高智威阅读机经26+1分析

psyche89

终于有人回应啦，好开心。第二篇让人头疼啊头疼！我还有好多疑问呢，都随着分析写出来了，大家一起讨论吧！

psyche89

今天上第六篇，讲一个关于蜜蜂的传染病的研究。有题哦。文章出自高智威GRE阅读机经考古还原26+1篇2.0版。

Ingestion of food containing spores of the pathogen Ascosphaera apis causes a fatal fungal disease
known as chalk brood in honeybee larvae. However, larvae must be chilled to about 30°C (normal
brood-comb temperature is 33-36°C) for the disease to develop. Accordingly, chalk brood is most
common in spring and in small colonies. A recent study revealed that honeybees responsible for
hive-temperature maintenance purposely raised the hives’ temperature when colonies were inoculated
with A.apis this “fever,” or up-regulation of temperature, occurred before any larvae died, suggesting
that the response is preventative and that either honeybee workers detect the infection before symptoms
are visible or larvae communicate the ingestion of the pathogen. Temperature returned to normal by the
end of the study, suggesting that increased temperature is not optimal when broods are not infected, as
well as that the fever does not result merely from normal colony growth (i.e., an increase in the number
of workers available for temperature maintenance).

6.1. The primary purpose of the passage is to
(A) discuss the findings and implications of a particular study
(B) illustrate a process that formerly had been misunderstood
(C) outline the methods used to investigate a problem
(D) provide evidence to support a controversial theory
(E) contrast alternative interpretations of certain date

6.2. According to the passage, researchers concluded that fever in honeybee coloniesis preventative
because their study showed that such fever
(A) does not occur when hive temperatures are within normal range
(B) protests adult bees from contracting chalk brood infection
(C) occurs prior to the death of any larvae
(D) is more likely to occur in spring than in summer
(E) does not have an effect on uninfected broods

6.3. The passage implies that if hive temperature had not returned to normal by the end of the study in
question, a probable conclusion of the researchers would have been that
(A) up-regulation of temperature is a preventative measure against chalkbrood
(B) honeybees are incapable of purposely raising hive temperatures
(C) A. apis cannot be completely eradicated throughup-regulation of temperature along
(D) honeybee larvae have a mechanism to alert adult honeybees to the presenceof A. apis
(E) honeybee larvae may benefit from increased hive temperature even when there is no A. apis present

6.4. According to the passage, which of the following is true of chalk brood infection among honeybee
larvae ？
(A) Larvae in small colonies are more likely to pass the infection to adult honeybees than are larvae in
large ones.
(B) Infection with chalk brood induces larvae to raise their hive’s temperature.
(C) The infection is more likely to affect larvae in winter than in spring.
(D) Larvae fail to develop symptoms of the disease when their brood –comb temperature remains
within the normal range.
(E) Infected larvae exhibit visible symptoms of disease for a significant time before death.

psyche89

答案 ACED

全文就一段，一共6句话。

第一句，引出话题，说如果蜜蜂吃了有Ascosphaera apis 的食物，就会导致幼虫（larvae）生一种致命疾病，叫chalk brood。 个人觉得读这句话的关键在于一定要搞清楚专有名词。并不是说要知道这些专有名词的意思，而是说一定要搞清楚它们指代的是啥，比如Ascosphaera apis 指的是一种病毒，chalk brood指的是一种病。因为这些名词在后文会反复出现，如果搞不清楚指的是病毒还是疾病还是幼虫，那读文章的时候就只会觉得看哪个单词都好像刚才看过，但理不清逻辑关系。这是我做阅读的时候最最常犯的错误。

第二句，进一步描述chalk brood这个病。however转折，作者要表达虽然这个病致命，但是它只有在幼虫温度降到（chill）30度的时候才发作。注意，这个30度并不是幼虫的正常体温，而是降温以后的体温，正常体温作者在这句话后的括号里告诉你了。言外之意，这个病在正常体温时不发作。第6.4题D选项就涉及了这里。我当时已经被后面一会升一会降的体温搞晕了，错把30度当正常体温，所以选错了。

