歷年英語(yǔ)四級(jí)閱讀真題全解析(2004-2006)
- 第1頁(yè)：2004.6-Passage Two
- 第2頁(yè)：2004.6-Passage Three
- 第3頁(yè)：2004.6-PassageFour
- 第4頁(yè)：2005.1-Passage One
- 第5頁(yè)：2005.1-Passage Two
- 第6頁(yè)：2005.1-Passage Three
- 第7頁(yè)：2005.1-Passage Four
- 第8頁(yè)：2005.6-Passage 1
2005.6
Passage 1
Is there enough oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (保護(hù)區(qū)) (ANWR) to help secure America’s energy future? President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence. But no one knows for sure how much crude oil lies buried beneath the frozen earth with the last government survey, conducted in 1998, projecting output anywhere from 3 billion to 16 billion barrels.
The oil industry goes with the high end of the range, which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years. By pumping more than 1 million barrels a day from the reserve for the next two three decades, lobbyists claim, the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia. Sounds good. An oil boom would also mean a multibillion-dollar windfall (意外之財(cái)) in tax revenues, royalties (開(kāi)采權(quán)使用費(fèi)) and leasing fees for Alaska and the Federal Government. Best of all, advocates of drilling say, damage to the environment would be insignificant. “We’ve never had a document case of oil rig chasing deer out onto the pack ice.” says Alaska State Representative Scott Ogan.
Not so far, say environmentalists. Sticking to the low end of government estimates, the National Resources Defense Council says there may be no more than 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil in the coastal plain of ANWR, a drop in the bucket that would do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems. And consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits, because drilling could begin only after much bargaining over leases, environmental permits and regulatory review. As for ANWR’s impact on the California power crisis, environmentalists point out that oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output—and just 3% of the nation’s.
21. What does President Bush think of tapping oil in ANWR?
A) It will exhaust the nation’s oil reserves.
B) It will help secure the future of ANWR.
C) It will help reduce the nation’s oil imports.
