GRE閱讀題需要掌握這些閱讀關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)和應(yīng)對(duì)技巧
做好GRE閱讀題，你需要掌握這些閱讀關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)和應(yīng)對(duì)技巧!我們來(lái)看看吧，下面小編就和大家分享，來(lái)欣賞一下吧。
做好GRE閱讀題，你需要掌握這些閱讀關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)和應(yīng)對(duì)技巧!
GRE閱讀文章題材內(nèi)容變化眾多，想要快速掌握一篇文章，考生不僅需要高效的閱讀技巧，還需要在閱讀過(guò)程中快速把握好閱讀關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)。
1、整體理解
General Understanding
主要是解決兩個(gè)問(wèn)題：
A. 文章主旨觀點(diǎn)Main Idea or Point
B. 邏輯論述展開(kāi)Logical Development or Organization
2、細(xì)節(jié)理解
Specific Understanding
主要是解決兩個(gè)問(wèn)題：
A. 特定細(xì)節(jié)信息Specific Details
B. 邏輯細(xì)節(jié)信息Logical Details
3、內(nèi)容評(píng)估
Evaluating
主要是解決三個(gè)問(wèn)題：
A. 暗示推理Implication
B. 信息應(yīng)用Further application
C. 論調(diào)態(tài)度Tone / attitude
針對(duì)不同類型的GRE閱讀題，考生應(yīng)該掌握好針對(duì)性更強(qiáng)的應(yīng)對(duì)技巧。
作者態(tài)度題
注意文中表示可能、強(qiáng)調(diào)的詞語(yǔ)，以及形容詞、副詞，表明作者的態(tài)度。一般選擇作者態(tài)度時(shí)不能選過(guò)于絕對(duì)的詞，選擇中性的感情色彩不強(qiáng)烈的詞;注意區(qū)分對(duì)立觀點(diǎn)和主題的補(bǔ)充觀點(diǎn)，注意作者的主導(dǎo)態(tài)度。
舉例/比較目的題
注意表示原因，比較/對(duì)比，以及舉例的詞。注意舉例和對(duì)比的目的，一般舉例的目的在本段中找，對(duì)比的目的絕對(duì)不是為了比較或者對(duì)比;比較題要注意題目問(wèn)的對(duì)象，不要混淆執(zhí)行動(dòng)作的對(duì)象。
推斷題
“Infer”和“suggest”，以及“assumption”的題無(wú)法從原文找答案，答案隱含在細(xì)節(jié)中。特別要注意表示時(shí)間的詞，具有提示信息的作用，也可能表示一個(gè)變化過(guò)程。推斷題選項(xiàng)中如果出現(xiàn)超出原文范圍的比較，該選項(xiàng)錯(cuò)誤。推斷題有時(shí)要和上下文建立聯(lián)系，不要局限在信息所在段落尋找答案。
細(xì)節(jié)題
細(xì)節(jié)題的答案在提干提示的原文信息的詞附近找，并在第一次出現(xiàn)該信息的地方找，只要選原意替換選項(xiàng)即可;細(xì)節(jié)題最常見(jiàn)的是取非題，在題干中的標(biāo)志是出現(xiàn)虛擬語(yǔ)氣，在文章中定位時(shí)要找表對(duì)比的詞。
類比題
類比題要注意概念范圍的界定，注意其中的限制條件。
【GRE閱讀材料】品牌的價(jià)值 無(wú)法觸摸的無(wú)形資產(chǎn)
Sometimes you see brands on the balance-sheet,sometimes you don't
一些企業(yè)把品牌價(jià)值列入資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表，而另一些企業(yè)卻沒(méi)有這樣做
COCA-COLA is worth 79.2 billion, according to Inter brand, a consultant. That does not seemexcessive for the brand responsible for making Santa Claus look so jolly. But neither thatnumber nor anything close to it appears on the company's balance-sheet. “Trademarks withindefinite lives”are worth just 6.7 billion, say the company's accounts.
