❶ 2000passage3考研英語閱讀真題及答案
Text 3
When a new movement in art attains a certain fashion, it is advisable to find out what its advocates are aiming at, for, however farfetched and unreasonable their principles may seem today, it is possible that in years to come they may be regarded as normal. With regard to Futurist poetry, however, the case is rather difficult, for whatever Futurist poetry may be -- even admitting that the theory on which it is based may be right -- it can hardly be classed as Literature.
This, in brief, is what the Futurist says; for a century, past conditions of life have been conditionally speeding up, till now we live in a world of noise and violence and speed. Consequently, our feelings, thoughts and emotions have undergone a corresponding change. This speeding up of life, says the Futurist, requires a new form of expression. We must speed up our literature too, if we want to interpret modern stress. We must pour out a large stream of essential words, unhampered by stops, or qualifying adjectives, or finite verbs. Instead of describing sounds we must make up words that imitate them; we must use many sizes of type and different colored inks on the same page, and shorten or lengthen words at will.
Certainly their descriptions of battles are confused. But it is a little upsetting to read in the explanatory notes that a certain line describes a fight between a Turkish and a Bulgarian officer on a bridge off which they both fall int0 the river -- and then to find that the line consists of the noise of their falling and the weights of the officers: 「Pluff! Pluff! A hundred and eighty-five kilograms.」
This, though it fulfills the laws and requirements of Futurist poetry, can hardly be classed as Literature. All the same, no thinking man can refuse to accept their first proposition: that a great change in our emotional life calls for a change of expression. The whole question is really this: have we essentially changed?
59. This passage is mainly ________.
[A] a survey of new approaches to art
[B] a review of Futurist poetry
[C] about merits of the Futurist movement
[D] about laws and requirements of literature
60. When a novel literary idea appears, people should try to ________.
[A] determine its purposes
[B] ignore its flaws
[C] follow the new fashions
[D] accept the principles
61. Futurists claim that we must ________.
