Question

The twentieth century saw greater changes than any century before. Changes for the better, changes for the worse, changes that brought a lot of benefits to human beings, changes that put man in danger. Many things caused the changes, but, in my opinion, the most important was the progress in science.

Scientific research in physics and biology has vastly broadened our views. It has given us a deeper knowledge of the structure of matter and of the universe. It has brought us a better understanding of the nature of life and of its continuous development. Technology in the application of science has made big advances that have benefited us in nearly every part of life.

The continuation of such activities in the twenty-first century will result in even greater advantages to human beings; in pure science—a wider and deeper knowledge in all fields of learning; in applied science--- a more reasonable sharing of material benefits, and better protection of the environment.

Sadly, however, there is another side to the picture. The creativity of science has been employed in doing damage to mankind. The application of science and technology to the development and production of weapons of mass destruction has created a real danger to the continued existence of the human race on this planet. We have seen this happen in the case of nuclear weapons. Although their actual use has so far occurred only in the Second World War, the number of nuclear weapons that were produced and made ready for use was so large that if the weapons had actually been used, the result could have been the ruin of the human race, as well as of many kinds of animals.

William Shakespeare said, “The web of our life is of a mingled yarn, good and ill together.” The above brief review the application of only one part of human activities—science seems to prove what Shakespeare said. But does it have to be so? Must the ill always go together with the good? Are we biologically programmed for war?

1.Which of the following best shows the structure of the passage?

=Paragraph 1,②=Paragraph 2, ③=Paragraph 3, ④=Paragraph 4,⑤=Paragraph 5）

2. From the fourth paragraph, we can infer that ______.

A. a great many nuclear weapons were actually used for war

B. a large number of nuclear weapons should have been used for war

C. the author is doubtful about the ruin of human beings by nuclear war

D. the author is anxious about the huge number of nuclear weapons on the earth

3. The underlined word “mingled” most probably means______

A. simple   B. mixed     C. sad   D. happy

4.What do you think the author is most likely to suggest if he continues to write?

A. Further application of science to war.

B. More reading of William Shakespeare.

C. Proper use of science in the new century.

D. Effective ways to separate the good from the ill.

 

Answer 1

【答案】

 

1.A

2.D

3.B

4.D

【解析】

試題分析： 作者在第一段提出論點：The progress in science caused the changes in the twentieth century (二十世紀科技的進步帶來巨變)，接下來，第二、三、四段作者提出正反兩面的論據：The progress in science has brought us advantages and the continuation of the progress will surely result in even greater advantages (科技的進步已經給我們帶來好處；持續的科技的進步肯定會給人類帶來更大的好處)。第四段作者從另一方面提出論據：The creativity of science has been employed in doing damage to mankind. (但是，科技的進步也可能給人類帶來毀滅)。再接下來，按行文結構作者應該做出結論，但作者在第五段并沒有直接說出不言自明的結論, 即We should separate the good from the ill (我們應該取其利而舍其弊), 而是用了幾個問句：But does it have to be so? (難道情況非得這樣嗎?) Must the ill always go together with the good (難道壞的東西一定要伴隨著好的東西)? Are we biologically programmed for war (難道人類非得策劃戰爭)? 這樣可引起讀者對結論的深入思考，引起讀者的重視。

1.文章結構題。在文章首段的最后一句話，通過but找到主題，第2段、第3段的主題句都出現了段尾，都講了科技帶來的benefit，從正面印證了主題。而第4段首句的sadly和however，表明文章轉入另外一個方面的論證，而且是反面的的論證。全文尾段用Shakespeare的話再次總結主題。根據這個分析，可以很容易地看出這篇文章的整體結構是“總－分－總”式，在“分”的部分有分為正、反兩方面，與A項意思一致。

2.推理判斷題。根據文章第四段可以看出作者對核武器的擔憂。D 。

3.詞義推測題。根據good and ill weapons可以猜測出mingle的意思為mixed。所以選B。

4.推理判斷題。根據第五段我們可以推理判斷出作者繼續寫的是如何有效的將good和ill分開。從But does it have to be so? Must the ill always go together with the good? 可以知道答案選D。

考點：生活百味類短文閱讀。