據(jù)Interbrand品牌咨詢公司估計(jì)， 僅“可口可樂(lè)”這個(gè)品牌就價(jià)值792億美元。可口可樂(lè)為每年的圣誕節(jié)增添了無(wú)窮的樂(lè)趣，這樣看來(lái)Interbrand的估價(jià)并不過(guò)分。然而，可口可樂(lè)公司的資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表中并沒(méi)有出現(xiàn)如此巨額的品牌估價(jià)，公司會(huì)計(jì)表示，該公司的商標(biāo)價(jià)值僅為67億。
這篇閱讀材料還有MP3音頻哦!下載>>傳送門(mén)
The reason is that both American and international accounting rules prohibit companies fromrecognising brands and many other “intangible” assets (such as customer lists) if they havecreated them themselves. Some would like to change that. Roger Sinclair, who advises the MASB, an American body that sets marketing standards, points out that rules are inconsistent. The value of a brand—invisible when internally generated—is revealed whenanother company buys it.
原因是美國(guó)和國(guó)際會(huì)計(jì)法規(guī)都不承認(rèn)企業(yè)自創(chuàng)的品牌以及其他無(wú)形資產(chǎn)的價(jià)值。一些準(zhǔn)備上市的企業(yè)希望改變這種狀況。Roger Sinclair指出，MASB(上市會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則理事會(huì)，美國(guó)的一個(gè)制定上市標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的機(jī)構(gòu))的這項(xiàng)規(guī)定是自相矛盾的：品牌的價(jià)值雖然在它產(chǎn)生的時(shí)候是隱性的，但是當(dāng)它出售時(shí)就會(huì)變成可衡量的顯性價(jià)值。
That is because a different rule applies to acquisitions. In 2005 Procter & Gamble, aconsumer-goods company, paid 57 billion for the Gillette razor company. The brand alone,P&G reckoned, was worth 24 billion. Oddly, Gillette's value can now only go down.P&G must test it for “impairment” but cannot acknowledge any increase, thoughInterbrand says Gillette's value rose 1% last year.
企業(yè)并購(gòu)中有一項(xiàng)特殊的規(guī)定，即允許企業(yè)對(duì)品牌進(jìn)行估價(jià)出售。在2005年保潔的并購(gòu)案中，保潔花了570億美元收購(gòu)了吉列剃須刀，其中僅僅是吉列這個(gè)品牌的價(jià)值就有240億。然而，現(xiàn)在吉列的價(jià)值只會(huì)不斷下降。因?yàn)椤睋p耗”，保潔必須對(duì)吉列進(jìn)行核算，但是它的估價(jià)絕不會(huì)有任何增長(zhǎng)，即使Inter brand表明吉列的價(jià)值在去年增長(zhǎng)了1%。
Investors have a right to know how much brands are worth because so much of a firm's futuredepends on them, Mr Sinclair argues. The conflicting standards treat brands rather as if they were electrons that can be in two places at once.
Sinclair認(rèn)為，投資者有權(quán)知道企業(yè)品牌的價(jià)值，因?yàn)檫@密切關(guān)乎著一個(gè)企業(yè)的未來(lái)。這種對(duì)品牌價(jià)值的矛盾的規(guī)定似乎認(rèn)為，品牌價(jià)值就像光電一樣可以瞬間穿梭于兩個(gè)地方。
Accountants seem content to live with such quantum weirdness. Brand values can “swing wildly”, says Alan Teixeira of the International Accounting Standards Board. Standard-setters worry that auditors would be quick to recognise rises but slow to acknowledge declines.Brands are unique, so it is hard to figure out what their market value is. “How do youseparate a brand from customers that generate the sales or the know-how that enables the product to be made?” wonders Hilary Eastman of PwC, an accounting firm.
會(huì)計(jì)師似乎很喜歡這種量化品牌價(jià)值的方式。國(guó)際會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)理事會(huì)認(rèn)為:品牌價(jià)值可能會(huì)有嚴(yán)重偏差。規(guī)則制定者擔(dān)心審計(jì)們很容易察覺(jué)到品牌價(jià)值的提升，卻很難發(fā)現(xiàn)它的下滑。品牌都是獨(dú)一無(wú)二的，所以很難用數(shù)據(jù)衡量它們的市值。普華永道的Hilary Eastman疑問(wèn)道:“怎樣將品牌和創(chuàng)造銷量的顧客、生產(chǎn)產(chǎn)品的技術(shù)分開(kāi)呢?”
