Passage 1
  Is there enough oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (保护区) (ANWR) to help secure America’s energy future? President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence. But no one knows for sure how much crude oil lies buried beneath the frozen earth with the last government survey, conducted in 1998, projecting output anywhere from 3 billion to 16 billion barrels.
  The oil industry goes with the high end of the range, which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years. By pumping more than 1 million barrels a day from the reserve for the next two three decades, lobbyists claim, the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia. Sounds good. An oil boom would also mean a multibillion-dollar windfall (意外之财) in tax revenues, royalties (开采权使用费) and leasing fees for Alaska and the Federal Government. Best of all, advocates of drilling say, damage to the environment would be insignificant. “We’ve never had a document case of oil rig chasing deer out onto the pack ice.” says Alaska State Representative Scott Ogan.
  Not so far, say environmentalists. Sticking to the low end of government estimates, the National Resources Defense Council says there may be no more than 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil in the coastal plain of ANWR, a drop in the bucket that would do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems. And consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits, because drilling could begin only after much bargaining over leases, environmental permits and regulatory review. As for ANWR’s impact on the California power crisis, environmentalists point out that oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output—and just 3% of the nation’s.
  21. What does President Bush think of tapping oil in ANWR?
  A) It will exhaust the nation’s oil reserves.
  B) It will help secure the future of ANWR.
  C) It will help reduce the nation’s oil imports.
  D) It will increase America’s energy consumption.(C)
  22. We learn from the second paragraph that the American oil industry ________.
  A) believes that drilling for oil in ANWR will produce high yields
  B) tends to exaggerate America’s reliance on foreign oil
  C) shows little interest in tapping oil in ANWR
  D) expects to stop oil imports from Saudi Arabia(A)
  23. Those against oil drilling in ANWR argue that ________.
  A) it can cause serious damage to the environment
  B) it can do little to solve U.S. energy problems
  C) it will drain the oil reserves in the Alaskan region
  D) it will not have much commercial value(B)
  24. What do the environmentalists mean by saying “Not so fast” (Line 1, Para. 3)?
  A) Oil exploitation takes a long time
  B) The oil drilling should be delayed
  C) Don’t be too optimistic
  D) Don’t expect fast returns(C)
  25. It can be learned from the passage that oil exploitation beneath ANWR’s frozen earth ________.
  A) remains a controversial issue
  B) is expected to get under way soon
  C) involves a lot of technological problems
  D) will enable the U.S. to be oil independent(A)
  这篇材料主要内容是对应否在阿拉斯加进行石油开采进行论述,三大段恰好阐述了三方面的观点。第一段开头首先以一个疑问句提出了论题,Is there enough oil …… to help secure America’s energy future?问的是阿拉斯加地下是否蕴藏了足以为拯救美国的能源未来提供助力的石油。接下来文章抛出了布什总统也就是美国政府的正面观点,该观点认为阿拉斯加的石油可以缓解加利福尼亚考(试^大的电力危机,并为国家的能源独立提供助推(would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence)。文章进而引述了政府勘测数据,说明阿拉斯加地区的石油储量达到30亿到160亿桶,不过这里使用了否定句式(no one knows for sure),表明对这一数据的怀疑态度,这样就自然地引出了后面两种截然不同的观点。
  第一种观点来自于石油业界——“The oil industry goes with the high end of the range”,这里的high end指的就是160亿桶,而go with表示认同了数据中的高点——160亿桶。支持开采的论据有三点,第一是可以减少大量石油进口(cut back on imports),第二是额外收入大笔税款、开采权使用费和租金(a multibillion-dollar windfall in tax revenues, royalties and leasing fees)第三是对环境的影响微乎其微(damage to the environment would be insignificant)。
  第二种观点来自于环保主义者——Sticking to the low end of government estimates,low end指的30亿桶,而stick to表示认同数据中30亿桶的低点。反对开采的论据也有三点,第一是石油蕴藏量只有32亿桶,对美国能源问题来说只能是杯水车薪(do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems),第二是消费者要等上十年时间才能获得利益(consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits),第三,针对政府提出的阿拉斯加石油可以缓解加利福尼亚电力危机的观点,环保主义者指出石油在加利福尼亚发电能源中只占1%(oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output)。  21. What does President Bush think of tapping oil in ANWR?