D) It will increase America’s energy consumption.（C）
22. We learn from the second paragraph that the American oil industry ________.
A) believes that drilling for oil in ANWR will produce high yields
B) tends to exaggerate America’s reliance on foreign oil
C) shows little interest in tapping oil in ANWR
D) expects to stop oil imports from Saudi Arabia（A）
23. Those against oil drilling in ANWR argue that ________.
A) it can cause serious damage to the environment
B) it can do little to solve U.S. energy problems
C) it will drain the oil reserves in the Alaskan region
D) it will not have much commercial value（B）
24. What do the environmentalists mean by saying “Not so fast” (Line 1, Para. 3)?
A) Oil exploitation takes a long time
B) The oil drilling should be delayed
C) Don’t be too optimistic
D) Don’t expect fast returns（C）
25. It can be learned from the passage that oil exploitation beneath ANWR’s frozen earth ________.
A) remains a controversial issue
B) is expected to get under way soon
C) involves a lot of technological problems
D) will enable the U.S. to be oil independent（A）
這篇材料主要內(nèi)容是對(duì)應(yīng)否在阿拉斯加進(jìn)行石油開(kāi)采進(jìn)行論述，三大段恰好闡述了三方面的觀點(diǎn)。段開(kāi)頭首先以一個(gè)疑問(wèn)句提出了論題，Is there enough oil …… to help secure America’s energy future?問(wèn)的是阿拉斯加地下是否蘊(yùn)藏了足以為拯救美國(guó)的能源未來(lái)提供助力的石油。接下來(lái)文章拋出了布什總統(tǒng)也就是美國(guó)政府的正面觀點(diǎn)，該觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為阿拉斯加的石油可以緩解加利福尼亞的電力危機(jī)，并為國(guó)家的能源獨(dú)立提供助推（would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence）。文章進(jìn)而引述了政府勘測(cè)數(shù)據(jù)，說(shuō)明阿拉斯加地區(qū)的石油儲(chǔ)量達(dá)到30億到160億桶，不過(guò)這里使用了否定句式（no one knows for sure），表明對(duì)這一數(shù)據(jù)的懷疑態(tài)度，這樣就自然地引出了后面兩種截然不同的觀點(diǎn)。
種觀點(diǎn)來(lái)自于石油業(yè)界——“The oil industry goes with the high end of the range”，這里的high end指的就是160億桶，而go with表示認(rèn)同了數(shù)據(jù)中的高點(diǎn)——160億桶。支持開(kāi)采的論據(jù)有三點(diǎn)，是可以減少大量石油進(jìn)口（cut back on imports），第二是額外收入大筆稅款、開(kāi)采權(quán)使用費(fèi)和租金（a multibillion-dollar windfall in tax revenues, royalties and leasing fees）第三是對(duì)環(huán)境的影響微乎其微（damage to the environment would be insignificant）。
第二種觀點(diǎn)來(lái)自于環(huán)保主義者——Sticking to the low end of government estimates，low end指的30億桶，而stick to表示認(rèn)同數(shù)據(jù)中30億桶的低點(diǎn)。反對(duì)開(kāi)采的論據(jù)也有三點(diǎn)，是石油蘊(yùn)藏量只有32億桶，對(duì)美國(guó)能源問(wèn)題來(lái)說(shuō)只能是杯水車(chē)薪（do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems），第二是消費(fèi)者要等上十年時(shí)間才能獲得利益（consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits），第三，針對(duì)政府提出的阿拉斯加石油可以緩解加利福尼亞電力危機(jī)的觀點(diǎn)，環(huán)保主義者指出石油在加利福尼亞發(fā)電能源中只占1%（oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output）。
21. C
本題問(wèn)在ANWR石油開(kāi)采問(wèn)題上，布什總統(tǒng)的意見(jiàn)如何。