Australia used to account for internally generated brands but gave it up in 2005 to align itselfwith international standards. It “put much more focus on brands” and gave markets extra information, says Angus Thomson of the Australian Accounting Standards Board. He would liketo see the practice restored but is not hopeful. If it's intangible, bean-counters won't touch it.
澳大利亞曾經(jīng)嘗試將自創(chuàng)品牌的價(jià)值計(jì)入會(huì)計(jì)賬目，但是為了與國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)接軌，于2005年取消了這種無(wú)形資產(chǎn)計(jì)價(jià)方式。澳大利亞會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)理事會(huì)的Angus Thomson認(rèn)為：“量化自創(chuàng)品牌價(jià)值使得大家對(duì)品牌更加關(guān)注，并且披露了更多的市場(chǎng)信息?！彼Ｍ@種做法可以重新實(shí)行，但他也認(rèn)為這種可能性不大。如果資產(chǎn)是無(wú)形的，那些錙銖必較的會(huì)計(jì)師們將不會(huì)參與這類資產(chǎn)的核算。
【高分GRE閱讀材料】即將被遺忘的公共汽車該何去何從
FEW Britons feel passionate about buses. Unlike therailways, they spur few protests or angry letters in local newspapers. On August 26th IPPR, a left-leaning think-tank influential in Labour circles, attempted to change this. Buses “seem tobe the forgotten aspect of public transport”, the authors of a new report sighed. But their proposed prescription is almost as doddery as an old Route master.
少有不列顛人對(duì)公共汽車表示憤怒的。不像鐵路，他們很少在當(dāng)?shù)貓?bào)紙上對(duì)公共汽車提出抗議或者向報(bào)社投寄發(fā)泄怒氣的信件。在8月26日，公共政策研究所—一個(gè)在工黨圈內(nèi)有影響力的左傾智庫(kù)——試圖改變這種狀況。在一則新報(bào)道中，有作者嘆道公共汽車“看來(lái)已經(jīng)成了公共交通系統(tǒng)中被遺忘的一環(huán)”。不過(guò)他們提出的建議基本上跟老司路者一樣老掉牙了。
In London, bus use is soaring. Some 7m journeys are made there each day, on a bus networkthat is highly regulated by Transport for London (TfL), a body that oversees public transport in the city, as well as many roads. But outside the capital the deregulated bus network can be patchy, with multiple ticketing systems and buses prone to get stuck in traffic, and use is falling.
這篇閱讀材料還有MP3音頻哦!下載>>傳送門(mén)
在倫敦，對(duì)公共汽車的使用飆升。每天約有7百萬(wàn)人次到此觀光，故而公共汽車系統(tǒng)為倫敦運(yùn)輸局(TfL)高效管理，這個(gè)組織管轄倫敦城內(nèi)公共運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)以及相當(dāng)多的道路。不過(guò)在首都之外的公交網(wǎng)絡(luò)，由于缺乏管理變得差強(qiáng)人意，相應(yīng)的大量的售票系統(tǒng)和公共汽車在交通中發(fā)生擁堵，因而對(duì)公共汽車的使用量下降。
The sharp contrast between London and the rest suggests to IPPR that large transport bodies similar to TfL ought to be set up, particularly in big metropolises. This would allow bothbetter co-ordination and more effective lobbying of the Treasury. Since TfL was created in2000 London’s bus network has been pumped with cash. Although it has fallen back slightly,net public support to London’s buses, at 809m in 2012-13, is still far higher than the amountdoled out to other big cities.