  A) It will exhaust the nation’s oil reserves.
  B) It will help secure the future of ANWR.
  C) It will help reduce the nation’s oil imports.
  D) It will increase America’s energy consumption.(C)
  本题问在ANWR石油开采问题上,布什总统的意见如何。
  布什总统的观点在第一段中有清楚的描述:President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence。正确理解这句话,就可以对本题做出解答。Certainly thinks so里的so对第一句的问话做了肯定回答,问话问的是ANWR地下有没有足够的石油可以帮助拯救美国的能源未来,布什的意见当然就是有足够的石油。后面一句话是布什总统支持开采的理由:“他争辩说开采ANWR的石油可以帮助缓解加利福尼亚的电力危机,大大推动国家的能源独立。”
  A,这会耗尽国家的石油储藏。
  B,这会为拯救ANWR的未来提供助力。
  C,这会有利于减少国家的石油进口。
  D,这会增加美国的能源消费量。
  A在文中没有提到。B的说法把ANWR与美国混淆起来,是ANWR可以拯救美国的未来,而不是拯救自己的未来。C认为这有利于减少国家的石油进口,实际上与energy independence意义一致,因为能源独立考(试^大也就是自给自足,不依赖于其他国家,其结果就是减少进口。D的说法在文中也没有提到。综上可知C的说法最为合理。
   22. We learn from the second paragraph that the American oil industry ________.
  A) believes that drilling for oil in ANWR will produce high yields
  B) tends to exaggerate America’s reliance on foreign oil
  C) shows little interest in tapping oil in ANWR
  D) expects to stop oil imports from Saudi Arabia(A)
  题目问我们能从第二段得知,美国石油产业如何如何。
  第二段从石油产业的角度论述了在ANWR地区进行石油开采的可行性,其观点是支持开采的。
  A,美石油产业认为ANWR地区的石油开采将会带来很高的产量。第二段基本观点是支持石油开采的,而A的观点与这一观点保持一致,只要在文中找到类似的描述就可以断定A的说法是正确的。文中有2句话可以作为佐证:which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years和pumping more than 1 million barrels a day,这2句都说明了未来石油产量的巨大。
  B,美石油产业倾向夸大美国对外国石油的依赖程度。本选项考查对the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia一句的理解。这句话的本意是有了ANWR的石油,可以减少进口量,该进口量相当于美国从沙特进口石油的总量。这句话的目的在于强调ANWR石油所能带来的好处,夸大进口依赖性与本段的中心思想无关。
  C,对在ANWR地区的石油开采没有表现出多少兴趣。与文意正好相反。
  D,希望停止从沙特进口石油。该句错误与B一样。
  23. Those against oil drilling in ANWR argue that ________.
  A) it can cause serious damage to the environment
  B) it can do little to solve U.S. energy problems
  C) it will drain the oil reserves in the Alaskan region
  D) it will not have much commercial value
  题目问反对在ANWR开采石油的人士争辩道……
  A,它会造成对环境的严重破坏。
  B,它对于美国能源问题的解决帮助很小。
  C,它会耗尽阿拉斯加地区的石油蕴藏。
  D,它不会产生很大的经济价值。
  对反对石油开采的观点的论述出现在第三段,根据前文的解释,反对的观点一共有三点,第一是它对美国能源问题来说只能是杯水车薪(do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems),这与B的说法一致。第二是消费者要等上十年时间才能获得利益(consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits),这一说法与D的说法近似,但区别是D认为永远不会产考(试^大生大的经济价值,而这里只是认为价值产生在时间上会晚一些,没有否定会产生较大的价值,因此D不对。第三,它不能很大程度上缓解加利福尼亚电力危机,这也验证了B的说法。此为,A和C的说法在文中都没有提到,可以排除。(B)  24. What do the environmentalists mean by saying “Not so fast” (Line 1, Para. 3)?