[A] increase the proction of literature
[B] use poetry to relieve modern stress
[C] develop new modes of expression
[D] avoid using adjectives and verbs
62. The author believes that Futurist poetry is ________.
[A] based on reasonable principles
[B] new and acceptable to ordinary people
[C] indicative of basic change in human nature
[D] more of a transient phenomenon than literature
答案:
59. [B]
60. [A]
61. [C]
62. [D]
❷ 考研英語閱讀理解歷年真題詳解怎麼樣
很好，優惠大眾
❸ 考研英語閱讀真題需要反復做幾次才行
做真題的時候先是按照考試時間做了一遍，
❹ 考研英語閱讀真題解析哪個好
10年真題做兩遍（准確說是研究兩遍！）後，再考慮閱讀模擬題做（不能讓自己停下來）以前網上說什麼220篇好，結果我做石春禎的220，做了兩篇就扔了（50塊大洋糟蹋了阿！），做過真題就知道，石的文章很難，題目很簡單，而真題是文章不算太難看懂，但題目超難，思路不能亂，一亂就完蛋！星火的考研閱讀120篇聽說還可以，但我沒用過，我同學用過，說文章很難很偏，我看了一篇談什麼，蝙蝠俠，好萊塢最新電影，不看譯文，根本不知道寫什麼東西！（扔不扔由你！）我當時用的是的什麼多少篇，感覺還行，文章不是很難，感覺很好，練習嗎，就是保持英文閱讀狀態，搞那麼難干嗎，而且的書都很有新意，看著很舒服！（其他書你也看看，但不要買120篇以上的，哪有時間？絕對浪費！）但星火不是一無是處，星火最後的模擬試卷，質量非常高，文章都標出選自最新國外雜志第幾期，因為我做過各種模擬卷，星火的質量令我驚異，其用心程度令人感動（有感於做過太多垃圾試卷）！本人不才，今年考研英語70，以上確是肺腑之言，最後再送兩句話，祝你成功！考期不至，單詞不止，考期不臨，閱讀不停！|||考研英語閱讀,真題最好了,做上三遍考試肯定沒有問題了,做的過程中單詞也背了,翻譯也練了.|||我買考試蟲的閱讀資料，很好的，我覺得！我以前是英語專業的。至於星火的，沒買，不知道怎麼樣|||不錯，如果做有些難度的還是石春楨的，他的閱讀文章難，問題相對不難。郭慶民的閱讀和胡敏的閱讀都接近真題水平。朱泰奇的英語適合整體復習使用，他的閱讀感覺不怎麼好，當然是一家之談。在考研論壇上你可以看到很多人的評價，你也可以看到根自己英語水平差不多的人的選擇，那對你很有幫助。|||我們這邊都用石春楨200篇`如一樓所說，生詞量和閱讀難度大，但是問題簡單。要得就是讓你弄懂文章的意思。星火是三本裝的，我用了。。覺得不大好|||你聽我說，買高教的閱讀專項訓練，韓鵬著，你是不會後悔的，非常有水平，模擬得很接近真題的難度與出題格局，解答非常正確合理。
❺ 考研英語閱讀六大題型
一、細節題
細節題在閱讀中考得算是最懂的一種，考研英語大概80%-90%是細節題，四六級中幾乎90%都是細節題。
細節題標志：
題目為不完整的陳述句
題目為疑問句，6 W 1 H—Who、When、Where、What、Why、Which、How
做題方法：
1、掃描題干，抓關鍵詞
容易定位的關鍵詞：人名、地名、數字、大寫字母等
2、返回原文，精確定位
99%的細節題就考對文中的一到兩句話的理解，所以找准關鍵詞進行精確定位很重要，不要看了不該看的。
3、同義替換，得出答案
選項跟文章長得像不像沒有關系，重要的是意思是不是一樣。有些選項跟文章中的某個表述長得像，但是換掉了一兩個關鍵詞就成了偷換概念。
正確答案的特徵：
同義替換
正話反說、反話正說（邏輯問題）
正確答案的性質：
1、委婉性
一切皆有可能，凡事千萬不能過於絕對。過於絕對的一定是錯誤選項，但反過來正確答案具有委婉性，有委婉性的不一定是正確答案。
2、概括性
正確選項一般包含文章中2-3個方面的意思，而錯誤選項就以偏概全或者范圍過大。
二、猜詞題
猜詞題標志：某個單詞（word）、短語（phrase）或句子（sentence）加引號，means/refers to（指的是......）
超綱詞-猜測
大綱常見詞-不選字面意思，選引申義
做題方法：不管認不認識這個詞句或短語，我們一刀切，都假裝不認識，然後返回該詞出現的上下文尋找線索，一定能找到其同義詞、近義詞、反義詞或解釋說明。
標點符號經常是解題線索：
A，B，and C 前後意思往往是一致的
A but B 前後意思往往是相反的
A；B 分號表示並列關系，前後意思往往是一致的
A：B 或 A—B或 B 都是對 A 進行解釋說明
三、推斷題
推斷題標志：題目中含infer（推斷）、imply/indicate/suggest（暗示）等詞
做題方法類似於細節題，重要的是一定要忠於原文，不能過度推理也不能主觀臆斷——文章中一定有根據，推斷題的推理只能進行最簡單的一步推理，不能進行復雜的邏輯推理。
四、例證題
例證題的關鍵是區分論點和論據：
論點-觀點idea；
論據-材料（material）、例子（example/case）
例證題標志：題目一般表述為the author/passage uses/cites=quotes/mentions the example/saying/story/somebody/something to......