布什總統(tǒng)的觀點(diǎn)在段中有清楚的描述：President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence。正確理解這句話，就可以對(duì)本題做出解答。Certainly thinks so里的so對(duì)句的問(wèn)話做了肯定回答，問(wèn)話問(wèn)的是ANWR地下有沒(méi)有足夠的石油可以幫助拯救美國(guó)的能源未來(lái)，布什的意見(jiàn)當(dāng)然就是有足夠的石油。后面一句話是布什總統(tǒng)支持開(kāi)采的理由：“他爭(zhēng)辯說(shuō)開(kāi)采ANWR的石油可以幫助緩解加利福尼亞的電力危機(jī)，大大推動(dòng)國(guó)家的能源獨(dú)立?！?
A，這會(huì)耗盡國(guó)家的石油儲(chǔ)藏。
B，這會(huì)為拯救ANWR的未來(lái)提供助力。
C，這會(huì)有利于減少國(guó)家的石油進(jìn)口。
D，這會(huì)增加美國(guó)的能源消費(fèi)量。
A在文中沒(méi)有提到。B的說(shuō)法把ANWR與美國(guó)混淆起來(lái)，是ANWR可以拯救美國(guó)的未來(lái)，而不是拯救自己的未來(lái)。C認(rèn)為這有利于減少國(guó)家的石油進(jìn)口，實(shí)際上與energy independence意義一致，因?yàn)槟茉椽?dú)立也就是自給自足，不依賴于其他國(guó)家，其結(jié)果就是減少進(jìn)口。D的說(shuō)法在文中也沒(méi)有提到。綜上可知C的說(shuō)法為合理。
22. A
題目問(wèn)我們能從第二段得知，美國(guó)石油產(chǎn)業(yè)如何如何。
第二段從石油產(chǎn)業(yè)的角度論述了在ANWR地區(qū)進(jìn)行石油開(kāi)采的可行性，其觀點(diǎn)是支持開(kāi)采的。
A，美石油產(chǎn)業(yè)認(rèn)為ANWR地區(qū)的石油開(kāi)采將會(huì)帶來(lái)很高的產(chǎn)量。第二段基本觀點(diǎn)是支持石油開(kāi)采的，而A的觀點(diǎn)與這一觀點(diǎn)保持一致，只要在文中找到類(lèi)似的描述就可以斷定A的說(shuō)法是正確的。文中有2句話可以作為佐證：which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years和pumping more than 1 million barrels a day，這2句都說(shuō)明了未來(lái)石油產(chǎn)量的巨大。
B，美石油產(chǎn)業(yè)傾向夸大美國(guó)對(duì)外國(guó)石油的依賴程度。本選項(xiàng)考查對(duì)the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia一句的理解。這句話的本意是有了ANWR的石油，可以減少進(jìn)口量，該進(jìn)口量相當(dāng)于美國(guó)從沙特進(jìn)口石油的總量。這句話的目的在于強(qiáng)調(diào)ANWR石油所能帶來(lái)的好處，夸大進(jìn)口依賴性與本段的中心思想無(wú)關(guān)。
C，對(duì)在ANWR地區(qū)的石油開(kāi)采沒(méi)有表現(xiàn)出多少興趣。與文意正好相反。
D，希望停止從沙特進(jìn)口石油。該句錯(cuò)誤與B一樣。
23. B
題目問(wèn)反對(duì)在ANWR開(kāi)采石油的人士爭(zhēng)辯道……
A，它會(huì)造成對(duì)環(huán)境的嚴(yán)重破壞。
B，它對(duì)于美國(guó)能源問(wèn)題的解決幫助很小。
C，它會(huì)耗盡阿拉斯加地區(qū)的石油蘊(yùn)藏。
D，它不會(huì)產(chǎn)生很大的經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值。
對(duì)反對(duì)石油開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)的論述出現(xiàn)在第三段，根據(jù)前文的解釋?zhuān)磳?duì)的觀點(diǎn)一共有三點(diǎn)，是它對(duì)美國(guó)能源問(wèn)題來(lái)說(shuō)只能是杯水車(chē)薪（do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems），這與B的說(shuō)法一致。第二是消費(fèi)者要等上十年時(shí)間才能獲得利益（consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits），這一說(shuō)法與D的說(shuō)法近似，但區(qū)別是D認(rèn)為永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)產(chǎn)生大的經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值，而這里只是認(rèn)為價(jià)值產(chǎn)生在時(shí)間上會(huì)晚一些，沒(méi)有否定會(huì)產(chǎn)生較大的價(jià)值，因此D不對(duì)。第三，它不能很大程度上緩解加利福尼亞電力危機(jī)，這也驗(yàn)證了B的說(shuō)法。此為，A和C的說(shuō)法在文中都沒(méi)有提到，可以排除。
24. C
題目問(wèn)環(huán)保主義者所說(shuō)的Not so fast是什么意思。
A，石油開(kāi)采需要很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間。
B，石油鉆探將會(huì)被拖延。
C，不要過(guò)于樂(lè)觀。
D，不要期待很快得到回報(bào)。
如何理解某個(gè)句子或詞組的含義的題在四級(jí)閱讀中出現(xiàn)幾率比較高，必須結(jié)合上下文環(huán)境才能做出正確解答。Not so fast出現(xiàn)在第三段的句，按位置來(lái)看，很可能起了承上啟下的作用。上文剛剛論述了支持石油開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)，而后文是對(duì)反對(duì)開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)的論述，那么Not so fast一定是對(duì)支持開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)的否定，而且是一個(gè)總領(lǐng)句，是對(duì)后面三個(gè)論據(jù)的總概括。否則，若Not so fast不是對(duì)第三段的總體概括，它就不應(yīng)該出現(xiàn)在段首，這是寫(xiě)作的基本規(guī)則之一。