  A) Oil exploitation takes a long time
  B) The oil drilling should be delayed
  C) Don’t be too optimistic
  D) Don’t expect fast returns
  题目问环保主义者所说的Not so fast是什么意思。
  A,石油开采需要很长时间。
  B,石油钻探将会被拖延。
  C,不要过于乐观。
  D,不要期待很快得到回报。
  如何理解某个句子或词组的含义的题在四级阅读中出现几率比较高,必须结合上下文环境才能做出正确解答。Not so fast出现在第三段的第一句,按位置来看,很可能起了承上启下的作用。上文刚刚论述了支持石油开采的观点,而后文是对反对开采的观点的论述,那么Not so fast一定是对支持开采的观点的否定,而且是一个总领句,是对后面三个论据的总概括。否则,若Not so fast不是对第三段的总体概括,它就不应该出现在段首,这是写作的基本规则之一。
  看一下四个选项,A的说法在第三段里没有提到,B和D都提到了,但无论选择哪一个都不是对第三段的总体概括,只有C能够涵盖第三段三个论据暗含的意义。
  25. It can be learned from the passage that oil exploitation beneath ANWR’s frozen earth ________.
  A) remains a controversial issue
  B) is expected to get under way soon
  C) involves a lot of technological problems
  D) will enable the U.S. to be oil independent(A)
  题目问从这篇材料可以得知,在ANWR的冻土下进行石油开采如何如何。
  A, 依然是一个正处争议中的问题。
  B, 被认为不久后就会得到结论。
  C, 涉及很多技术难题。
  D, 将会使美国获得石油独立。
  这篇材料一共三段,每一段论述了一种观点,第一段是政府的观点,第二段是石油产业的观点,第三段是环保主义者的观点。作者没有给出一个客观的评述,认为哪一种观点获得了更多的支持,或将来有可能得到实行。考(试^大因此说,开不开采实际上还是个悬而未决的问题,这样A的说法是正确的,而B是错误的。C所说的技术难题应该不存在,因为第二段中石油产业者的观点是无比乐观的,他们希望立即投入到石油开采中,所以应该不会存在太多的技术难题。即便实际情况不是如此,也可以以文章没有提到技术难题方面的证据为由,排除C。而D的说法在文中相关论述是石油开采会减轻石油依赖,并不是从此获得石油独立。   Passage 2
  “Tear ‘em apart!” “Kill the fool!” “Murder the referee (裁判)!”
  These are common remarks one may hear at various sporting events. At the time they are made, they may seem innocent enough. But let’s not kid ourselves. They have been known to influence behavior in such a way as to lead to real bloodshed. Volumes have been written about the way words affect us. It has been shown that words having certain connotations (含义) may cause us to react in ways quite foreign to what we consider to be our usual humanistic behavior. I see the term “opponent” as one of those words. Perhaps the time has come to delete it from sports terms.
  The dictionary meaning of the term “opponent “is “adversary “: “enemy “; “one who opposes your interests.” “Thus, when a player meets an opponent, he or she may tend to treat that opponent as an enemy. At such times, winning may dominate one’s intellect, and every action, no matter how gross, may be considered justifiable. I recall an incident in a handball game when a referee refused a player’s request for a time out for a glove change because he did not considered then wet enough. The player proceeded to rub his gloves across his wet T-shirt and then exclaimed. “Are they wet enough now?”
  In the heat of battle, players have been observed to throw themselves across the court without considering the consequences that such a move might have on anyone in their way. I have also witnessed a player reacting to his opponent’s international and illegal blocking by deliberately hitting him with the ball as hard as he could during the course of play. Off the court, they are good friends. Does that make any sense? It certainly gives proof of a court attitude which departs from normal behavior.
  Therefore, I believe it is time we elevated (提升) the game to the level where it belongs thereby setting an example to the rest of the sporting world. Replacing the term “opponent” with “associate” could be an ideal way to start.
  The dictionary meaning of the term “associate” is “colleague”; “friend”; “companion.” Reflect a moment! You may soon see and possibly feel the difference in your reaction to the term “associate” rather than “opponent.”
  26. Which of the following statements best expresses the author’s view?
  A) Aggressive behavior in sports can have serious consequences.
  B) The words people use can influence their behavior.
  C) Unpleasant words in sports are often used by foreign athletes.
  D) Unfair judgments by referees will lead to violence on the sports field.(B)
  27. Harsh words are spoken during games because the players ________.
  A) are too eager to win
  B) are usually short-tempered and easily offended
  C) cannot afford to be polite in fierce competition
  D) treat their rivals as enemies(D)
  28. What did the handball player do when he was not allowed a time out to change his gloves?
  A) He refused to continue the game.
  B) He angrily hit the referee with a ball.