第三句，依旧描述chalk brood这个病，承接上一句，讲这个病在春季和小群体中最流行。6.4题A选项涉及这里，但是这个选项错在它说在幼虫更可能把病传给成年蜜蜂，这个文章没有讲到。

第四句，这里我有一个疑问，我觉得这句话在“when colonies were inoculated with A.apis”后面应该有个句号，后面是另外一句。不知道我的理解对不对，就先索性把它分成两句看，待哪位同学能给我分析分析这句话的结构。所以第四句是“A recent study revealed that honeybees responsible for hive-temperature maintenance purposely raised the hives’ temperature when colonies were inoculated with A.apis” 从这句话起，后面开始讲研究了。研究发现当一个种群遭受这种A这种病毒，负责控制蜂房温度的蜜蜂就会提升蜂房的温度。

第五句，“this “fever,” or up-regulation of temperature, occurred before any larvae died, suggesting that the response is preventative and that either honeybee workers detect the infection before symptoms are visible or larvae communicate the ingestion of the pathogen” 讲升温发生在幼虫死亡之前，这表明（suggest）了三件事：第一，升温这种反应是预防性的；第二，工蜂能够在有明显症状以前就察觉种群被传染了；第三，幼虫能传播这种病毒。这句话是个因果关系，因是“升温在幼虫死亡之前”，果是后面表明的三件事。搞清楚谁导致了谁灰常重要，因为6.2题就考这里，问为啥说升温行为是预防性的，答案当然是因为升温在幼虫死亡以前。

第六句，讲在研究的末期，发现温度又降回正常值了，这也表明了两件事：第一，在有虫卵没被感染以前，升温不是最佳选择；第二，升温并不仅仅是因为normal colony growth 。（其实这里我有点没明白作者想说什么，但是不影响做题）6.3题考了这里，问如果研究末期温度不降低表明啥，答案就是把表明的两件事取非，E选项说的就是第一件事取非以后的结果。

综上，全文是在讲一个研究和它的发现，所以第6.1题选A。

manad

第四句，这里我有一个疑问，我觉得这句话在“when colonies were inoculated with A.apis”后面应该有个句号，后面是另外一句。不知道我的理解对不对，就先索性把它分成两句看，待哪位同学能给我分析分析这句话的结构。所以第四句是“A recent study revealed that honeybees responsible for hive-temperature maintenance purposely raised the hives’ temperature when colonies were inoculated with A.apis” 从这句话起，后面开始讲研究了。研究发现当一个种群遭受这种A这种病毒，负责控制蜂房温度的蜜蜂就会提升蜂房的温度。
===============================
我也觉得这应该是两句话。This "fever"...开始是下一句，下面跟着说，也是这个温度的升高suggesting这种反应可预防的。

地雷猫

楼主威武！我正在做这个，有几个想拿出来问的，正好看到这贴，感谢~

psyche89

是吧。看来做机经还原回来的文章还要小心里面的错误啊！各位注意！

psyche89

有帮助是最好了！有啥问题拿上来大家一起讨论呀。

manad

嗯，要说是倒装句的话，怎么倒回去都觉得奇怪。

是吧。看来做机经还原回来的文章还要小心里面的错误啊！各位注意！

-- by 会员 psyche89 (2013/1/11 12:58:38)

