高考英語復(fù)習(xí)閱讀理解題特征分析之偷梁換柱講義

閱讀理解題特征分析之偷梁換柱閱讀理解題在干擾項(xiàng)設(shè)置上使用了“偷梁換柱”“答非所問”“錯(cuò)誤聯(lián)想”等手段，比較明顯地使用了“偷梁換柱”這一方法。該干擾方式的特點(diǎn)是，整個(gè)選項(xiàng)和原文在表述上粗看差異不大，但在某個(gè)細(xì)節(jié)上卻有不同，也正是因?yàn)檫@點(diǎn)差異導(dǎo)致了原文和選項(xiàng)意思的不同。利用該方法編寫的選項(xiàng)干擾效果不錯(cuò)，其中的22題和30題讓很多學(xué)生掉坑里了?，F(xiàn)將其記錄并分享如下。偷梁換柱22.

WhatisguaranteedforvolunteersinCostaRica?

A.

Training

beforedeparture.

（偷梁換柱）

B.Certificateofparticipation.

（同義轉(zhuǎn)述）

C.

Singleroom

acmodation.（偷梁換柱）

D.Handpickedtravel

panions.

（偷梁換柱）原文：PreDepartureGuide

—

Ourindepthpredeparture

guide

willhavealltheinformationyouneedaboutyourtrip&destination,

atyourfingertips.

DedicatedTrip

Coordinator

—

Handpickedfromanexperiencedteamwho'vebeenthere,donethatandreadytoguideyouthroughyourentirejourney.

AcmodationMeals

—

Relaxinyour

shareddormacmodation

onsite,withfreeWiFiandamunityatmosphere,andenjoynutritiousCostaRicancuisine.

Certificateof

pletion

—

Inrecognitionofyourhardworkanddedicationthroughouttheexperience,anditgoesverywellwithyourfuturerésumé.分析：A選項(xiàng)將原文的guide換成了training，二者意思好像差不多。guide有“導(dǎo)游，向?qū)А钡囊馑?，容易和“?xùn)練”混淆。實(shí)際上，原文還有一個(gè)短語“atyourfingertips”，表明此處的guide應(yīng)該翻譯成“指南，手冊”，可以拿在書上隨時(shí)翻閱查詢。因此，不能將guide錯(cuò)誤理想成training。C選項(xiàng)將原文中的“shareddormacmodation”替換成了“singleroomacmodation”。更多的學(xué)生會(huì)錯(cuò)選D選項(xiàng)，沒有理解panions和coordinator的區(qū)別，前者指旅行團(tuán)的團(tuán)員們，后者指旅行社的協(xié)調(diào)人員，類似導(dǎo)游。學(xué)生不了解二者差異（況且panions是復(fù)數(shù)，非coordinator的單數(shù)），看選項(xiàng)的詞匯在原文中有復(fù)現(xiàn)，意思也差不多就誤選了。當(dāng)然B選項(xiàng)的participation和pletion是否相等呢？一般是完成了全程活動(dòng)，才會(huì)頒發(fā)證書，表示參與了某某活動(dòng)，不過很多學(xué)生搞不清楚，就很糾結(jié)。那么，只能靠排除另外三個(gè)干擾項(xiàng)再選了。30.

Whatiscrucialfordevelopingstudents'intelligentthoughtaccordingtothe2019tudy?

A.Intenselabwork.

（錯(cuò)誤聯(lián)想）

B.Peerpressureandevaluation.

（錯(cuò)誤聯(lián)想）

C.Academicinteractionwithfellows.

（同義轉(zhuǎn)述）

D.Engagementwith

external

society.

（偷梁換柱）原文：Amajorfactorinthegraduatestudents'

transformation,Wiemanconcluded,wastheirexperienceofintense

socialengagement

aroundabodyofknowledge

—

thehourstheyspentadvising,debatingwith,andrecountinganecdotestooneanother.