  C) He claimed that the referee was unfair.
  D) He wet his gloves by rubbing them across his T-shirt.(D)
  29. According to the passage, players, in a game, may ________.
  A) deliberately throw the ball at anyone illegally blocking their way
  B) keep on screaming and shouting throughout the game
  C) lie down on the ground as an act of protest
  D) kick the ball across the court with force(A)
  30. The author hopes to have the current situation in sports improved by ________.
  A) calling on players to use clean language on the court
  B) raising the referee’s sense of responsibility
  C) changing the attitude of players on the sports field
  D) regulating the relationship between players and referees(C)  开篇是三个耸人听闻的句子:撕碎他们,宰了那个白痴,杀了裁判。可以说以震撼效果吸引了读者注意,同时也引出了语言这个论题,而这些句子本身又是常现于体育场的,这就提示了本文所讨论语言的范围。
  第二段解释了开篇所举三个句子的背后含义,即结合具体情境的话,这些话虽看似无辜(they may seem innocent enough),但实际会对行为形成影响以致使真的流血事件的发生(lead to real bloodshed)。作者随后把这种现象上升到理论层次:words having certain connotations may cause us to react in ways quite foreign to what we consider to be our usual humanistic behavior,意思是具有特定含义的词语会导致与常规迥异的行为。而后作者举出了opponent这个例子,并认为是时候把它从体育词汇里去除的时候了(the time has come to delete it from sports terms),这就提示了后文的论述倾向于对opponent一词的否定。
  接下来的一段首先引用字典对opponent一词的解释,而后对这个单词为体育运动带来的负面影响做了描述:every action, no matter how gross, may be considered justifiable,每一行为都被认为考(试^大是正当的。这实际上就是语言会带来真的流血事件的根本原因所在。文章随后举了一个手球比赛的例子对此加以说明。
  下一段举例说明了上述根本原因会导致失常行为的发生:一个球员故意把球狠狠地砸向了非法阻挡他的对手身上,而这个对手在日常生活中还是他的朋友。
  在阐明了语言与行为的这种关系之后,作者在最后两小段提出了自己的倡议。前一小段提出以associate替代opponent,最后一段展望了associate所能带来的实际益处。
  26. Which of the following statements best expresses the author’s view?
  A) Aggressive behavior in sports can have serious consequences.
  B) The words people use can influence their behavior.
  C) Unpleasant words in sports are often used by foreign athletes.
  D) Unfair judgments by referees will lead to violence on the sports field.(B)
  本题问下列哪一项说法最能表达作者的观点。
  A,体育运动中的侵略性行为会产生严重的后果。
  B,人们说话时的用词会影响行为。
  C,外国运动员经常在体育比赛中使用令人不快的语言。
  D,裁判不公平的判罚会引起比赛场上的暴力。
  注意本题题干的用词:best expresses,“表达”前面有一个best,表示最能表达作者观点的是什么。也就是说四个选项中正确的说法可能不止一个,要在正确说法中选择最合适的一个。
  这四个选项中,A、B、D都符合文章的意思,C在文中没有注脚,可以排除。A强调行为本身会带来的后果,而本文主要在讲语言与行为的关系,A的说法没有剔除了语言,不能完全概括作者的观点。B的说法正好符合前面的分析。D只是文章举的一个例子,就事实本身来说没有错误,但判罚与暴力的关系不是本文讨论的核心。  27. Harsh words are spoken during games because the players ________.
  A) are too eager to win
  B) are usually short-tempered and easily offended
  C) cannot afford to be polite in fierce competition
  D) treat their rivals as enemies(D)
  本题问比赛中间出现粗鲁语言是因为比赛者……
  A,太渴望胜利了。
  B,通常脾气暴躁、易被激怒。
  C,在激烈的竞争中无法做到讲究礼貌。
  D,把他们的对手视为敌人。
  文章的第三段对运动员们在比赛场上出现粗鲁语言的原因做了分析。作者认为他们把对手视为敌人(he or she may tend to treat that opponent as an enemy),因而把比赛场上的粗鲁语言视为是正当的(every action, no matter how gross, may be considered justifiable.),这才造成出口成脏,不以为耻。四个选项中D最为符合这个意思,C似乎也有道理,但细分析可知它把说粗口的原因归结为竞争的激烈性,显然不符合作者的观点。
  28. What did the handball player do when he was not allowed a time out to change his gloves?
  A) He refused to continue the game.