做題方法：返回該論據出現的上下文（往往是上文）一定能找到其所證明的論點，而正確答案就是概論點的同義替換/正話反說/反話正說，而干擾選項經常是例子本身、就事論事。
做例證題就像打官司一樣，「想做一件事就做吧，辯護律師總會找到的」。另外做這種題，千萬不要看例子，控制住自己，如果非要看例子那就要看懂，不然好奇心害死貓。
五、態度題
態度題標志：
題干中往往有attitude，feel，feeling，seem等詞
選項都是具有感情色彩的詞
態度題一般有兩種考法：一個是考作者態度，一個是考他人態度。
做題方法：返回原文找到表示作者或他人態度情感的詞或句子（考誰找誰），有時候他人態度可以反映作者態度。
正確答案一般分三種：
積極的 positive
消極的 negative
客觀的，公正的 objective，impartial，impersonal
干擾項：
1、indifferent 漠不關心的、冷漠的，往往是錯誤選項
2、強烈負面情感的詞往往是錯的
biased、prejudiced偏見的，subjective主觀的，puzzling令人困惑的，gloomy黑暗的、抑鬱的，scared害怕的，conceited自負的，scornful、contemptible蔑視的、嘲笑的，permissive放縱的、縱容的
六、主旨題
主旨題標志：
mainly about，main idea，focus on
best title，subject=topic=theme主題
conclusion from the passage
寫作目的 writing purpose，the author wants to tell us......,the passage intends to express the idea that......
做題方法：留到最後做，通讀全文找中心，一定能找到主題詞或者主題句。
1、主題詞=主角
文章中主題詞一定會復現，不一定是原詞復現，也可以是同義詞、近義詞、反義詞復現
2、主題句=論點據—起承轉合
起：開頭—文章的開頭或者段落的開頭
承：承上啟下—第二段的第一句話
轉：轉折
合：結尾—文章的結尾或段落的結尾
正確答案特徵：
1、必須具有概括性
必須能夠概括文章最核心、最本質、最主要的內容
2、必須包含主題詞（不一定是原詞）
干擾項：
具體細節，以偏概全
范圍過大
轉載於花花師姐
❻ 05年碩士研究生入學考試英語閱讀理解試題譯文
Everybody loves a fat pay rise. Yet pleasure at your own can vanish if you learn that a colleague has been given a bigger one. Indeed, if he has a reputation for slacking, you might even be outraged. Such behaviour is regarded as 「all too human」, with the underlying assumption that other animals would not be capable of this finely developed sense of grievance. But a study by Sarah Brosnan and Frans de Waal of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, which has just been published in Nature, suggests that it all too monkey, as well.
The researchers studied the behaviour of female brown capuchin monkeys. They look cute. They are good-natured, co-operative creatures, and they share their food tardily. Above all, like their female human counterparts, they tend to pay much closer attention to the value of 「goods and services」 than males.
Such characteristics make them perfect candidates for Dr. Brosnan's and Dr. de waal's; study. The researchers spent two years teaching their monkeys to exchange tokens for food. Normally, the monkeys were happy enough to exchange pieces of rock for slices of cucumber. However, when two monkeys were placed in separate but adjoining chambers, so that each could observe what the other was getting in return for its rock, their behaviour became markedly different.
In the world of capuchins grapes are luxury goods (and much preferable to cucumbers) So when one monkey was handed a grape in exchange for her token, the second was reluctant to hand hers over for a mere piece of cucumber. And if one received a grape without having to provide her token in exchange at all, the other either tossed her own token at the researcher or out of the chamber, or refused to accept the slice of cucumber . Indeed, the mere presence of a grape in the other chamber (without an actual monkey to eat it) was enough to rece resentment in a female capuchin.
The researches suggest that capuchin monkeys, like humans, are guided by social emotions, in the wild, they are a co-operative, groupliving species, Such co-operation is likely to be stable only when each animal feels it is not being cheated. Feelings of righteous indignation, it seems, are not the preserve of people alone, Refusing a lesser reward completely makes these feelings abundantly clear to other members of the group. However, whether such a sense of fairness evolved independently in capuchins and humans, or whether it stems form the common ancestor that the species had 35 million years ago, is, as yet, an unanswered question.
