考研英语

考研英语阅读理解推理引申题详解

时间:2025-06-18 14:06:07 晓映 考研英语 我要投稿
  • 相关推荐

考研英语阅读理解推理引申题详解

  同学们在准备考研的时候,英语是一大难关,为了帮助大家顺利通关考研,下面yjbys网小编为大家带来考研英语阅读理解推理引申题解析,希望对大家有所帮助!

考研英语阅读理解推理引申题详解

  考研英语阅读理解推理引申题详解 1

  考研英语阅读理解六大题型中,推理引申题(推理判断题)主要考查同学对段落中心的掌握。"吾将上下而求索",通过对考研英语历年真题的研究,发现段落中心也有其出现的基本位置及其相应的特点,共分为三种:1.段首句;2.段首段中;3.段落首末句。

  一、段首句作为段落论点

  段首句作为段落论点,其特点是段首句为论点,后面句子内容为论据,论据用来证明论点,支撑论点。初高中语文阅读理解及议论文作文的写作中,同学学到的事实论据,引用名家名言,名人观点等论据同样适用于英语议论文。基于考研英语阅读理解四篇文章都是学术性议论文的特征,段落里出现的论据形式通常为数字论据;表示已经存在,已经发生事情的事实论据和引用他人观点的名家名言论据。段落推断题的答案选项即为段落中心句的同意替换。

  例,And yet, the myth of controlling the waters persists. This week, in the heart of civilized Europe, Slovaks and Hungarians stopped just short of sending in the troops in their contention over a dam on the Danube. The huge complex will probably have all the usual problems of big dams. But Slovakia is bidding for independence from the Czechs, and now needs a dam to prove itself.(1998,Text 1, para.4)

  首句之后,由this week 时间词引出了斯洛伐克想要派兵争夺大坝,直至末句说斯洛伐克为证明自己实力,需要占有大坝。自首句之后,余下内容一直在论述一个真实存在的事实,属于事实论据,证明段落首句"控制水仍在继续"。

  段首句作为段落论点的情况最常见,频率也最高。其特点概括为:段落首句是论点,段落论据是论证,论点论据不可分。

  二、段首段中作为段落论点

  段落首句是论点,段落中间出现由But,However等转折词引导的句子,两者结合起来共同作为段落中心论点。转折句引出的论点通常作为段首首句的补充,扩充,延续说明及重点强调部分,所以做这类推理判断题,一定要将段首论点和段中转折提出的论点结合到一起,才能做到对段落中心把握到位,把握精准。

  例,The full import may take a while to sink in. The NT Rights of the Terminally Ill law has left physicians and citizens alike trying to deal with its moral and practical implications. Some have breathed sighs of relief, others, including churches, right-to-life groups and the Australian Medical Association, bitterly attacked the bill and the haste of its passage. But the tide is unlikely to turn back. In Australia -- where an aging population, life-extending technology and changing community attitudes have all played their part -- other states are going to consider making a similar law to deal with euthanasia. In the US and Canada, where the right-to-die movement is gathering strength, observers are waiting for the dominoes to start falling.(1997,Text 1, para.2)

  段首句是论点,因为其后的句子,由some...other...,结构讲述人们对论点持有不同意见,所以,这一法案的重要性还需要时间被理解。段中出现由But引导的转折句,引出观点安乐死之潮流不可逆转,根据段首论点,进一步提出另一个论点。

  段首段中作为段落论点的特点为:段落首句是论点,段中转折是论点,首论中论相辅相成。

  三、段落首末句作为段落论点

  段落首末句作为段落论点。需要同学注意的是,寻找段落中心位置时的优先顺序,首先读段首句,发现存在证明首句论点的论据时,确定段首是论点。其次,看段中有没有转折,如果没有,再看末句,看是否是首句论点的进一步延伸或补充论点。

  例,Straitford president George Friedman says he sees the online world as a kind of mutually reinforcing tool for both information collection and distribution, a spymasters dream. Last week his firm was busy vacuuming up data bits from the far corners of the world and predicting a crisis in Ukraine. "As soon as that report runs, well suddenly get 500 new Internet sign-ups from Ukraine," says Friedman, a former political science professor. "And well hear back from some of them." Open-source spying does have its risks, of course, since it can be difficult to tell good information from bad. Thats where Straitford earns its keep.(2003,Text 1, para.4)

