高中英语新高考阅读理解从语篇解读题眼焦点和命题选项三个角度去备考高考阅读.docx

1、高中英语新高考阅读理解从语篇解读题眼焦点和命题选项三个角度去备考高考阅读高中英语新高考-阅读理解：从语篇解读、题眼焦点和命题选项三个角度去备考高考阅读在冲刺阶段，我对阅读理解的总的看法是：不能为了做题而做题，要学会从不同角度思考：命题人为什么选这篇材料（摸索材料的行文特点）、命题人为什么这样挑选题眼（摸索阅读的焦点信息在什么地方）、命题人如何设置正确选项和干扰项（命题人的设题思维）这就是命题人的角度。当然，这种思考非常痛苦，因为要求你去摸索命题人的命题的暗箱操作过程。下面我以C篇阅读为例（原题见文末）：首先复习一下篇章段落之间的连贯的三种方式：第一种：首末句照应第二种：主题句关联第三种：主题句

2、串联掌握着三种关系有助于我们快速把握语篇结构和连贯方式，而命题的焦点信息都在连贯处。需要说明的是，任何一篇阅读，不只是单纯的三种结构的一种，往往是多种组合。解释：第一段：now这个词非常神奇，既可以表示对比，也可以类比，还可以表示转折，但突出的都是后面句子。因此本段提出了文章中心：concern: giants deal in data.最后一句举例说明这种现象的必然性。段落展开方法：对比法、举例法。第二段：开头一个词such是承接上段段末信息。这就是对应首末句的呼应模式了。可以肯定说，首句有代词的地方都是首末句呼应，通过辨析指代关系来设题是命题人常见的方式。但是，命题人不会直接问such指什

3、么。这里就是问为什么出现calls?你要回答，就必须了解such situations指什么，就必须追溯到上段。总结过程：calls - such situations -Now similar.unstoppable.第二段的中心还在于but后面的size alone is not a crime。接下来就是具体解释原因。本段展开方式属于：原因解释。这一段主要证明上段末句。我们虽然比较容易知道正确选项，但是还是有必要了解命题人如何设置干扰项。由于干扰项内容在第三段，所以接下来看。解释：第三段第一句就是转折，主要证明第一段的焦点信息。现在你看明白了吗？第一段说到了两个信息：人们的焦虑（conc

4、ern)，趋势的不可阻挡（unstoppable)，而二、三段分别针对它们进行解释。第三段也是对比法，段中的but非常明显，通过initially和recently进行对比，最后so进行总结。至于题眼基本都是围绕对比方的不同。还有干扰项特点，请直接看图中所说。还有一点要说明：出现专有名词的地方，都会存在设题，譬如本段最后的Gods eye view。因为它会涉及到词义理解，而词义理解必须结合上下文。通俗说：如果进行过去和现在对比，设题必然会问现在会如何，和过去有什么不同等，而干扰项会把现在和过去的特点进行对调。当然还有更高级的干扰，那就是考验你的逻辑思维，例如文章中说的是公司可以用数据进行交易

5、，干扰项说公司不再提供免费服务。脑筋转不过来的考生就会上当。解释：第四段一开头的this nature，又是一个指代关系，然后末句的two ideas提醒我们下文会分成两点来阐述了。既然我知道下文讲什么了，读起来自然更有信心。解释：第五段的三个路标词：for example, now, also。需要对它们进行辨认：for example是举例法展开，对主题句的move的解释。now是转折，对例子里的今昔做法进行对比，焦点是size。also一词说明的例子带来的另一个暗示。虽然题眼很多，但命题人最终选择了now处，对焦点size进行命题。第六段的展开方式是通过举例法来具体解释，对loosen

6、control进行说明。虽然没有用for example，但是companies和governments就是两个例子，其中could情态动词也是暗示。这里的选项设置很是烧脑，逻辑思维不够强大的考生将会非常吃力。譬如文章说对信息提供方放松管制，避免大公司垄断出现，然后推理出小公司会有更多机会。再说干扰项，文章说，公司要对用户提供更多的使用信息，干扰项说消费者隐私会得到更好保护。二者实际上没有逻辑链，但考生可能根据自己的常识上当了。为了更加直观研究本文结构，有必要这样标注。可以看出来命题焦点基本都是段落中心句。即使对例子进行设问，例子也是围绕中心句来的。因此，无论如何要把握中心句，你选择的答案也要

7、符合中心句的信息。最后总结，本文属于多种段落连贯的组合。附原文：1 A new commodity brings about a highly profitable, fast-growing industry, urging antitrust (反垄断) regulators to step in to check those who control its flow. A century ago, the resource in question was oil. Now similar concerns are being raised by the giants (巨头) that

8、deal in data, the oil of the digital age. The most valuable firms are Google, Amazon, Facebook and Microsoft. All look unstoppable.2 Such situations have led to calls for the tech giants to be broken up. But size alone is not a crime. The giants success has benefited consumers. Few want to live with

9、out search engines or a quick delivery. Far from charging consumers high prices, many of these services are free (users pay, in effect, by handing over yet more data). And the appearance of new-born giants suggests that newcomers can make waves, too.3 But there is cause for concern. The internet has

10、 made data abundant, all-present and far more valuable, changing the nature of data and competition. Google initially used the data collected from users to target advertising better. But recently it has discovered that data can be turned into new services: translation and visual recognition, to be s

11、old to other companies. Internet companies control of data gives them enormous power. So they have a “Gods eye view” of activities in their own markets and beyond.4 This nature of data makes the antitrust measures of the past less useful. Breaking up firms like Google into five small ones would not

12、stop remaking themselves: in time, one of them would become great again. A rethink is requiredand as a new approach starts to become apparent, two ideas stand out.5 The first is that antitrust authorities need to move from the industrial age into the 21st century. When considering a merger (兼并), for

13、 example, they have traditionally used size to determine when to step in. They now need to take into account the extent of firms data assets (资产) when assessing the impact of deals. The purchase price could also be a signal that an established company is buying a new-borm threat. When this takes pla

14、ce, especially when a new-born company has no revenue to speak of, the regulators should raise red flags.6 The second principle is to loosen the control that providers of on-line services have over data and give more to those who supply them.Companies could be forced to reveal to consumers what info

15、rmation they hold and how much money they make from it. Governments could order the sharing of certain kinds of data, with users consent.7 Restarting antitrust for the information age will not be easy. But if governments dont want a data economy controlled by a few giants, they must act soon.1. Why

16、is there a call to break up giants?A. They have controlled the data marketB. They collect enormous private dataC. They no longer provide free servicesD. They dismissed some new-born giants2. What does the technological innovation in Paragraph 3 indicate?A. Data giants technology is very expensiveB.

17、Googles idea is popular among data firmsC. Data can strengthen giants controlling positionD. Data can be turned into new services or products3. By paying attention to firms data assets, antitrust regulators could _.A. kill a new threatB. avoid the size trapC. favour bigger firmsD. charge higher prices4. What is the purpose of loosening the giants control of data?A. Big companies could relieve data security pressure.B. Governments could relieve their financial pressure.C. Consumers could better protect their privacy.D. Small companies could get more opportunities.