人人都喜歡大幅加薪，但是當你知道一個同事薪水加得比你還要多的時候，那麼加薪帶給你的喜悅感就消失的無影無蹤了。如果他還以懶散出名的話，你甚至會變得怒不可遏。這種行為被看作是「人之長情」，其潛在的假定其他動物不可能具有如此高度發達的不公平意識。但是由喬治亞州亞特蘭大埃里莫大學的Sarah Brosnan 和Frans de Waal進行的一項研究表明，它也是「猴之常情」。這項研究成果剛剛發表在《自然》雜志上。
研究者們對雌性棕色卷尾猴的行為進行了研究。它們看起來很可愛，性格溫順，合作，樂於分享食物。最重要的是，就象女人們一樣，它們往往比雄性更關注「商品和服務」價值。這些特性使它們成為Brosnan 和 de Waal理想的研究對象。研究者們花了兩年的時間教這些猴子用代幣換取食物。正常情況下，猴子很願意用幾塊石頭換幾片黃瓜。但是，當兩個猴子被安置在隔開但相鄰的兩個房間里，能夠互相看見對方用石頭換回來什麼東西時，猴子的行為就會變的明顯不同。
在卷尾猴的世界裡，葡萄是奢侈品（比黃瓜受歡迎得多）。所以當一隻猴子用一個代幣換回一顆葡萄時，第二隻猴子就不願意用自己的代幣換回一片黃瓜。如果一隻猴子根本無需用代幣就能夠得到一顆葡萄的話，那麼另外一隻就會將代幣擲向研究人員或者扔出房間外，或者拒絕接受那片黃瓜。事實上，只要在另一房間里出現了葡萄（不管有沒有猴子吃它），都足以引起雌卷尾猴的怨恨。
研究人員指出，正如人類一樣，卷尾猴也受社會情感的影響。在野外，它們是相互合作的群居動物。只有當每隻猴子感到自己沒有受到欺騙時，這種合作才可能穩定。不公平而引起的憤怒感似乎不是人類的專利。拒絕接受較少的酬勞可以讓這些情緒准確無誤地傳達給其它成員。但是這種公平感是在卷尾猴和人類身上各自獨立演化而成，還是來自三千五百萬前他們共同的祖先，這還是一個懸而未決的問題。
Do you remember all those years when scientists argued that smoking would kill us but the doubters insisted that we didn't know for sure? That the evidence was inconclusive, the science uncertain? That the antismoking lobby was out to destroy our way of life and the government should stay out of the way? Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves.
There are upsetting parallels today, as scientists in one wave after another try to awaken us to the growing threat of global warming. The latest was a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, enlisted by the White House, to tell us that the Earth's atmosphere is definitely warming and that the problem is largely man-made. The clear message is that we should get moving to protect ourselves. The president of the National Academy, Bruce Alberts, added this key point in the preface to the panel's report 「Science never has all the answers .But science does provide us with the best available guide to the future, and it is critical that out nation and the world base important policies on the best judgments that science can provide concerning the future consequences of present actions.」
Just as on smoking, voices now come from many quarters insisting that the science about global warming is incomplete, that it's Ok to keep pouring fumes into the air until we know for sure. This is a dangerous game: by the 100 percent of the evidence is in, it may be too late. With the risks obvious and growing, a prudent people would take out an insurance policy now.
Fortunately, the White House is starting to pay attention. But it's obvious that a majority of the president's advisers still don't take global warming seriously. Instead of a plan of action, they continue to press for more research-a classic case of 「paralysis by analysis」.
To serve as responsible stewards of the planet, we must press forward on deeper atmospheric and oceanic research But research alone is inadequate. If the Administration won't take the legislative initiative, Congress should help to begin fashioning conservation measures .A bill by Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, which would offer financial incentives for private instry is a promising start Many see that the country is getting ready to build lots of new power plants to meet our energy needs. If we are ever going to protect the atmosphere, it is crucial that those new plants be environmentally sound.