看一下四個(gè)選項(xiàng)，A的說(shuō)法在第三段里沒(méi)有提到，B和D都提到了，但無(wú)論選擇哪一個(gè)都不是對(duì)第三段的總體概括，只有C能夠涵蓋第三段三個(gè)論據(jù)暗含的意義。
25. A
題目問(wèn)從這篇材料可以得知，在ANWR的凍土下進(jìn)行石油開(kāi)采如何如何。
A，依然是一個(gè)正處爭(zhēng)議中的問(wèn)題。
B，被認(rèn)為不久后就會(huì)得到結(jié)論。
C，涉及很多技術(shù)難題。
D，將會(huì)使美國(guó)獲得石油獨(dú)立。
這篇材料一共三段，每一段論述了一種觀點(diǎn)，段是政府的觀點(diǎn)，第二段是石油產(chǎn)業(yè)的觀點(diǎn)，第三段是環(huán)保主義者的觀點(diǎn)。作者沒(méi)有給出一個(gè)客觀的評(píng)述，認(rèn)為哪一種觀點(diǎn)獲得了更多的支持，或?qū)?lái)有可能得到實(shí)行。因此說(shuō)，開(kāi)不開(kāi)采實(shí)際上還是個(gè)懸而未決的問(wèn)題，這樣A的說(shuō)法是正確的，而B(niǎo)是錯(cuò)誤的。C所說(shuō)的技術(shù)難題應(yīng)該不存在，因?yàn)榈诙沃惺彤a(chǎn)業(yè)者的觀點(diǎn)是無(wú)比樂(lè)觀的，他們希望立即投入到石油開(kāi)采中，所以應(yīng)該不會(huì)存在太多的技術(shù)難題。即便實(shí)際情況不是如此，也可以以文章沒(méi)有提到技術(shù)難題方面的證據(jù)為由，排除C。而D的說(shuō)法在文中相關(guān)論述是石油開(kāi)采會(huì)減輕石油依賴，并不是從此獲得石油獨(dú)立。
Passage 1
Is there enough oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (保護(hù)區(qū)) (ANWR) to help secure America’s energy future? President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence. But no one knows for sure how much crude oil lies buried beneath the frozen earth with the last government survey, conducted in 1998, projecting output anywhere from 3 billion to 16 billion barrels.
The oil industry goes with the high end of the range, which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years. By pumping more than 1 million barrels a day from the reserve for the next two three decades, lobbyists claim, the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia. Sounds good. An oil boom would also mean a multibillion-dollar windfall (意外之財(cái)) in tax revenues, royalties (開(kāi)采權(quán)使用費(fèi)) and leasing fees for Alaska and the Federal Government. Best of all, advocates of drilling say, damage to the environment would be insignificant. “We’ve never had a document case of oil rig chasing deer out onto the pack ice.” says Alaska State Representative Scott Ogan.
Not so far, say environmentalists. Sticking to the low end of government estimates, the National Resources Defense Council says there may be no more than 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil in the coastal plain of ANWR, a drop in the bucket that would do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems. And consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits, because drilling could begin only after much bargaining over leases, environmental permits and regulatory review. As for ANWR’s impact on the California power crisis, environmentalists point out that oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output—and just 3% of the nation’s.
21. What does President Bush think of tapping oil in ANWR?
A) It will exhaust the nation’s oil reserves.
B) It will help secure the future of ANWR.
C) It will help reduce the nation’s oil imports.
