全国乙卷阅读理解D篇解析讲义高三英语一轮复习.docx

If you want to tell the history of the whole world, a history that does not privilege one part of humanity, you cannot do it through texts alone, because only some of the world has ever had texts, while most of the world, for most of the timez has not. Writing is one of humanity' s later achievements, and until fairly recently even many literate （有文字的）societies recorded their concerns not only in writing but in things.Ideally a history would bring together texts and objects, and some chapters of this book are able to do just that, but in many cases we simply can, t. The clearest example of this between literate and non-literate history is perhaps the first conflict, at Botany Bay, between Captain Cook' s voyage and the Australian Aboriginals. From the English side, we have scientific reports and the captain7 s record of that terrible day. From the Australian side, we have only a wooden shield （盾）dropped by a man in flight after his first experience of gunshot. If we want to reconstruct what was actually going on that day, the shield must be questioned and interpreted as deeply and strictly as the written reports.In addition to the problem of miscomprehension from both sides, there are victories accidentally or deliberately twisted, especially when only the victors know how to write. Those who are on the losing side often have only their things to tell their stories. The Caribbean Tainoz the Australian Aboriginals, the African people of Benin and the Incas, all of whom appear in this book, can speak to us now of their past achievements most powerfully through the objects they made: a history told through things gives them back a voice. When we consider contact （联系）between literate and non-literate societies such as these, all our first-hand accounts are necessarily twisted, only one half of a dialogue. If we are to find the other half of that conversation, we have to read not just the texts, but the objects.32. What is the first paragraph mainly about?A. How past events should be . What humanity is concerned . Whether facts speak louder than . Why written language is reliable.33. What does the author indicate by mentioning Captain Cook in paragraph 2?A. His report was . He represented the local . He ruled over Botany . His record was one-sided.34. What does the underlined word "convervatiorTin paragraph 3 refer to?A. . . . Society.35. Which of the following books is the text most likely selected from?A. How Maps Tell Stories of the Worlds. A Short History of AustraliaC. A History of the World in 100 Objects. How Art Works Tell Stories文章分析阅读理解中出现这种三大段式的文章，往往给人较大的阅读压力，因为并不像其 它文章那样，有相对较短的首段或尾段能帮助你迅速了解文章的主题。但是你要坚定 不移地贯彻高考阅读理解的三项原则：1 .所有高考阅读理解的CD篇，也就是说明文和议论文，主题和主旨一定非常直接明确；2 .主题和主旨一定在文章的标题和首尾段中有所体现，要在首尾段中寻找前后呼应的关键信息；3、所有题目的正确选项一定与文章的主题和主旨有密切的关系。无论文章是什么呈现形式，以上三点在绝大多数文章里都是基本确定的。深呼吸，我们来看看文章的第一段，全段一共两句话。第一句虽然略长，但是重点非 常容易把握，去掉开头的"如果"、逗号后面的插入语、最后的"因为"，整个句 子的主干就是"单独通过文字是做不到的"。在文章里看到类似“你不能做某事”的信息 时，一定要立刻想到，作者要讲述的重点信息一定不会止步于否定，“你不能做某事”之 后一定会出现你能做某事，这就是所谓的不破不立、先破后立的写作逻辑。° not only . but (also).不但而且."的递进结构中，重点信息一定是but或but also后面的内容。于是我们就把握住了作者在第一段给出的文章主题一只靠文字是不够 的，还要有物品。读过第一段之后，如果你有把握文章主题和主旨的阅读理解解题思路，那么这个时候 就不会继续往下读第二段，而是会直接去扫一眼全文的结尾，通过结尾来反向验证第一段 主题的判断。在这篇文章里，这样做的好处是显而易见的，因为全文的最后一句话直接告 诉你”不仅要阅读文字，还要审视物品"，你看到的"not just. but."与第一段末尾 的信息直接呼应。到此为止，文章的主题可以100%确定了，配合文章里不断出现的"历 史"，作者强调的是things或objects对记述历史的作用。对于剩下的文章，继续仔细读也可以，随便扫一遍直接去看题目要求解题也可以。只 要抓住了文章的主题和主旨，阅读部分的任务就基本结束了。32题主旨题虽然题目问的是"第一段主要讲的是什么"，但是第一段的主要内容一定要与文章的 主题保持一致，你要判断的就是哪个选项与"讲述历史不能只靠文字，还要有物品"关系 最密切，那么答案一定是A选项"过往的事件应该如何被呈现"。