還記得科學家們認為吸煙會致人死亡，而那些懷疑者們卻堅持認為我們無法對此得出定論的時候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅持認為缺乏決定性的證據，科學也不確定的時候嗎？還記得懷疑者們堅持認為反對吸煙的游說是為了毀掉我們的生活方式，而政府應該置身事外的時候嗎？許多美國人相信了這些胡言亂語，在三十多年中，差不多有一千萬煙民早早的進了墳墓。
現在出現了與吸煙類似的令人感到難過的事情。科學家們前仆後繼，試圖使我們意識到全球氣候變暖所帶來的日益嚴重的威脅。最近的行動是由白宮召集了一批來自國家科學院的專家團，他們告訴我們，地球氣候毫無疑問正在變暖，而這個問題主要是人為造成的。明確的信息表明是我們應該立刻著手保護自己。國家科學院院長Bruce Alberts在專家團報告的前言中加上了這一重要觀點：「科學解答不了所有問題。但是科學確實為我們的未來提供了最好的指導，關鍵是我們的國家和整個的世界在做重要決策時，應該以科學能夠提供的關於人類現在的行為對未來影響最好的判斷作為依據。
就象吸煙問題一樣，來自不同領域的聲音堅持認為有關全球變暖的科學資料還不完整。在我們證實這件事之前可以向大氣中不斷的排放氣體。這是一個危險的游戲；到了有百分之百的證據的時候，可能就太晚了。隨著風險越來越明顯，並且不斷增加，一個謹慎的民族現在應該准備一份保單了。
幸運的是，白宮開始關注這件事了。但是顯然大多數總統顧問並沒有認真看待全球氣候變暖這個問題。他們沒有出台行動計劃，相反只是繼續迫切要求進行更多的研究――這是一個經典的「分析導致麻痹案例」。
為了成為地球上有責任心的一員，我們必須積極推進對於大氣和海洋的深入研究。但只有研究是不夠的。如果政府不爭取立法上的主動權，國會就應該幫助政府開始採取保護措施。弗吉尼亞的民主黨議員Robert Byrd提出一項議案，從經濟上激勵私企，就是一個良好的開端。許多人看到這個國家正准備修建許多新的發電廠，以滿足我們的能源需求。如果我們准備保護大氣，關鍵要讓這些新發電廠對環境無害。
Of all the components of a good night's sleep, dreams seem to be least within our control. In dreams, a window opens into a world where logic is suspended and dead people speak. A century ago, Freud formulated his revolutionary theory that dreams were the disguised shadows of our unconscious desires and rears, by the late 1970s. neurologists had switched to thinking of them as just 「mental noise」 the random byprocts of the neural-repair work that goes on ring sleep. Now researchers suspect that dreams are part of the mind's emotional thermostat, regulating moods while the brain is 「off-line」. And one leading authority says that these intensely powerful mental events can be not only harnessed but actually brought under conscious control, to help us sleep and feel better. 「It's your dream」 says Rosalind Cartwright, chair of psychology at Chicago's Medical Center. 「If you don't like it , change it.」
Evidence from brain imaging supports this view. The brain is as active ring REM (rapid eye movement) sleep-when most vivid dreams occur-as it is when fully awake, says Dr, Eric Nofzinger at the University of Pittsburgh. But not all parts of the brain are equally involved, the limbic system (the 「emotional brain」)is especially active, while the prefrontal cortex (the center of intellect and reasoning) is relatively quiet. 「We wake up from dreams happy of depressed, and those feelings can stay with us all day」 says Stanford sleep researcher Dr, William Dement.
The link between dreams and emotions shows up among the patients in Cartwright』s clinic. Most people seem to have more bad dreams early in the night, progressing toward happier ones before awakening, suggesting that they are working through negative feelings generated ring the day. Because our conscious mind is occupied with daily life we don』t always think about the emotional significance of the day』s events-until, it appears, we begin to dream.
And this process need not be left to the unconscious. Cartwright believes one can exercise conscious control over recurring bad dreams As soon as you awaken, identify what is upsetting about the dream. Visualize how you would like it to end instead, the next time is occurs, try to wake up just enough to control its course. With much practice people can learn to, literally, do it in their sleep.
