GRE閱讀文章遇到生詞怎么辦
任何一次出國(guó)考試都是重大挑戰(zhàn)，在閱讀中，很多同學(xué)都害怕遇到生詞，往往理解錯(cuò)一個(gè)詞，意思就會(huì)變。下面我們一起來(lái)看看以下這篇文章，在GRE考試中，文章閱讀遇到生詞怎么辦。
GRE閱讀文章遇到生詞怎么辦
首先要說(shuō)的是，在GRE閱讀教學(xué)的研究當(dāng)中，語(yǔ)言學(xué)家們發(fā)現(xiàn)，一篇文章中不認(rèn)識(shí)的單詞占全文詞匯總量的比例只要控制在8%以?xún)?nèi)，是絕對(duì)不會(huì)影響到我們對(duì)全文任何觀點(diǎn)的理解的?；谶@一點(diǎn)，我們大家大可不必因?yàn)橛龅搅藥讉€(gè)我們完全沒(méi)見(jiàn)過(guò)的奇形怪狀的單詞而感到頭痛和掙扎。因?yàn)樗鼈儾蛔阋詫?duì)我們理解文章產(chǎn)生影響。
但同時(shí)，我們?cè)陂喿x文章的過(guò)程中也常常會(huì)碰到這樣的一種單詞，那就是專(zhuān)有名詞，尤其是涉及全文主題的專(zhuān)有名詞，難道我們就必須一一認(rèn)識(shí)它?答案顯然是否定的。什么叫做認(rèn)識(shí)專(zhuān)有名詞?從英到漢的翻譯叫做認(rèn)識(shí)?還是知道專(zhuān)有名詞的特征叫做認(rèn)識(shí)?讀者請(qǐng)想想看，我們?cè)陂喿x理解中有沒(méi)有遇到過(guò)這樣的問(wèn)題提法：What is sedge root? 我想沒(méi)有，因?yàn)檫@種問(wèn)法是在問(wèn)專(zhuān)有名詞的翻譯。我們遇到的是這樣的一些問(wèn)法：According to the passage， which of the following statements about sedge root is true? What can be inferred from the passage about sedge root? 這些問(wèn)題的提法卻是在問(wèn)專(zhuān)有名詞的文中闡述特征。我們?cè)購(gòu)奈恼卤旧韺?duì)這個(gè)問(wèn)題做出進(jìn)一步的分析。
假設(shè)原文有這樣一句話(huà)：Sedge root， a woody fiber that can be easily separated into strands， is essential to basketry production. 請(qǐng)問(wèn)sedge root的中文翻譯“莎草的根” 能夠幫助我們解決閱讀理解題目嗎?我想很難!真正能夠幫助我們解決閱讀理解題目的應(yīng)該是這樣的文字a woody fiber (木制纖維)和定語(yǔ)從句中的文字部分can be easily separated into strands (能夠輕易地被分割成線(xiàn))。通過(guò)以上的分析，想必大家已經(jīng)非常清楚地認(rèn)識(shí)到，過(guò)去我們拼命去死記硬背專(zhuān)有名詞的中文釋義是多么愚蠢的行為。因?yàn)檎嬲恼J(rèn)識(shí)應(yīng)該是對(duì)特征的認(rèn)識(shí)，所以一個(gè)專(zhuān)有名詞和他的中文釋義對(duì)我們來(lái)說(shuō)是沒(méi)有任何意義的，畢竟我們對(duì)它們都沒(méi)有任何的概念。
最后很多人都說(shuō)我們可以從上下文中猜出單詞的釋義，難道真的是這樣么? 認(rèn)為從上下文中猜出單詞的釋義是不現(xiàn)實(shí)的。例如有這樣一句話(huà)“Supernova is a massive star which undergoes gravitational collapse.” 我們是不可能從上下文中猜出supernova的釋義“超新星”的。而我們真正能夠做到的只是從上下文中猜出單詞的特征：supernova是巨大的恒星(massive star)，它在進(jìn)行引力收縮(undergoes gravitational collapse)。于是以后當(dāng)我們遇到不認(rèn)識(shí)的單詞，我們可以再也不用停下來(lái)思考單詞的釋義，也不用費(fèi)盡思量地去猜所謂的單詞的釋義，我們需要做的只是靜下心來(lái)在后面找到單詞在文章當(dāng)中傳達(dá)的特征就可以。
GRE閱讀短篇文章練習(xí)
Each of two particular inspection systems that are based on different principles would detect all product flaws but would also erroneously reject three percent of flawless products.Assuming there is no overlap between the products erroneously rejected by the two systems and also no interference between the systems if both operate， using both systems and rejecting only those products found flawed by both would be a way of avoiding all erroneous rejections.
Which of the following most precisely characterizes the reasoning in the argument?
(A)The reasoning is conclusive， that is， the conclusion cannot be false if the statements offered in its support are true.
(B)The reasoning is strong but not conclusive， if the statements offered in support of the conclusion are true， they provide good grounds for that conclu-sion， though it is possible that additional infor-mation might weaken the argument.
(C)The reasoning is weak; the statements offered in support of the conclusion， though relevant to it， by themselves provide at best inadequate grounds for the conclusion.
(D)The reasoning is flawed in that the conclusion is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of evidence offered in its support.
(E)The reasoning is flawed in that the argument treats evidence that a factor is necessary to bring about an event as if it were evidence that the factor is sufficient to bring about that event.
答案：A
GRE考試相關(guān)文章：