psyche89

今天来第七篇，关于美国的十四修正案的文章，看得我那叫一个纠结啊，题也不少。
先来原文。

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified in 1868, prohibits state
governments from denying citizens the “equal protection of the laws.” Although precisely what the
framers of the amendment meant by this equal protection clause remains unclear, all interpreters agree
that the framers’ immediate objective was to provide a constitutional warrant for the Civil Rights Act
of 1866, which guaranteed the citizenship of all persons born in the United States and subject to United
States jurisdiction. This declaration, which was echoed in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment, was
designed primarily to counter the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford that Black people
in the United States could be denied citizenship. The act was vetoed by President Andrew Johnson,
who argued that the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery, did not provide Congress with
the authority to extend citizenship and equal protection to the freed slaves. Although Congress
promptly overrode Johnson’s veto, supporters of the act sought to ensure its constitutional foundations
with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The broad language of the amendment strongly suggests that its framers were proposing to write
into the Constitution not a laundry list of specific civil rights but a principle of equal citizenship that
forbids organized society from treating any individual as a member of an inferior class. Yet for the first
eight decades of the amendment’s existence, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the amendment
betrayed this ideal of equality. In the Civil Rights Cases of 1883, for example, the Court invented the
“state action” limitation, which asserts that “private” decisions by owners of public accommodations
and other commercial businesses to segregate their facilities are insulated from the reach of the
Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

After the Second World War, a judicial climate more hospitable to equal protection claims
culminated in the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education that racially segregated
schools violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Two doctrines embraced by
the Supreme Court during this period extended the amendment’s reach. First, the Court required
especially strict scrutiny of legislation that employed a “suspect classification,” meaning discrimination
against a group on grounds that could be construed as racial. This doctrine has broadened the
application of the Fourteenth Amendment to other, nonracial forms of discrimination, for while some
justices have refused to find any legislative classification other than race to be constitutionally
disfavored, most have been receptive to arguments that at least some nonracial discriminations, sexual discrimination in particular, are “suspect” and deserve this heightened scrutiny by the courts. Second,
the Court relaxed the state action limitation on the Fourteenth Amendment, bringing new forms of
private conduct within the amendment’s reach.

7.1. Which of the following best describes the main idea of the passage?
(A) By presenting a list of specific rights, framers of the Fourteenth Amendment were attempting to
provide a constitutional basis for broad judicial protection of the principle of equal citizenship.
(B) Only after the Supreme Court adopted the suspect classification approach to reviewing potentially
discriminatory legislation was the applicability of the Fourteenth Amendment extended to include
sexual discrimination.
(C) Not until after the Second World War did the Supreme Court begin to interpret the Fourteenth
Amendment in a manner consistent with the principle of equal citizenship that it expresses.
(D) Interpreters of the Fourteenth Amendment have yet to reach consensus with regard to what its
framers meant by the equal protection clause.
(E) Although the reluctance of judges to extend the reach of the Fourteenth Amendment to nonracial
discrimination has betrayed the principle of equal citizenship, the Supreme Court’s use of the state
action limitation to insulate private activity from the amendment’s reach has been more harmful.

7.2. The passage suggests that the principal effect of the state action limitation was to
(A) allow some discriminatory practices to continue unimpeded by the Fourteenth Amendment
(B) influence the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v, Board of Education
(C) provide expanded guidelines describing prohibited actions
(D) prohibit states from enacting laws that violated the intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1866
(E) shift to state governments the responsibility for enforcement of laws prohibiting discriminatory
practices

7.3. The author’s position regarding the intent of the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment would be
most seriously undermined if which of the following were true?
(A) The framers had anticipated state action limitations as they are described in the passage.
(B) The framers had merely sought to prevent discriminatory acts by federal officials.
(C) The framers were concerned that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 would be overturned by the Supreme
Court.
(D) The framers were aware that the phrase “equal protection of the laws” had broad implications.
(E) The framers believed that racial as well as non-racial forms of discrimination were unacceptable.