D) It will increase America’s energy consumption.（C）
22. We learn from the second paragraph that the American oil industry ________.
A) believes that drilling for oil in ANWR will produce high yields
B) tends to exaggerate America’s reliance on foreign oil
C) shows little interest in tapping oil in ANWR
D) expects to stop oil imports from Saudi Arabia（A）
23. Those against oil drilling in ANWR argue that ________.
A) it can cause serious damage to the environment
B) it can do little to solve U.S. energy problems
C) it will drain the oil reserves in the Alaskan region
D) it will not have much commercial value（B）
24. What do the environmentalists mean by saying “Not so fast” (Line 1, Para. 3)?
A) Oil exploitation takes a long time
B) The oil drilling should be delayed
C) Don’t be too optimistic
D) Don’t expect fast returns（C）
25. It can be learned from the passage that oil exploitation beneath ANWR’s frozen earth ________.
A) remains a controversial issue
B) is expected to get under way soon
C) involves a lot of technological problems
D) will enable the U.S. to be oil independent（A）
這篇材料主要內(nèi)容是對(duì)應(yīng)否在阿拉斯加進(jìn)行石油開(kāi)采進(jìn)行論述，三大段恰好闡述了三方面的觀點(diǎn)。段開(kāi)頭首先以一個(gè)疑問(wèn)句提出了論題，Is there enough oil …… to help secure America’s energy future?問(wèn)的是阿拉斯加地下是否蘊(yùn)藏了足以為拯救美國(guó)的能源未來(lái)提供助力的石油。接下來(lái)文章拋出了布什總統(tǒng)也就是美國(guó)政府的正面觀點(diǎn)，該觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為阿拉斯加的石油可以緩解加利福尼亞的電力危機(jī)，并為國(guó)家的能源獨(dú)立提供助推（would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence）。文章進(jìn)而引述了政府勘測(cè)數(shù)據(jù)，說(shuō)明阿拉斯加地區(qū)的石油儲(chǔ)量達(dá)到30億到160億桶，不過(guò)這里使用了否定句式（no one knows for sure），表明對(duì)這一數(shù)據(jù)的懷疑態(tài)度，這樣就自然地引出了后面兩種截然不同的觀點(diǎn)。
種觀點(diǎn)來(lái)自于石油業(yè)界——“The oil industry goes with the high end of the range”，這里的high end指的就是160億桶，而go with表示認(rèn)同了數(shù)據(jù)中的高點(diǎn)——160億桶。支持開(kāi)采的論據(jù)有三點(diǎn)，是可以減少大量石油進(jìn)口（cut back on imports），第二是額外收入大筆稅款、開(kāi)采權(quán)使用費(fèi)和租金（a multibillion-dollar windfall in tax revenues, royalties and leasing fees）第三是對(duì)環(huán)境的影響微乎其微（damage to the environment would be insignificant）。
第二種觀點(diǎn)來(lái)自于環(huán)保主義者——Sticking to the low end of government estimates，low end指的30億桶，而stick to表示認(rèn)同數(shù)據(jù)中30億桶的低點(diǎn)。反對(duì)開(kāi)采的論據(jù)也有三點(diǎn)，是石油蘊(yùn)藏量只有32億桶，對(duì)美國(guó)能源問(wèn)題來(lái)說(shuō)只能是杯水車(chē)薪（do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems），第二是消費(fèi)者要等上十年時(shí)間才能獲得利益（consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits），第三，針對(duì)政府提出的阿拉斯加石油可以緩解加利福尼亞電力危機(jī)的觀點(diǎn)，環(huán)保主義者指出石油在加利福尼亞發(fā)電能源中只占1%（oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output）。
21. C
本題問(wèn)在ANWR石油開(kāi)采問(wèn)題上，布什總統(tǒng)的意見(jiàn)如何。
布什總統(tǒng)的觀點(diǎn)在段中有清楚的描述：President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence。正確理解這句話，就可以對(duì)本題做出解答。Certainly thinks so里的so對(duì)句的問(wèn)話做了肯定回答，問(wèn)話問(wèn)的是ANWR地下有沒(méi)有足夠的石油可以幫助拯救美國(guó)的能源未來(lái)，布什的意見(jiàn)當(dāng)然就是有足夠的石油。后面一句話是布什總統(tǒng)支持開(kāi)采的理由：“他爭(zhēng)辯說(shuō)開(kāi)采ANWR的石油可以幫助緩解加利福尼亞的電力危機(jī)，大大推動(dòng)國(guó)家的能源獨(dú)立?！?