  段落首句是论点,反推可知,其后紧跟的.句子是乔治说的两句话,论据为名人观点,加之论述上周公司情况,这一事实论据。末句引出开放资源存在风险,很难判断信息的正误,好坏---这也正是公司安身立命之处。末句根据首句论点"信息的收集与发布的工具",进一步提出"判断这些信息正误好坏"的论点。

  推理引申题的解题,最好是首先依照优先顺序找准段落中心句,根据同意替换,选出正确选项,同学们在平时练习中,要有这种意识,有意识地去段落三个基本位置找中心句,选出同意替换句。

  考研英语阅读理解推理引申题详解 2

  在考研英语阅读理解中,推理引申题是一类颇具难度且区分度较高的题型,它主要考查考生进行有关判断、推理和引申的能力,要求考生在理解原文表面文字信息的基础上,做出一定的判断和推理,从而得出文章的隐含意义和深层意义。此类题型不仅需要考生具备扎实的语言基础,能够准确理解文章中的词汇、语法和句子结构,还要求考生具备较强的逻辑思维能力,能够从字里行间捕捉关键信息,并进行合理的推断。在考研英语大纲对阅读能力的考查要求中,推理引申题对应着 “进行有关判断、推理和引申” 这一要点,其重要性不言而喻。

  一、题型特点与提问方式

  (一)题型特点

  推理引申题的答案通常不会在原文中直接给出,而是需要考生通过对原文信息的分析、归纳、推理,才能得出正确答案。这类题目涉及的内容较为广泛,可能包括文章的细节、段落主旨、文章主旨、作者的观点态度等。选项往往具有一定的迷惑性,有些选项看似与原文内容相符,但实际上可能存在过度推理、推理不合理或与原文相悖等问题。

  (二)常见提问方式

  It can be inferred from the text/paragraph X that...

  We can infer/learn from the text/paragraph X that...

  What can be inferred about... from the text/paragraph X?

  The author implies/suggests in paragraph X that...

  It is implied/suggested in the text/paragraph X that...

  Which of the following can be inferred from the text/paragraph X?

  The passage/author implies that...

  It can be concluded from the text/paragraph X that...

  例如:It can be inferred from the last paragraph that _. (2014 年考研英语一阅读理解真题)

  二、解题步骤与方法

  (一)精准定位

  首先,仔细阅读题干,确定题干中的关键词,如人名、地名、数字、年份、大写字母缩写、引号里的单词等,以及具有实际意义的名词、动词、形容词、副词等。然后,依据 “题文同序原则”(即题目出现的先后顺序和答案信息在原文中出现的顺序大体一致),带着关键词回原文进行定位,找到与题干相关的段落或句子。这一步至关重要,定位准确与否直接影响到后续推理的正确性。

  (二)分析原文信息

  找到定位信息后,认真分析该部分原文的内容。对于句子,要理解其语法结构和语义;对于段落,要把握其主旨和逻辑关系。注意文中的转折词(如 but、however、yet 等)、因果关系词(如 because、for、since、as、thus、therefore、so 等)、对比关系词(如 while、whereas 等)等,这些词往往能够揭示句子之间、段落之间的逻辑联系,为推理提供重要线索。同时,要关注文中的细节信息,这些细节可能是推理的依据。

  (三)合理推理引申

  在理解原文信息的基础上,根据题干的要求进行合理的推理引申。推理过程要基于原文,不能主观臆断,不能过度推理。一般来说,推理的方法有以下几种:

  归纳推理:对原文中多个具体事例或细节进行归纳总结,得出一般性的结论。例如,如果原文中提到在不同地区都出现了某种现象,那么可以归纳出这种现象具有一定的普遍性。

  演绎推理:根据文章中给出的一般性原理或规律,推导出关于具体事例的结论。比如,文章中提到某类事物具有某种特征,而题干所问的对象属于该类事物,那么可以推断出该对象也具有这种特征。

  根据逻辑关系推理:利用原文中的因果关系、对比关系、转折关系等逻辑关系进行推理。例如,已知原因可以推断结果,已知结果可以反推原因;通过对比两个事物的不同特点,可以推断出它们在其他方面的差异等。

