超好运气+超级发挥：一战750

sxfwj

求秒选题哪~~谢谢啦！！

*19.Tiwanaku的衰落

一、段落大意：
P1. 这个Tiwanaku（部落/城市？求补充）尽管繁衍了400多年，还是在AD1100年的时候衰落（collapse）了，有砖家认为是1050年的一场drought造成的。这个drought导致了水平面下降，然后就影响了agriculture pattern，进而影响了raised land。因为该部落依赖raise lake来灌溉，而不是rain lake，干旱对该地的农业影响很大。且raising lake导致人口聚集，而干旱后人口开始分散了。有很多证据证明，如lake的水位下降，让raised land的农作物更难存活，发现一些人群分布的变化，还有AD1050的时候，出现了高纬度的husbandry（大概是证明农业衰退吧）, 还有canal，xx等的建设多了，证明了农业的衰退。

P2. 光是drought不能造成这么大影响, 因为早在650-700年的时候，T城市也遇到过drought，之后不是好好的，还更繁荣了嘛。干旱只是诱发T崩溃的一个因素，在此之前T的经济和政治就不行了。真正的原因是当时的统治阶级的问题，使得T城市的经济和政治都非常不稳固。这个时候遇到drought一激发，就collapse了。所以，1100年以前城市的衰落还有别的原因，就是政治和经济的影响。说是那个国家的领导人不会治理，政治上的问题，说那段时间当地的各种机构都在减少什么的，领导人Hold不住了，一个正在修的大型综合体停建了，还有王室的房子和宫殿也被摧毁了，最后说m在干旱开始之前也脱离了T的殖民统治。（这里有题，问这个例子说明了什么）

二、题目：
Q1. 主旨题 （可以秒选）
就是question drought 说明political 是 real reason  (本月V40 狗主确认)

Q2. 问了最后一句高亮问作用，就是有个国家独立出来了那一句。
我好像选了说明drought is not the direct reason for which T collapsed.（not 100% sure)(本月750 狗主)
就是否认drought是国家衰落的原因  (本月V29 狗主)
说明了T的政治衰败 (本月V40 狗主)
证明与political这个原因的。(本月730 狗主)
730狗主提示：但是大家记住思路比记住选项要好。选项有变体，但主要思想不变:-D

Q3. 问AD1050的时候有什么现象证明了农业的衰退？

Q4. 说作者INFER了AD1050，发生了什么？

Q5. 细节题：有什么能够说明政治上的瓦解。(还有一个定位第一段)
选的是那边的居民去更高纬度放牧 很确定
我选的是工程停工。(本月V21狗主) (本月V40 狗主)

Q6.高亮第二段:650-700某城也遇到干旱问题，也米有倒台啊。 问作用
我选，there is more that one factor 导致国家垮台。(本月V28狗主)

Q7.以下哪个细节，如果true，说明干旱了？
A 没看太懂，看见题目中有low water level就选了。(本月V28狗主)

Q8.干旱后人口分散那里有题，具体什么问题忘记了
我选的是有scattered的选项

-- by 会员 zxfjacob (2012/12/20 11:19:13)

也就q2了，我选说明政治因素的选项

sparklelynn

LZ 这道题是不是其他答案都是其他选项呢？？？

Q2. 问了最后一句高亮问作用，就是有个国家独立出来了那一句。

我好像选了说明drought is not the direct reason for which T collapsed.（not 100% sure)(本月750 狗主)

就是否认drought是国家衰落的原因(本月V29 狗主)

说明了T的政治衰败(本月V40 狗主)

来支持此王朝政治方面控制力不足证据。(本月V40 狗主)

晨依Jacqueline

感谢楼主的IR狗狗

sxfwj

LZ 这道题是不是其他答案都是其他选项呢？？？

Q2. 问了最后一句高亮问作用，就是有个国家独立出来了那一句。

我好像选了说明drought is not the direct reason for which T collapsed.（not 100% sure)(本月750 狗主)

就是否认drought是国家衰落的原因(本月V29 狗主)

说明了T的政治衰败(本月V40 狗主)

来支持此王朝政治方面控制力不足证据。(本月V40 狗主)

-- by 会员 sparklelynn (2012/12/20 13:52:15)

这道题据我的回忆，选项的设置似乎和其他狗主的选项不太一样，但是核心意思，都是应该选政治因素是导致国家衰落的主因。我是这么想的

sxfwj

LZ还记得这道题的原文表述么？？麻烦了~！！
Q7. 问bank charge fee的考括号里imply什么? （可以秒选）

好像是说bank charge fee 的时候要charge company approved不然bank 可以通过charge fee赚钱而且不用真的去evaluation。（本月两位V40狗主确认）

-- by 会员 sparklelynn (2012/12/20 13:42:08)

原文的表述，大致意思是如果银行对于所有的investigation都charge的话，那么银行就可以什么样的公司也不去做调查，只等着charge fee了

sparklelynn

谢谢LZ
雪菲 checked

zxfjacob

污染那篇有童鞋提供了一个类似原文，麻烦看看像么？？

(考古）污染认识的转变
The concept of resource productivity opens up a new way of looking at both the full systems costs and the value associated with any product. Resource inefficiencies are most obvious within a company in the form of incomplete material utilization and poor process controls, which result in unnecessary waste, defects, and stored materials. But there also are many other hidden costs buried in the life cycle of the product. Packaging discarded by distributors or customers, for example, wastes resources and adds costs. Customers bear additional costs when they use products that pollute or waste energy. Resources are lost when products that contain usable materials are discarded and when customers pay --directly or indirectly -- for product disposal.

