多了，看的稍微深入了，可能对阅读理解有了一些想法而已。其实，你说阅读如何总结啊。把文章按类型分类吗？好像有人分过类了。把题目按题型分类吗？这个也容易，在阅读做题后顺便记下题号即可。但分类后有很多用处吗？本人表示一点怀疑。我看，文章的解释是在强调一个个提炼出来的方法，而不是强调具体的类型。所以，我觉得即便要分类，基础还是要把解释部分看明白。再按照方法进行分类。例如，段落层次，多点定位，this/these，定语从句、形容词、副词的重要性，等等。嗯，我的建议还是像我的加油站中所说，要认真分析OG的解释。把你自己对OG每句话的核心方法的理解标在书上，做的多了，自然就会发现有方法重复出现的地方。将这些方法归纳到一起，这可能就是自己在总结吧，但这种总结也不能脱离原文和题目，要把文章、题目和方法体会结合起来进行复习，而不是只知道方法就满足了。

我觉得ETS在OG的解释部分开始前说的很清楚了，这48篇文章代表了考试时遇到的各类问题。我担心，只是前20篇还解决不了问题啊，它们的代表性可能还不充分。GWD没有解释部分，很难总结啊。

以上仅一家之言，或许不能直接解决你的问题，仅供参考。有问题继续讨论吧。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-1-8 9:25:24编辑过]

瑜珑

wangyu73cnGG好，昨天和今天各认真做了５篇大全的阅读，感觉收获特别大．不过同时心里也开始越发没有底了．上一次备考的时候只是把大全当作泛读看了两遍，再去做ＧＷＤ的题目时准确率蛮高的．这两天认真做了题以后觉得以前的做法好象是在走钢丝，好危险啊，觉得自己是无知者无畏，根本没有意识到ＥＴＳ的城府，就瞎冲瞎撞了．

我想问ＧＧ的是：是不是我只要这样坚持下去就一定会有收获呢

wangyu73cn

以下是引用瑜珑在2004-11-30 14:12:00的发言：

wangyu73cnGG好，昨天和今天各认真做了５篇大全的阅读，感觉收获特别大．不过同时心里也开始越发没有底了．上一次备考的时候只是把大全当作泛读看了两遍，再去做ＧＷＤ的题目时准确率蛮高的．这两天认真做了题以后觉得以前的做法好象是在走钢丝，好危险啊，觉得自己是无知者无畏，根本没有意识到ＥＴＳ的城府，就瞎冲瞎撞了．

我想问ＧＧ的是：是不是我只要这样坚持下去就一定会有收获呢

我也真是不知道是否一定就有收获，这因人而异吧。但我知道，我是收获很大的。仔细阅读解释部分让我了解到ETS就是这样要求的。至于我们是否能够达到他的要求，就要看我们自己的理解力和付诸实践的能力了。