过往的事件就是历史， 而文字和物品都是呈现历史的方式。B选项"人类担忧的是什么"、C选项"事实是否强于雄辩"都与文章主题毫无关系。 D选项”为什么书面语言可靠"偏离了作者强调的重点，作者强调的不是文字，而是物品。33题主旨题从题干里可以看出，库克船长只是文章里的例子而已。关于"例子的作用"或"作者 通过例子要表现什么”这样的问题，你的思路应该非常清晰一任何例子的作用都是为主 题服务，任何例子表现的都是文章主题。所以这样的题目是主旨题。首先可以排除的是与文章主题完全无关的B选项"他代表当地人"和C选项"他统治 博坦湾"，这两个选项都只与例子本身有关，例子是不能只用来表现例子本身的。剩下的A选项和D选项里分别提到了报告和记录，如果你对主题概念明确，你就应该立刻意识到，report和record实际上都是文字的代名词，而作者的主题是"讲述历史不 能只靠文字，还要有物品"。文字是不足的，作者对文字是负态度体现，那么A选项的正 态度"科学的"就不符合要求，你要选择的是负态度的D选项“一面之词"。34题细节题划线词我不知道各位会怎么看待这道题，但是你必须要学会对B选项"历史”这种直接与文 章主题相关的答案另眼相看，它的地位和性质是其它选项不可比拟的。再来看看实际的句子。conversation前面的"that那个"说明在前面一定有对应的 指代，也就是上一句末尾的"dialogue对话"。而对话在前一句中是插入语，用于补充说 明前面的"first-hand accounts第一手记录"。看到这里已经基本可以做出判断了 ,对 过往事件的第一手记录就是B选项"历史"，不是A选项"问题"、C选项"声音"和D 选项"社会"。35题主旨题提问文章出处的题目同样属于主旨题，文章来自的范围一定要满足文章主题的要求， 所以答案很容易判断出C选项"100个物品中的世界历史"，因为同时满足了 "历史"和 "物品”两大重要概念。B选项里虽然也有历史，但是澳大利亚只是文章的例子之一，并非主题。A选项的"地 图”和D选项的“艺术品”都是物品的某些具体例子，而且与历史都没有直接关联，是比 较容易排除的。全文翻译If you want to tell the history of the whole world, a history that does not privilege one part of humanity, you cannot do it through texts alone, because only some of the world has ever had texts, while most of the world, for most of the time, has not. Writing is one of humanity' s later achievements, and until fairly recently even many literate societies recorded their concerns not only in writing but in things.如果你要讲述整个世界的历史，一个不偏向人类某一方的历史，单独通过文字是做 不到的，因为世界上只有少数人拥有过文字，而世界上的大多数人在大多数时间里都没有 文字。写作是人类较晚的成就之一，即便是离现在很近的时候，也还有许多有文字的社会Ideally a history would bring together texts and objects, and some chapters of this book are able to do just that, but in many cases we simply can' t. The clearest example of this between literate and non-literate history is perhaps the first conflict at Botany Bay, between Captain Cook' s voyage and the Australian Aboriginals. From the English side, we have scientific reports and the captain, s record of that terrible day. From the Australian side, we have only a wooden shield （盾）dropped by a man in flight after his first experience of gunshot If we want to reconstruct what was actually going on that day, the shield must be questioned and interpreted as deeply and strictly as the written reports.理想情况下，历史应该把 文字和物品结合起来，本书的某些章节也做到了这一点，但是在许多情况下，我们确实做 不到。有文字记载的历史和无文字记载的历史之间的区别最典型的案例，也许是库克船长 的远航与澳大利亚原住民之间在博坦湾的第一次冲突。从英国的视角来看，我们有科学报 告和船长对于恐怖的那一天的记录。从澳大利亚的视角来看，我们只有一个木制的盾牌， 那是战斗中的某人在第一次遭遇枪击后掉落的。如果我们想要重建那一天真实发生的情况， 就必须对这个盾牌进行与文字报告对等的深入严谨的质疑和解读。In addition to the problem of miscomprehension from both sides, there are victories accidentally or deliberately twisted, especially when only the victors know how to write. Those who are on the losing side often have only their things to tell their stories. The Caribbean Taino, the Australian Aboriginals, the African people of Benin and the Incas, all of whom appear in this book, can speak to us now of their past achievements most powerfully through the objects they made: a history told through things gives them back a voice. When we consider contact （联系）between literate and non-literate societies such as these, all our first-hand accounts are necessarily twisted, only one half of a dialogue. If we are to find the other half of that conversation, we have to read not just the texts, but the objects.除了双方者B存 在误解的问题以外，还有些胜利被无意或有意地扭曲了，特别是在只有胜利者知道如何书 写的时候。那些失败者通常只能通过物品来讲述他们的故事。加勒比海的泰诺人、澳大利亚的原住民、非洲的贝宁人和印加人，所有这些出现在本书中的人们，都可以通过他们制 造的物品最有力地向我们讲述他们过往的成就：通过物品讲述的历史让他们重新得到了发 声的机会。当我们考虑类似这些有文字的社会和无文字的社会之间的联系时，所有第一手 的记载都必然会被扭曲，它们只是对话的一半。如果我们要找到这场对话的另一半，就不 仅要阅读文字，还要审视物品。