  B) He angrily hit the referee with a ball.
  C) He claimed that the referee was unfair.
  D) He wet his gloves by rubbing them across his T-shirt.(D)
  本题问那位手球选手在换手套的请求没有得到允许之后做了什么。
  A,他拒绝继续比赛。
  B,他愤怒地把球扔向了裁判。
  C,他宣称裁判不公平。
  D,他把手套放在T恤上擦,以弄湿手套。
  本题所说的手球队员是作者在第三段所举的一个例子:I recall an incident in a handball game when a referee refused a player’s request for a time out for a glove change because he did not considered then wet enough. The player proceeded to rub his gloves across his wet T-shirt and then exclaimed. “Are they wet enough now?”这句话的大意是在一场手球比赛中一个球员请求暂停来换手套(request for a time out for a glove change),但裁判认为手套不够湿拒绝了他的请求。他便把手考(试^大套在湿T恤上搓湿,并反问裁判手套够不够湿。显然D的意思是对的。这里没有提到他是否拒绝继续比赛,可以排除A。他绝对没有把球扔向裁判(除非他想被当场驱逐出场),这里不能和第四段的例子混淆(deliberately hitting him with the ball as hard as he could)。
  球员说的话是“这下够湿了吗?”,是在表明手套已经够湿,可以批准暂停,另外还有向裁判示威的意思。Claim是公开宣称的意思,球员的话从暗含的意思来看勉强有裁判不公的意思,但绝没有公开宣称出来。可以排除C。
  29. According to the passage, players, in a game, may ________.
  A) deliberately throw the ball at anyone illegally blocking their way
  B) keep on screaming and shouting throughout the game
  C) lie down on the ground as an act of protest
  D) kick the ball across the court with force(A)
  题目问根据文意,运动员在比赛中会如何如何。
  A,故意把球扔向任何一个阻挡犯规的人身上。
  B,会全场比赛不停地大喊大叫。
  C,躺到地板上表示抗议。
  D,用力将球从场地一边踢向另一边。
  从四个选项来看,题目问的是球员们在比赛场上的具体反应,而在文中具体的例子实际上只有两个,第一个是第三段的搓手套的例子,第二个是第四段的故意把球扔到对手身上的例子。而第一个例子在上一道题中已经考查过了,这一道题继续考查的可能性不大。由此判断此题的答案只需要看第二个例子就可以了。第二个例子是故意扔球, B、C在文中都没有提到,可以排除,D是说把球踢走,而不是把球扔到对手身上,也不对。为了节省时间,本题可以直接选A。
  可以再具体分析一下。其实看了A的表述多少会产生一些怀疑,“扔向任何一个……”会不会太绝对了呢?第四段第一句话给出了答案:players have been observed to throw themselves across the court without considering the consequences that such a move might have on anyone in their way,这里的anyone就已经把这种现象“绝对”化了,故意扔球是这种绝对化中的一个例子,因此可以放心选择A。  Passage 3
  Consumers are being confused and misled by the hodge-podge (大杂烩) of environmental claims made by household products, according to a “green labeling” study published by Consumers International Friday.
  Among the report’s more outrageous (令人无法容忍的) findings-a German fertilizer described itself as “earthworm friendly” a brand of flour said it was “non-polluting” and a British toilet paper claimed to be “environmentally friendlier”
  The study was written and researched by Britain’s National Consumer Council (NCC) for lobby group Consumer International. It was funded by the German and Dutch governments and the European Commission.
  “ While many good and useful claims are being made, it is clear there is a long way to go in ensuring shoppers are adequately informed about the environmental impact of products they buy,” said Consumers International director Anna Fielder.
  The 10-country study surveyed product packaging in Britain, Western Europe, Scandinavia and the United States. It found that products sold in Germany and the United Kingdom made the most environmental claims on average.
  The report focused on claims made by specific products, such as detergent (洗涤剂) insect sprays and by some garden products. It did not test the claims, but compared them to labeling guidelines set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in September, 1999.
  Researchers documented claims of environmental friendliness made by about 2,000 products and found many too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards.
  “Many products had specially-designed labels to make them seem environmentally friendly, but in fact many of these symbols mean nothing,” said report researcher Philip Page.