A，這會(huì)耗盡國(guó)家的石油儲(chǔ)藏。
B，這會(huì)為拯救ANWR的未來(lái)提供助力。
C，這會(huì)有利于減少國(guó)家的石油進(jìn)口。
D，這會(huì)增加美國(guó)的能源消費(fèi)量。
A在文中沒(méi)有提到。B的說(shuō)法把ANWR與美國(guó)混淆起來(lái)，是ANWR可以拯救美國(guó)的未來(lái)，而不是拯救自己的未來(lái)。C認(rèn)為這有利于減少國(guó)家的石油進(jìn)口，實(shí)際上與energy independence意義一致，因?yàn)槟茉椽?dú)立也就是自給自足，不依賴于其他國(guó)家，其結(jié)果就是減少進(jìn)口。D的說(shuō)法在文中也沒(méi)有提到。綜上可知C的說(shuō)法為合理。
22. A
題目問(wèn)我們能從第二段得知，美國(guó)石油產(chǎn)業(yè)如何如何。
第二段從石油產(chǎn)業(yè)的角度論述了在ANWR地區(qū)進(jìn)行石油開(kāi)采的可行性，其觀點(diǎn)是支持開(kāi)采的。
A，美石油產(chǎn)業(yè)認(rèn)為ANWR地區(qū)的石油開(kāi)采將會(huì)帶來(lái)很高的產(chǎn)量。第二段基本觀點(diǎn)是支持石油開(kāi)采的，而A的觀點(diǎn)與這一觀點(diǎn)保持一致，只要在文中找到類(lèi)似的描述就可以斷定A的說(shuō)法是正確的。文中有2句話可以作為佐證：which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years和pumping more than 1 million barrels a day，這2句都說(shuō)明了未來(lái)石油產(chǎn)量的巨大。
B，美石油產(chǎn)業(yè)傾向夸大美國(guó)對(duì)外國(guó)石油的依賴程度。本選項(xiàng)考查對(duì)the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia一句的理解。這句話的本意是有了ANWR的石油，可以減少進(jìn)口量，該進(jìn)口量相當(dāng)于美國(guó)從沙特進(jìn)口石油的總量。這句話的目的在于強(qiáng)調(diào)ANWR石油所能帶來(lái)的好處，夸大進(jìn)口依賴性與本段的中心思想無(wú)關(guān)。
C，對(duì)在ANWR地區(qū)的石油開(kāi)采沒(méi)有表現(xiàn)出多少興趣。與文意正好相反。
D，希望停止從沙特進(jìn)口石油。該句錯(cuò)誤與B一樣。
23. B
題目問(wèn)反對(duì)在ANWR開(kāi)采石油的人士爭(zhēng)辯道……
A，它會(huì)造成對(duì)環(huán)境的嚴(yán)重破壞。
B，它對(duì)于美國(guó)能源問(wèn)題的解決幫助很小。
C，它會(huì)耗盡阿拉斯加地區(qū)的石油蘊(yùn)藏。
D，它不會(huì)產(chǎn)生很大的經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值。
對(duì)反對(duì)石油開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)的論述出現(xiàn)在第三段，根據(jù)前文的解釋?zhuān)磳?duì)的觀點(diǎn)一共有三點(diǎn)，是它對(duì)美國(guó)能源問(wèn)題來(lái)說(shuō)只能是杯水車(chē)薪（do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems），這與B的說(shuō)法一致。第二是消費(fèi)者要等上十年時(shí)間才能獲得利益（consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits），這一說(shuō)法與D的說(shuō)法近似，但區(qū)別是D認(rèn)為永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)產(chǎn)生大的經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值，而這里只是認(rèn)為價(jià)值產(chǎn)生在時(shí)間上會(huì)晚一些，沒(méi)有否定會(huì)產(chǎn)生較大的價(jià)值，因此D不對(duì)。第三，它不能很大程度上緩解加利福尼亞電力危機(jī)，這也驗(yàn)證了B的說(shuō)法。此為，A和C的說(shuō)法在文中都沒(méi)有提到，可以排除。