In2019,astudypublishedintheProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciencesbackedthisidea.Trackingtheintellectualadvancementofseveralhundredgraduatestudentsinthesciencesoverthecourseoffouryears,itsauthorsfoundthat

thedevelopmentofcrucialskills

suchas

generatinghypotheses(假設(shè)),

designingexperiments,andanalyzingdata

wascloselyrelatedtothestudents'

engagementwiththeir

peers

inthelab,

ratherthantheguidancetheyreceivedfromtheirfacultymentors(導(dǎo)師).分析：研究生們通過和同伴們在實(shí)驗(yàn)室提出假設(shè)、設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)驗(yàn)、分析數(shù)據(jù)，培養(yǎng)了重要的技能。所以，文章中的socialengagement指的是和學(xué)術(shù)上的小伙伴們進(jìn)行交往（Academicinteractionwithfellows），而不是和外部社會(huì)人員的交往。D選項(xiàng)錯(cuò)在external上，如果改成internal就可以了。這是典型的偷梁換柱，不過很多學(xué)生看到socialengagement就高高興興地錯(cuò)選了。PS:

另外，作者還使用了錯(cuò)誤聯(lián)想、答非所問等方法，效果也還不錯(cuò)，順便摘錄如下：答非所問29.

WhichofthefollowingbestdescribesthegraduatestudentswhofirstjoinedWieman'slab?

A.Limitedinthinking.

（同義轉(zhuǎn)述）

B.Resistanttonewideas.

C.Flexibleandearnest.

（答非所問）

D.Experiencedandcooperative.

原文：WhenhisPH.D.candidatesenteredthelab,Wiemannoticed,theirhabitsofthoughtwere

nolessnarrowandrigidthan

theundergraduates.Withinayearortwo,however,thesesamegraduatestudentstransformedintothe

flexible

thinkershewastryingso

earnestly,andunsuccessfully,tocultivate.分析：學(xué)生沒有認(rèn)真讀原文，看到復(fù)現(xiàn)的原詞就誤選了。“當(dāng)博士研究生進(jìn)入實(shí)驗(yàn)室時(shí),威爾曼注意到,他們的思維方式與本科生差不多地狹隘和死板。然而僅僅一兩年內(nèi),這些同樣的研究生就變成了他所竭盡全力但未能培養(yǎng)出的那樣具有靈活性的思考者?！睂?shí)際上，flexible是讀研之后的狀況，earnest是形容導(dǎo)師的狀況，而題干問的是研究生最初的狀況（narrowandrigid），C是典型的答非所問。錯(cuò)誤聯(lián)想24.

HowdidMichaelmakethelargedonation?

A.

Heinputanincorrectamount.

（同義轉(zhuǎn)述）

B.Heencounteredasystemerror.

C.HewasgreatlyinspiredbyDunan.

D.

Heentered

wrong

creditcard

details.

（錯(cuò)誤聯(lián)想）原文：Michael'screditcardnumberstartedwithfourandone.Clearly,heaccidentallybegan

typinghis

creditcardinformation

whilehiscursor(光標(biāo))

wasstillinthedonationbox.

分析：作者把信用卡開頭兩個(gè)數(shù)字錯(cuò)誤地輸入到捐助金額了，因此是輸入了錯(cuò)誤的金額（inputanincorrectamount），而不是輸入了錯(cuò)誤的信用卡信息（entered

wrong

creditcarddetails）。如果信用卡信息出錯(cuò)，也不可能完成轉(zhuǎn)賬交易。簡而言之，學(xué)生沒有讀懂文章和選項(xiàng)。34.

WhatisParagraph2mainlyabout?

A.Therecyclingprocessofplastics.

B.Pollutantscontainedinrecycledplastics.

C.

Reasons

whyusersdislikerecycledplastics.

D.Contributingfactorstolowplasticrecyclingrates.原文：Whilemanyplasticshavethepotentialtoberecycled,mostarenot

becausetheprocess

iscostly,

plicatedandtheresultingproductofalowerquality

thantheoriginal.Despite

risingdemandforrecycledplastic,fewwastepaniesturnaprofit.Partofthisis

becausevirginplasticlinkedtooilprices

—

isoftencheaperthanrecycledplastic,meaning

thereislittleeconomic

incentive

touseit.

Worseyet,muchofourplasticwasteisdifficult

torecycle.Lightweightfoodpackaging,likeamozzarellapacket,containsdifferentplastics,dyesandtoxicadditives(添加劑).Thisdirtymixmeansplasticrecycledthroughmechanicalmethods

—

themostmonform

—

canonlybemelteddownandmouldedagainacoupleoftimesbeforeitbeestoofragiletobereused.Andthenatureofth