At the end of the day, there's probably little reason to pay attention to our dreams at all unless they keep us from sleeping of 「we wake u in a panic,」 Cartwright says. Terrorism, economic uncertainties and general feelings of insecurity have increased people's anxiety. Those suffering from persistent nightmares should seek help from a therapist For the rest of us, the brain has its ways of working through bad feelings. Sleep-or rather dream-on it and you'll feel better in the morning.
在高質量睡眠的所有因素中，夢似乎是最無法控制的一個。在夢中，窗戶通向的世界裡，邏輯暫時失去了效用，死人開口說話。一個世紀前，弗洛伊德闡述了革命性的理論，即夢是人們潛意識中慾望和恐懼經偽裝後的預示；到了20世紀70年代末期，神經病學家們轉而認為夢是「精神噪音」，即睡眠時進行的神經修復活動的一種雜亂的副產品。目前，研究人員猜想夢是大腦情感自動調節系統的組成部分，當大腦處於「掉線」狀態時對情緒進行規整。一名主要的權威人士說，夢這種異常強烈的精神活動不僅能被駕馭，事實上還可以有意識地加以控制，以幫助我們更好地睡眠和感覺。芝加哥醫療中心心裡學系主任 Rosalind Cartwright說「夢是你自己的，如果你不喜歡，就改變它。」
大腦造影的證據支持了以上觀點。匹茲堡大學的埃里克博士說，在出現清晰夢境的快速動眼睡眠中大腦和完全清醒時一樣活躍。但並非大腦的所有部分都一樣，腦邊緣系統（「情緒大腦」）異常活躍，而前額皮層（思維和推理的中心地帶）則相對平靜大。斯坦福睡眠研究員William Dement博士說：「我們從夢中醒來，或者高興或者沮喪，這些情緒會伴隨我們一整天。」
夢和情緒之間的聯系在Cartwright的診所的病人身上顯露出來了。多數人似乎在晚上入睡的較早階段做更多不好的夢，而在快睡醒前會逐漸做開心一些的夢，這說明人們在夢里漸漸克服了白天的不良情緒。因為清醒時我們的頭腦被日常瑣事占據著，所以並不總是想到白天發生的事情對我們情緒的影響，直到我們開始做夢，這種影響才出現。
這一過程不一定是無意識的。Cartwright認為人們可以練習有意識地控制噩夢的重演。你一醒來就立刻確定夢中有什麼在困擾你，設想一下你所希望的夢的結局，下次再做同樣的夢時，試圖醒來以控制它的進程。通過多次練習，人們完全可以學會在夢中這樣做。
Cartwright說，說到底，只要夢不使我們無法睡眠或「從夢中驚醒」，就沒有理由太在意所做的夢。恐怖主義、經濟不確定及通常的不安全感都增加了人們的焦慮。那些長期受到噩夢折磨的人應該尋求專家幫助，而對其他人來說，大腦有自動消除不良情緒的方法。安心睡覺甚至做夢，早上醒來時你會感覺好多了。
American no longer expect public figures, whether in speech or in writing, to command the English language with skill and gift. Nor do they aspire to such command themselves. In his latest book, Doing Our Own Thing:The Degradation of language and Music and why we should like, care, John McWhorter, a linguist and controversialist of mixed liberal and conservative views, sees the triumph of 1960s counter-culture as responsible for the decline of formal English.
Blaming the permissive 1960s is nothing new, but this is not yet another criticism against the decline in ecation. Mr.McWhorter』s academic speciality is language history and change, and he sees the graal disappearance of 「whom」 ,for example, to be natural and no more regranttable than the loss of the case-endings of Old English.
But the cult of the authentic and the personal, 「doing our own thing」, has spelt the death of formal speech, writing, poetry and music. While even the modestly ecated sought an elevated tone when they put pen to paper before the 1960s, even the most well regarded writing since then has sought to capture spoken English on the page. Equally, in poetry, the highly personal, performative genre is the only form that could claim real liveliness. In both oral and written English, talking is triumphing over speaking, spontaneity over craft.