倫敦及其他地區(qū)的強(qiáng)烈對(duì)比使得IPPR認(rèn)為類似于 TfL 的大型交通組織應(yīng)當(dāng)建立起來(lái)，特別是在大都市。這有利于更好地協(xié)調(diào)合作以及更為有效地游說(shuō)財(cái)政部以獲得資金支持。自從2000年以來(lái)TfL 建立，倫敦的公交網(wǎng)絡(luò)來(lái)錢(qián)如井噴，雖然現(xiàn)在有些許回落，但公共交通網(wǎng)絡(luò)在2012~2013年間給倫敦公交共資助了八千九百萬(wàn)英鎊，遠(yuǎn)高于給予其他大城市的資金撥款。
The bigger-body plan, though, is likely to remain a theory. Even in Manchester, the most go-ahead big city outside London, a combined authority representing local governments is only just getting limited powers over transport. London is exceedingly unusual and hard to copy.It has a high-profile elected mayor, a large congestion-charging zone and a young, fast-growingpopulation that shuns cars. Bus use is rising even though they are no longer particularlycheap. Fares are now, by one measure, some of the highest in Britain. Since 2005 they haveincreased by 23%, only slightly less than in other metropolitan areas.
不過(guò)這種擴(kuò)大組織的計(jì)劃，很可能會(huì)停留在紙面上。即便像曼徹斯特這種除倫敦之外走在前列的城市，當(dāng)?shù)芈?lián)合執(zhí)政的政府對(duì)于交通運(yùn)輸業(yè)的管轄權(quán)力依然有限。倫敦過(guò)于特殊，難以復(fù)制。它有高調(diào)選舉產(chǎn)生的市長(zhǎng)，一大片擁堵收費(fèi)的區(qū)域以及一群迅速成長(zhǎng)起來(lái)的年輕、買(mǎi)不起車的人。盡管公共交通出行已經(jīng)不是特別便宜了，但是對(duì)公共交通系統(tǒng)使用數(shù)量仍在上升。據(jù)一項(xiàng)調(diào)查表明，如今的公共汽車出行費(fèi)用，有些在不列顛都是最高的。公交費(fèi)用自2005年以來(lái)已經(jīng)增長(zhǎng)了23%，僅次于其他大城市地區(qū)。
Buses are doing well in a few other spots, too. As the report notes, they are popular in Oxford and Brighton, congested cities with high parking fees. In East Kent 29m passenger trips weremade on buses run by Stagecoach, Britain’s biggest bus operator, in 2011, up from 14m in2003. Punctuality is improving in many areas. Routes have been cut back outside London—butmany of them were publicly subsidised ones squeezed by austerity.
如報(bào)道中提到的，在牛津和布萊頓這些停車費(fèi)用很高的擁擠的城市里，公共交通也十分流行。在東肯特，出行使用“驛站馬車”公司公交車的人次由2003年的140萬(wàn)上升至2011年的290萬(wàn)。該公司乃是不列顛最大的公交運(yùn)營(yíng)商。在諸多區(qū)域不準(zhǔn)時(shí)的狀況正在改善。倫敦之外的線路已經(jīng)砍掉不少—不過(guò)很多是由于財(cái)政緊縮政策而被排除出局的。
Rather than try and replicate TfL, local authorities might be encouraged to impose stricterparking regulations and work harder with bus companies to improve service. Concessionary fares, overseen by individual councils, could be simplified and targeted at the poor far more efficiently. But in some areas it would be wise to accept that bus use will just continue todecline, says David Leeder, a bus expert. In regions such as north-east England, where unemployment is the highest in the country, car ownership has traditionally been low. But itis starting to catch up as the economy recovers. That is more bad news for buses.
與其嘗試復(fù)制TfL模式，不如鼓勵(lì)地方當(dāng)局制定更為嚴(yán)格的停車條例并與公交公司共同致力改善服務(wù)。由個(gè)別理事會(huì)監(jiān)督下的優(yōu)惠收費(fèi)項(xiàng)目可以簡(jiǎn)化，并有效地向窮困人員傾斜。公交研究專家戴維德·李德說(shuō)，不過(guò)在一些區(qū)域，接受公交車使用量減少也許是明智的。在諸如英格蘭東北部的一些區(qū)域，那里是整個(gè)國(guó)家失業(yè)率最高的地方，私車擁有量從來(lái)很低。而當(dāng)經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇的時(shí)候，私車擁有量也開(kāi)始上揚(yáng)。這對(duì)于公交車事業(yè)來(lái)說(shuō)無(wú)異于雪上加霜。
GRE閱讀題需要掌握這些閱讀關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)和應(yīng)對(duì)技巧相關(guān)文章：