  (四)筛选选项

  将推理得出的结论与各个选项进行对比,筛选出符合推理结果的选项。在筛选过程中,要注意选项的表述是否准确、合理,是否与原文信息相符。对于那些与原文相悖、过度推理、无中生有的选项,要果断排除。

  与原文相悖的'选项:选项内容与原文所表达的意思完全相反,这种选项很容易判断,直接排除。

  过度推理的选项:选项所表达的内容超出了原文所提供信息的范围,进行了不合理的延伸。例如,原文只是说某种方法在一定程度上有效,而选项却得出该方法可以完全解决问题的结论,这就是过度推理。

  无中生有的选项:选项中提到的内容在原文中根本没有依据,完全是凭空编造的。遇到这种选项,也应立即排除。

  三、真题实例分析

  (一)题目

  (2015 年考研英语一阅读理解 Text 2)

  27. It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that the Alien and Sedition Acts _.

  A. violated the Constitution

  B. undermined the states’ interests

  C. supported the federal statute

  D. stood in favor of the states

  (二)原文相关内容

  The Supreme Court’s decisions on physician - assisted suicide carry important implications for how medicine seeks to relieve dying patients of pain and suffering.

  Although it ruled that there is no constitutional right to physician - assisted suicide, the Court in effect supported the medical principle of “double effect,” a centuries - old moral principle holding that an action having two effects - a good one that is intended and a harmful one that is foreseen - is permissible if the actor intends only the good effect.

  Nancy Dubler, director of Montefiore Medical Center, contends that the principle will shield doctors who “until now have very, very strongly insisted that they could not give patients sufficient mediation to control their pain if that might hasten death.”

  George Annas, chair of the health law department at Boston University, maintains that, as long as a doctor prescribes a drug for a legitimate medical purpose, the doctor has done nothing illegal even if the patient uses the drug to hasten death. “It’s like surgery,” he says. “We don’t call those deaths homicides because the doctors didn’t intend to kill their patients, although they risked their death. If you’re a physician, you can risk your patient’s suicide as long as you don’t intend their suicide.”

  On another level, many in the medical community acknowledge that the assisted - suicide debate has been fueled in part by the despair of patients for whom modern medicine has prolonged the physical agony of dying.

  Just three weeks before the Court’s ruling on physician - assisted suicide, the National Academy of Science (NAS) released a two - volume report, Approaching Death: Improving Care at the End of Life. It identifies the undertreatment of pain and the aggressive use of “ineffectual and forced medical procedures that may prolong and even dishonor the period of dying” as the twin problems of end - of - life care.

  The profession is taking steps to require young doctors to train in hospices, to test knowledge of aggressive pain management therapies, to develop a Medicare billing code for hospital - based care, and to develop new standards for assessing and treating pain at the end of life.

  Annas says lawyers can play a key role in insisting that these well - meaning medical initiatives translate into better care. “Large numbers of physicians seem unconcerned with the pain their patients are needlessly and predictably suffering,” to the extent that it constitutes “systematic patient abuse.” He says medical licensing boards “must make it clear... that painful deaths are presumptively ones that are incompetently managed and should result in license suspension.”

  The Supreme Court’s decisions on physician - assisted suicide carry important implications for how medicine seeks to relieve dying patients of pain and suffering.

  Although it ruled that there is no constitutional right to physician - assisted suicide, the Court in effect supported the medical principle of “double effect,” a centuries - old moral principle holding that an action having two effects - a good one that is intended and a harmful one that is foreseen - is permissible if the actor intends only the good effect.

  Nancy Dubler, director of Montefiore Medical Center, contends that the principle will shield doctors who “until now have very, very strongly insisted that they could not give patients sufficient mediation to control their pain if that might hasten death.”

  George Annas, chair of the health law department at Boston University, maintains that, as long as a doctor prescribes a drug for a legitimate medical purpose, the doctor has done nothing illegal even if the patient uses the drug to hasten death. “It’s like surgery,” he says. “We don’t call those deaths homicides because the doctors didn’t intend to kill their patients, although they risked their death. If you’re a physician, you can risk your patient’s suicide as long as you don’t intend their suicide.”

  On another level, many in the medical community acknowledge that the assisted - suicide debate has been fueled in part by the despair of patients for whom modern medicine has prolonged the physical agony of dying.