24. C
題目問(wèn)環(huán)保主義者所說(shuō)的Not so fast是什么意思。
A，石油開(kāi)采需要很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間。
B，石油鉆探將會(huì)被拖延。
C，不要過(guò)于樂(lè)觀。
D，不要期待很快得到回報(bào)。
如何理解某個(gè)句子或詞組的含義的題在四級(jí)閱讀中出現(xiàn)幾率比較高，必須結(jié)合上下文環(huán)境才能做出正確解答。Not so fast出現(xiàn)在第三段的句，按位置來(lái)看，很可能起了承上啟下的作用。上文剛剛論述了支持石油開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)，而后文是對(duì)反對(duì)開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)的論述，那么Not so fast一定是對(duì)支持開(kāi)采的觀點(diǎn)的否定，而且是一個(gè)總領(lǐng)句，是對(duì)后面三個(gè)論據(jù)的總概括。否則，若Not so fast不是對(duì)第三段的總體概括，它就不應(yīng)該出現(xiàn)在段首，這是寫(xiě)作的基本規(guī)則之一。
看一下四個(gè)選項(xiàng)，A的說(shuō)法在第三段里沒(méi)有提到，B和D都提到了，但無(wú)論選擇哪一個(gè)都不是對(duì)第三段的總體概括，只有C能夠涵蓋第三段三個(gè)論據(jù)暗含的意義。
25. A
題目問(wèn)從這篇材料可以得知，在ANWR的凍土下進(jìn)行石油開(kāi)采如何如何。
A，依然是一個(gè)正處爭(zhēng)議中的問(wèn)題。
B，被認(rèn)為不久后就會(huì)得到結(jié)論。
C，涉及很多技術(shù)難題。
D，將會(huì)使美國(guó)獲得石油獨(dú)立。
這篇材料一共三段，每一段論述了一種觀點(diǎn)，段是政府的觀點(diǎn)，第二段是石油產(chǎn)業(yè)的觀點(diǎn)，第三段是環(huán)保主義者的觀點(diǎn)。作者沒(méi)有給出一個(gè)客觀的評(píng)述，認(rèn)為哪一種觀點(diǎn)獲得了更多的支持，或?qū)?lái)有可能得到實(shí)行。因此說(shuō)，開(kāi)不開(kāi)采實(shí)際上還是個(gè)懸而未決的問(wèn)題，這樣A的說(shuō)法是正確的，而B(niǎo)是錯(cuò)誤的。C所說(shuō)的技術(shù)難題應(yīng)該不存在，因?yàn)榈诙沃惺彤a(chǎn)業(yè)者的觀點(diǎn)是無(wú)比樂(lè)觀的，他們希望立即投入到石油開(kāi)采中，所以應(yīng)該不會(huì)存在太多的技術(shù)難題。即便實(shí)際情況不是如此，也可以以文章沒(méi)有提到技術(shù)難題方面的證據(jù)為由，排除C。而D的說(shuō)法在文中相關(guān)論述是石油開(kāi)采會(huì)減輕石油依賴，并不是從此獲得石油獨(dú)立。
熱門(mén)推薦：
歷年英語(yǔ)四級(jí)閱讀真題全解析(2002-2004)
2011年12月英語(yǔ)四級(jí)閱讀試題及答案匯總
相關(guān)推薦
課程免費(fèi)試聽(tīng)
| ?γ??????? | ??? | ???/???? | ??????? | ???? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ????????????????????????????????? | ????? | ??100 / ??100 |  |
???? |
| ???????????????????????? | ????? | ??100 / ??100 | |
???? |
| ???????????????????????? | ????? | ??100 / ??100 | |
???? |
| ??????????????????д???? | ????? | ??100 / ??100 | |
???? |
熱點(diǎn)專(zhuān)題
????0??????
????????????????