7.4. According to the passage, the original proponents of the Fourteenth Amendment were primarily
concerned with
(A) detailing the rights afforded by the principle of equal citizenship
(B) providing support in the Constitution for equal protection for all citizens of the United States
(C) closing a loophole that could be used to deny individuals the right to sue for enforcement of their
civil rights
(D) asserting that the civil rights protected by the Constitution included nonracial discrimination as
well as racial discrimination
(E) granting state governments broader discretion in interpreting the Civil Rights Act of 1866
7.5. The author implies that the Fourteenth Amendment might not have been enacted if
(A) Congress’ authority with regard to legislating civil rights had not been challenged
(B) the framers had anticipated the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education
(C) the framers had believed that it would be used in deciding cases of discrimination involving
non-racial groups
(D) most state governments had been willing to protect citizens’ civil rights
(E) its essential elements had not been implicit in the Thirteenth Amendment

7.6. According to the passage, which of the following most accurately indicates the sequence of the
events listed below?
I. Civil Rights Act of 1866
II. Dred Scott v. Sandford
III. Fourteenth Amendment
IV. Veto by President Johnson
(A) I, II, III, IV
(B) I, IV, II, III
(C) I, IV, III, II
(D) II, I, IV, III
(E) III, II, I, IV

7.7. Which of the following can be inferred about the second of the two doctrines referred to in lines
39-41 of the passage?
(A) It caused some justices to rule that all types of discrimination are prohibited by the Constitution.
(B) It shifted the focus of the Supreme Court from racial to nonracial discrimination.
(C) It narrowed the concern of the Supreme Court to legislation that employed a suspect classification.
(D) It caused legislators who were writing new legislation to reject language that could be construed as
permitting racial discrimination.
(E) It made it more difficult for commercial businesses to practice racial discrimination.

psyche89

答案：CABBADE

生肉过后来分析。这篇文章的特点就是长句多，而且是很长很长的那种。

第一段5句话。个人认为读这一段的关键就是搞清楚每句话主语是谁，因为你会看到好几句话的指代词都出现在主语的位置上。
第一句讲1868年的第十四修正案禁止政府否认公民“受法律平等保护的权利”。这可以看做是全文的主旨句了，因为整片文章就是再说这个权利建立起来的过程，当中怎么怎么受阻挠了，又怎么破冲万难的建立了。（感叹一句，美国人对于失去民主和自由的恐惧真的是渗透到骨髓里的，这也是为什么我觉得bans of gun不可能在美国实现的原因之一。咳咳，扯远了）
第二句，十四修正案其实是给《民权法案》（Civil Rights Act）提供了一个宪法层面的依据。
第三句，指代词来了，this declaration，我觉得指代的是民权法案，全句说民权法案最初是用来反对最高法院（supreme court）的一项裁决（ruling）的，这个裁决就是认为黑人不属于美国公民。
第四句，指代词又来了，the act，当然指代民权法案，说这个法案被约翰逊总统否决了，他觉得第十三修正案没有给最高法院这么大的权限去把解放的黑奴纳入到美国公民和平等保护的范围之内。
第五句，讲虽然法院及时的驳回了总统的这个否决，但是支持民权法案的人心里不踏实啊，夜不能寐啊，必须要在十四修正案里给民权法案奠定一个宪法层面的基础，牢牢的巩固住平等的地位，保证不会有人来破坏它。7.4题考这里，问十四修正案的支持者的最初初衷是啥，答案就是这个，为了保护民权法案，民权法案是啥，就是平等保护。7.5题也考这里，问什么情况下，就不会修订十四修正案，答案是如果法院在关于民权立法问题上的权威不被挑战，因为如果不被挑战，总统就不会否决民权法案，支持民权法案的人就不会心里不踏实，也就不会急切的想要用十四修正案把民权法案确定在宪法里。所以综上，这一段讲的是十四修正案的来源，讲它是如何产生的。7.6题考这一整段的几个重要事件的发生先后，因为先有了Dred Scott v. Sandford，于是有了民权法案，于是有了总统反对它，于是有了十四修正案。个人觉得这道题是对这一段内容最好的概括。