  “Laundry detergents made the most number of claims with 158. Household cleaners were second with 145 separate claims, while paints were third on our list with 73. The high numbers show how very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading.” he said.
  The ISO labeling standards ban vague or misleading claims on product packaging, because terms such as “environmentally friendly” and “non-polluting” cannot be verified. “What we are now pushing for is to have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO.” said Page.
  31. According to the passage, the NCC found it outrageous that ________.
  A) all the products surveyed claim to meet ISO standards
  B) the claims made by products are often unclear or deceiving
  C) consumers would believe many of the manufactures’ claim
  D) few products actually prove to be environment friendly(B)
  32. As indicated in this passage, with so many good claims, the consumers ________.
  A) are becoming more cautious about the products they are going to buy
  B) are still not willing to pay more for products with green labeling
  C) are becoming more aware of the effects different products have on the environment
  D) still do not know the exact impact of different products on the environment(D)
  33. A study was carried out by Britain’s NCC to ________.
  A) find out how many claims made by products fail to meet environmental standards
  B) inform the consumers of the environmental impact of the products they buy
  C) examine claims made by products against ISO standards
  D) revise the guidelines set by the International Standards Organization(C)
  34. What is one of the consequences caused by the many claims of household products?
  A) They are likely to lead to serious environmental problems.
  B) Consumers find it difficult to tell the true from the false.
  C) They could arouse widespread anger among consumer.
  D) Consumers will be tempted to buy products they don’t need.(B)
  35. It can be inferred from the passage that the lobby group Consumer International wants to ________.
  A) make product labeling satisfy ISO requirements
  B) see all household products meet environmental standards
  C) warn consumers of the danger of so-called green products
  D) verify the efforts of non-polluting products(A)  这篇材料讲的是欧美国家日常用品上环保说明遭到滥用的现象。文章第一段十分精炼地交代了全篇所述的主要内容:消费者正受到环保说明的困扰和误导(Consumers are being confused and misled by……environmental claims);同时透露出这一内容的发布来源。余下的几段对首段的说法进行详细了阐述。这种金字塔结构属于英美报刊文章的典型特点。
  第二段举出了几个实例说明环保说明遭到滥用的情形,使人对文章所述核心内容有一个感性的认识。一个例子是某德国肥料号称具有“蚯蚓友好性”(a German fertilizer described itself as “earthworm friendly”),还有某品牌面粉也自称“不会引起污染”(non-polluting),而一种英国卫生纸也自诩“环境友好性”(environmentally friendlier)。
  第三段指出进行这一研究的单位:Britain’s National Consumer Council,这是为了体现研究的权威性。而后又说明了该研究机构的资助机构:German and Dutch governments and the European Commission,即德国、荷兰政府和欧盟执行委员会,这是为了说明该项研究的中立性,强调其可信度。
  第四段引用研究人员的话,对其研究对象做出了总体评价:在告知顾客如何判断考(试^大商品对环境的影响上,还有很长的路要走(there is a long way to go in……)。之后的几段描述了研究的细节。
  第五段说明该研究的覆盖范围(10-country)以及初步结论:德英两国的产品滥用环保说明的现象平均最多。第六段说明实际研究的主要商品类别(洗涤剂、杀虫剂和园艺用品),并指出研究的方式是不做测试,而只是将其与ISO的商标说明进行比照(did not test the claims, but compared them to……)。下一段给出了比照结果:环保说明太过模糊、误导性过强,达不到ISO标准要求(too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards)。
  随后的两段分析了这些环保说明的实质,第八、九段引用研究员的话指出许多环保说明空无一物(these symbols mean nothing),而环保说明的繁杂也使消费者无法判断其真伪(very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading)。
  最后一段借Page之口道出了该项研究的目的:促使跨国公司达到ISO要求(have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO)。  Passage 4
  Two hours from the tall buildings of Manhattan and Philadelphia live some of the world’s largest black bears. They are in northern Pennsylvania’s Pocono Mountains, a home they share with an abundance of other wildlife.
  The streams, lakes, meadows (草地), mountain ridges and forests that make the Poconos an ideal place for black bears have also attracted more people to the region. Open spaces are threatened by plans for housing estates and important habitats (栖息地) are endangered by highway construction. To protect the Poconos natural beauty from irresponsible development, the Nature Conservancy (大自然保护协会) named the area one of America’s “Last Great Places”.