Illustrated with an entertaining array of examples from both high and low culture, the trend that Mr. McWhorter documents is unmistakable. But it is less clear, to take the question of his subtitle, why we should, like care. As a linguist, he acknowledges that all varieties of human language, including non-standard ones like Black English, can be powerfully expressive-there exists no language or dialect in the world that cannot convey complex ideas .He is not arguing, as many do, that we can no longer think straight because we do not talk proper.
Russians have a deep love for their own language and carry large chunks of memorized poetry in their heads, while Italian politicians tend to elaborate speech that would seem old-fashioned to most English-speakers. Mr. McWhorter acknowledges that formal language is not strictly necessary, and proposes no radical ecation reforms-he is really grieving over the loss of something beautiful more than useful. We now take our English 「on paper plates instead of china」. A shame, perhaps, but probably an inevitable one.
美國人已不再期待公眾人物在演講或寫作中能運用技巧和文采來駕馭英語，而公眾人物自己也不渴望這樣。語言學家麥荷特喜好爭論，他的觀點混雜著自由派與保守派的看法。在他最近的書《做我們自己的事：語言和音樂的退化，以及為什麼我們應該喜歡或在意？》中，這位學者認為60年代反文化運動的勝利要對正式英語的退化負責。
責備放縱的六十年代不是什麼新鮮事，但這次算不上是對教育衰落的又一場批判。麥荷特先生的學術專長在於語言史和語言演變。舉例來說，他認為「whom」一詞的逐漸消失是自然的，並不比古英語中詞格尾綴的消失更讓人惋惜。
然而，「做自己的事」這一對事務真實性和個人性的崇高信條，已經導致了正式演講、寫作、詩歌及音樂的消亡。在20世紀60年代以前，僅受過一般教育的人在下筆時都會尋求一種更高雅的強調；而那之後，即使是最受關注的文章也開始逮住口語就寫在紙面上。同樣的，對於詩歌來說，非常個性化和富有表現力的創作風格成為了能夠表達真實生動含義的唯一形式。無論作為口語還是書面語的英語，隨意言談勝過雅緻的言辭，自我發揮也壓過了精心准備。
麥荷特顯示先生從上層和下層文化中列舉了一系列有趣的例子，從而說明他記錄的這種趨勢是確鑿無誤的。但就書中副標題中的疑問：為什麼我們應該、喜歡或在意，答案卻不夠明確。作為語言學家，麥荷特認為各種各樣的人類語言，包括像黑人語言這樣的非標准語言，都具有強大的表達力――世上沒有傳達不了復雜思想的語言或方言。不像其他大多數人，麥荷特先生並不認為我們說話方式不再規范就會使我們不能夠准確的思考。
俄羅斯人深愛自己的語言，並在腦海中存儲了大量詩歌；而義大利的政客們往往精心准備演講，即使這在大多數講英語的人們眼裡已經過時。麥荷特先生認為正式語言並非不可或缺，也沒有提出要進行徹底的教育改革――他其實只是為那些美好事務而不是實用品的消逝而哀嘆。我們現在用「紙盤子」而非「瓷盤子」裝著我們的英語大餐。真是慚愧啊，但很可能已無法避免。
❼ 研究生英語閱讀試題
CDDBA
❽ 大家考研英語閱讀理解（40分四大題）一般能拿多少分啊
閱讀站的分值比較大，抄還是好好練練。要想把考研閱讀搞好，詞彙的基礎復習是前提，只有能夠做到大部分的考研詞彙都能夠掌握其意思及關聯，才能談閱讀速度和技巧。在閱讀上困擾同學們的問題無非是：速度跟不上，長難從句搞不懂，選項辨析不清楚。所以，考研英語閱讀速度要跟上，可以練一些資料書。建議考生強迫自己有選擇地讀不同專業不同內容的英語文章，從平時開始，在做題以外的時候自然地去讀。當你自然地理解了一篇東西，哪怕是猜測到一些大意，這個速度比硬梆梆地去啃是快很多的。