第二段三句话，全段讲的都是十四修正案在最初实行的过程中受到的阻碍。
第一句，个人感觉更像是过渡句，总结了一下上一段，说修正案的起草者觉得不能只跟列清单一样把一系列特定的民权写进宪法里，而是应该有一个principle，（从更加广义的角度）来界定equal citizenship，以防社会将任何一个人当做下等公民。7.1题A选项就考了这里，错就错在起草者并不是只列列特定民权就完事了。
第二句开始讲遇到的阻挠了，说的是起草者的愿景的灰常美好的，但是在这个修正案实行之初的头80年里，这么美好的愿景却没有被最高法院落实。7.3题考这里，问哪个选项成真的话，起草者的美好愿景就被破坏了，这题我错选成E了，而且至今不知为啥，求解。
第三句，按照逻辑就应该讲是如何没有落实的。果然，看见了for example，作者举了个例子，说在1883年的民权案子中，法院整出了一个叫“state action limitation”的说辞，说这个商业活动者们把他们的设备都隔离起来（我感觉这里的facilities让我有点费解），这是他们“私人”的决定，不在十四修正案平等保护的管辖范围了。7.2题考了这里，问state action limitation的影响，其实就是允许了一些歧视行为的存在，阻碍了修正案的实施。

第三段讲的就是上文的这种状况是如何被化解的。一共五句话。
第一句说二战以后，司法的风气变得更有利于平等保护了，这也终结了最高法院在教育领域的一项裁决，认为按人种划分学校是侵犯了十四修正案里所说的平等保护原则的。但是这句话的结构我有点不清楚，尤其是that racially segregated以后的部分，请高手指点。而且7.1题C选项考这里，它还是个正确选项，可见这句话还是很重要的。
第二句说最高法院通过了两项声明来拓宽十四修正案的管辖范围。因此，这一段的最后三句肯定是在说这两个声明是啥。而且，最后几句有很多对前两段的呼应。
第三句讲的是第一个声明，法院要求严格立法。如果你招工的时候疑似将来者分类了，那么可以将其解释为按种族分类，就可以认为这是一种歧视。
第四句是一个超级长句，句子结构有待讨论。它进一步解释了第三句，说这个声明把十四修正案的应用范围从只限于种族歧视拓宽到非种族歧视的一些形式。因为有的法官拒绝使用种族以外的其他分类，而实际上呢，一些非种族的歧视，比如性别歧视，是应该受到法庭重视的（这句话翻译的好怪，请大家说说自己对这句话的分析吧）。7.1题B选项考了这里，虽然叙述没有什么问题，但是题目问的是全文的主旨，它显然不是。
最后一句讲第二个声明，说法院放宽了“state action limitation”，把许多新的私人管理形式加入到修正案的管辖范围里。这里是呼应了第二段的那个阻碍。7.7题考这里，问第二个声明能推断出啥，答案是是得商人更加不容易实施种族歧视。个人认为做对这道题的关键是，一定要结合第二段与之相对应的地方，仅仅通过这一句话是推断不出来的。

其实有相关背景知识的同学对这篇文章会更加得心应手，不熟悉的同学也最好借这个机会了解一下。美国的宪政制度是怎么样，三权分立是哪三权，它们各自负责哪一块，它们之间是如何获得制衡的。知道了这些，你就不会纠结于文章里所说的，一会总统否决，一会最高法院又驳回等等问题了。如果时间还比较充裕同时对这个领域有兴趣的同学，我推荐两本书，一本是《美国宪政历程》；还有就是林达的《近距离看美国》，这不是一本书，而是一套，一共六本，林达用书信的形式，浅显易懂的介绍了美国的政治制度。有时一本书就讲只一个美国政治历史上的重要事件。我比较推荐的是其中的第二本《总统是靠不住的》（全书就讲了水门事件这一件事，如何源起，如何解决，意义何在）和第四本《如彗星划过夜空》。推荐理由是，这是真真正正从一个在美国生活的中国人的视角来看美国政治制度的得与失，挫折与进步，不学术但非常有趣。当年看的时候，曾经让我立志到了美国以后也要写一本这样的介绍真实的美国的书，哈哈。这都是题外话啦！