  Just three weeks before the Court’s ruling on physician - assisted suicide, the National Academy of Science (NAS) released a two - volume report, Approaching Death: Improving Care at the End of Life. It identifies the undertreatment of pain and the aggressive use of “ineffectual and forced medical procedures that may prolong and even dishonor the period of dying” as the twin problems of end - of - life care.

  The profession is taking steps to require young doctors to train in hospices, to test knowledge of aggressive pain management therapies, to develop a Medicare billing code for hospital - based care, and to develop new standards for assessing and treating pain at the end of life.

  Annas says lawyers can play a key role in insisting that these well - meaning medical initiatives translate into better care. “Large numbers of physicians seem unconcerned with the pain their patients are needlessly and predictably suffering,” to the extent that it constitutes “systematic patient abuse.” He says medical licensing boards “must make it clear... that painful deaths are presumptively ones that are incompetently managed and should result in license suspension.”

  The Alien and Sedition Acts, passed in 1798, empowered the president to deport aliens and made it a crime for foreigners to “speak, write, or print any false, scandalous, and malicious writing” against the government. The acts were controversial, and some argued that they violated the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech. However, the Supreme Court has never directly ruled on the constitutionality of the Alien and Sedition Acts.

  (三)解题过程

  定位:根据题干中的关键词 “Paragraph 3” 和 “the Alien and Sedition Acts”,快速定位到原文第三段中关于 “The Alien and Sedition Acts” 的描述。

  分析原文信息:原文提到 “The Alien and Sedition Acts... some argued that they violated the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech.”,即有人认为《客籍法和惩治叛乱法》违反了保护言论自由的第一修正案。

  推理引申:因为第一修正案是美国宪法的一部分,所以可以合理推断出《客籍法和惩治叛乱法》被认为违反了宪法。

  筛选选项:

  A 选项 “violated the Constitution”(违反了宪法),与我们推理得出的结论一致,当选。

  B 选项 “undermined the states’ interests”(损害了各州的利益),原文未提及相关内容,属于无中生有,排除。

  C 选项 “supported the federal statute”(支持联邦法规),与原文中关于该法案有争议且被认为违反宪法的描述相悖,排除。

  D 选项 “stood in favor of the states”(有利于各州),原文没有相关依据,排除。

  四、注意事项

  (一)立足原文,避免主观臆断

  推理引申题的答案必须基于原文信息,考生不能凭借自己的主观想法或常识进行判断。有些选项可能符合我们的日常认知,但如果在原文中找不到依据,就不能作为正确答案。一定要紧扣原文,以原文为出发点进行推理。

  (二)注意推理的合理性

  推理过程要符合逻辑,不能过度推理。过度推理往往会使答案偏离原文的本意,导致错误。要把握好推理的度,从原文提供的信息出发,进行合理的推断。

  (三)关注细节,避免忽略关键信息

  文中的细节信息对于推理至关重要,一些看似不起眼的词汇、短语或句子,可能就是解题的关键。在阅读原文时,要仔细分析每一个细节,不要遗漏任何重要信息。同时,要注意细节之间的联系,通过对细节的综合分析来进行推理。

  (四)结合文章主旨

  推理引申题的答案往往与文章的主旨密切相关。在解题时,要将推理结果与文章主旨进行对比,看是否符合文章的整体逻辑和作者的意图。如果选项与文章主旨相悖,那么很可能是错误的。

  总之,考研英语阅读理解推理引申题虽然具有一定难度,但只要考生掌握了正确的解题方法和技巧,多加练习,提高自己的阅读理解能力和逻辑思维能力,就能够在这类题目上取得较好的成绩。在备考过程中,要注重分析真题,总结规律,不断积累经验,逐步提高自己的解题水平。

【考研英语阅读理解推理引申题详解】相关文章:

考研英语阅读理解推理引申题解析09-20

2017考研英语一阅读理解细节题推理题攻略11-11

考研英语阅读理解真题05-30

2017考研英语阅读理解文章结构详解10-16

考研英语阅读推理题怎么做09-16

考研英语阅读理解历年真题05-14

考研英语阅读理解蒙题技巧06-25

历年考研英语阅读理解真题09-17

阅读理解:主旨题详解09-23