Environmental improvement efforts have traditionally overlooked these systems costs. Instead, they have focused on pollution control through better identification, processing, and disposal of discharges or waste -- costly approaches. In recent years, more advanced companies and regulators have embraced the concept of pollution prevention, sometimes called source reduction, which uses such methods as material substitution and closed-loop processes to limit pollution before it occurs.

But, although pollution prevention is an important step in the right direction, ultimately companies must learn to frame environmental improvement in terms of resource productivity. [1] Today managers and regulators focus on the actual costs of eliminating or treating pollution. They must shift their attention to include the opportunity costs of pollution --wasted resources, wasted effort, and diminished product value to the customer. At the level of resource productivity, environmental improvement and competitiveness come together.

This new view of pollution as resource inefficiency evokes the quality revolution of the 1980s and its most powerful lessons. Today we have little trouble grasping the idea that innovation can improve quality while actually lowering cost.

But as recently as fifteen years ago, managers believed there was a fixed trade-off. Improving quality was expensive because it could be achieved only through inspection and rework of the inevitable" defects that came off the line. What lay behind the old view was the assumption that both product design and production processes were fixed. As managers have rethought the quality issue, however, they have abandoned that old mind-set. Viewing defects as a sign of inefficient product and process design -- not as an inevitable byproduct of manufacturing -- was a breakthrough. Companies now strive to build quality into the entire process. The new mind-set unleashed the power of innovation to relax or eliminate what companies had previously accepted as fixed trade-offs.

第二段用defect做类比  Like defects, pollution often reveals flaws in the product design or production process. Efforts to eliminate pollution can therefore follow the same basic principles widely used in quality programs: Use inputs more efficiently, eliminate the need for hazardous, hard-to-handle materials, and eliminate unneeded activities. In a recent study of major process changes at ten manufacturers of printed circuit boards, for example, pollution-control personnel initiated thirteen of thirty-three major changes. Of the thirteen changes, twelve resulted in cost reduction, eight in quality improvements, and five in extension of production capabilities. [2] It is not surprising that total quality management (TQM) has become a source of ideas for pollution reduction that can create offsetting benefits. The Dow Chemical Company, for example, explicitly identified the link between quality improvement and environmental performance by using statistical-process control to reduce the variance in processes and to lower waste.

hujing92

求语法狗！

sxfwj

求语法狗！

-- by 会员 hujing92 (2012/12/20 19:31:48)

我做语法题基本不是特别纠结于意思，所以基本记不住题目。。。

sxfwj

污染那篇有童鞋提供了一个类似原文，麻烦看看像么？？

(考古）污染认识的转变
The concept of resource productivity opens up a new way of looking at both the full systems costs and the value associated with any product. Resource inefficiencies are most obvious within a company in the form of incomplete material utilization and poor process controls, which result in unnecessary waste, defects, and stored materials. But there also are many other hidden costs buried in the life cycle of the product. Packaging discarded by distributors or customers, for example, wastes resources and adds costs. Customers bear additional costs when they use products that pollute or waste energy. Resources are lost when products that contain usable materials are discarded and when customers pay --directly or indirectly -- for product disposal.

Environmental improvement efforts have traditionally overlooked these systems costs. Instead, they have focused on pollution control through better identification, processing, and disposal of discharges or waste -- costly approaches. In recent years, more advanced companies and regulators have embraced the concept of pollution prevention, sometimes called source reduction, which uses such methods as material substitution and closed-loop processes to limit pollution before it occurs.

But, although pollution prevention is an important step in the right direction, ultimately companies must learn to frame environmental improvement in terms of resource productivity. [1] Today managers and regulators focus on the actual costs of eliminating or treating pollution. They must shift their attention to include the opportunity costs of pollution --wasted resources, wasted effort, and diminished product value to the customer. At the level of resource productivity, environmental improvement and competitiveness come together.

This new view of pollution as resource inefficiency evokes the quality revolution of the 1980s and its most powerful lessons. Today we have little trouble grasping the idea that innovation can improve quality while actually lowering cost.

But as recently as fifteen years ago, managers believed there was a fixed trade-off. Improving quality was expensive because it could be achieved only through inspection and rework of the inevitable" defects that came off the line. What lay behind the old view was the assumption that both product design and production processes were fixed. As managers have rethought the quality issue, however, they have abandoned that old mind-set. Viewing defects as a sign of inefficient product and process design -- not as an inevitable byproduct of manufacturing -- was a breakthrough. Companies now strive to build quality into the entire process. The new mind-set unleashed the power of innovation to relax or eliminate what companies had previously accepted as fixed trade-offs.

第二段用defect做类比  Like defects, pollution often reveals flaws in the product design or production process. Efforts to eliminate pollution can therefore follow the same basic principles widely used in quality programs: Use inputs more efficiently, eliminate the need for hazardous, hard-to-handle materials, and eliminate unneeded activities. In a recent study of major process changes at ten manufacturers of printed circuit boards, for example, pollution-control personnel initiated thirteen of thirty-three major changes. Of the thirteen changes, twelve resulted in cost reduction, eight in quality improvements, and five in extension of production capabilities. [2] It is not surprising that total quality management (TQM) has become a source of ideas for pollution reduction that can create offsetting benefits. The Dow Chemical Company, for example, explicitly identified the link between quality improvement and environmental performance by using statistical-process control to reduce the variance in processes and to lower waste.

-- by 会员 zxfjacob (2012/12/20 19:10:22)

很类似，除了第一段。红色字部分必须是！而且是考点！