  Operating out of a century-old schoolhouse in the village of Long Pond, Pennsylvania, the conservancy’s bud Cook is working with local people and business leaders to balance economic growth with environmental protection. By forging partnerships with people like Francis Altemose, the Conservancy has been able to protect more than 14,000 acres of environmentally important land in the area.
  Altemose’s family has farmed in the Pocono area for generations. Two years ago Francis worked with the Conservancy to include his farm in a county farmland protection program. As a result, his family’s land can be protected from development and the Altemoses will be better able to provide a secure financial future for their 7-year-old grandson.
  Cook attributes the Conservancy’s success in the Poconos to having a local presence and a commitment to working with local residents
  “The key to protecting these remarkable lands is connecting with the local community,” Cook said. “The people who live there respect the land. They value quiet forests, clear streams and abundant wildlife. They are eager to help with conservation effort.
  For more information on how you can help the Nature Conservancy protect the Poconos and the world’s other “Last Great Places,” please call 1-888-564 6864 or visit us on the World Wide Web at www.tnc.org.
  36. The purpose in naming the Poconos as one of America’s “Last Great Places” is to ________.
  A) gain support from the local community
  B) protect it from irresponsible development
  C) make it a better home for black bears
  D) provide financial security for future generations(B)
  37. We learn from the passage that ________.
  A) the population in the Pocono area is growing
  B) wildlife in the Pocono area is dying out rapidly
  C) the security of the Pocono residents is being threatened
  D) farmlands in the Pocono area are shrinking fast(A)
  38. What is important in protecting the Poconos according to Cook?
  A) The setting up of an environmental protection website
  B) Support from organizations like The Nature Conservancy
  C) Cooperation with the local residents and business leaders
  D) Inclusion of farmlands in the region’s protection program(C)
  39. What does Bud Cook mean by “having a local presence” (Line 1, Para. 5)?
  A) Financial contributions from local business leaders
  B) Consideration of the interests of the local residents
  C) The establishment of a wildlife protection foundation in the area
  D) The setting up of a local Nature Conservancy branch in the Pocono area(D)
  40. The passage most probably is ________.
  A) an official document
  B) a news story
  C) an advertisement
  D) a research report(D)  这是一篇推广目的很强的实用性文章,文末给出了联系方式,可见这篇文章有头有尾,不同于许多阅读真题中的节选材料。完整引用原文也使这篇材料段落较多,内容较长,加大了阅读的难度。
  文章的主要内容是介绍美国一处自然野生环境面临遭到破坏的危险,以及相关人员和机构为保护这一自然环境奔走努力的经历,写作目的是吸引公众对此事的关注,从而为这一野生环境的保护赢得更多的社会力量。
  全文一共七段,前两段按部就班道出了文章的核心内容。开头介绍了这一野生环境的基本情况,如大体位置(Two hours from the tall buildings),主要物种(生长着黑熊)。第二段介绍这一地区所面临的威胁——空地受到房地产建设的威胁,栖息地受到高速公路建设的威胁——以及相关机构的环保努力(Nature Conservancy named the area one of……)。
  接下来的二段继续对Nature Conservancy机构的环保行动做进一步的说明。第三段引出了该机构的工作人员Cook,叙述他保护这一地区环境的具体做法:主要是与当地居民和商业领袖共同合作(working with local people and business leaders)。段落最后指出他的工作卓有成效(protect more than 14,000 acres of environmentally important land)。第三段是从环保机构的角度进行叙述,第四段则从考(试^大当地人的角度讲述环保工作的效果。文章以Altemoses的家庭为例,叙述他们二年前接受Conservancy的环保计划后的变化,一是土地受到保护(land can be protected from development),二是获得了经济上保障(a secure financial future for their 7-year-old grandson)。
  行文至此,读者可知这样一个信息,Conservancy机构的环保工作是成功的。后面两段马上经Cook之口说出了他们成功的秘诀,即与当地人合作(protecting these remarkable lands is connecting with the local community),原因是当地人热爱家乡的自然环境,他们有强烈的保护家乡环境的愿望,更能协助该机构开展工作。
  文章最后给出了免费电话和网站地址,希望更多的人能够了解和参与该机构的环保行动。