When you think of the tremendous technological progress we have made, it’s amazing how little we have developed in other respects. We may speak contemptuously of the poor old Romans because they relished the orgies of slaughter that went on in their arenas. We may despise them because they mistook these goings on for entertainment. We may forgive them condescendingly because they lived 2000 years ago and obviously knew no better. But are our feelings of superiority really justified? Are we any less blood-thirsty? Why do boxing matches, for instance, attract such universal interest? Don’t the spectators who attend them hope they will see some violence? Human beings remains as bloodthirsty as ever they were. The only difference between ourselves and the Romans is that while they were honest enough to admit that they enjoyed watching hungry lions tearing people apart and eating them alive, we find all sorts of sophisticated arguments to defend sports which should have been banned long age; sports which are quite as barbarous as, say, public hangings or bearbaiting.
It really is incredible that in this day and age we should still allow hunting or bull-fighting, that we should be prepared to sit back and watch two men batter each other to pulp in a boxing ring, that we should be relatively unmoved by the sight of one or a number of racing cars crashing and bursting into flames. Let us not deceive ourselves. Any talk of “the sporting spirit” is sheer hypocrisy. People take part in violent sports because of the high rewards they bring. Spectators are willing to pay vast sums of money to see violence. A world heavyweight championship match, for instance, is front page news. Millions of people are disappointed if a big fight is over in two rounds instead of fifteen. They feel disappointment because they have been deprived of the exquisite pleasure of witnessing prolonged torture and violence.
Why should we ban violent spoils if people enjoy them so much? You may welt ask. The answer is simple: they are uncivilized. For centuries man has been trying to improve himself spiritually and emotionally—admittedly with little success. But at least we no longer tolerate the sight madmen cooped up in cages, or public floggings of any of the countless other barbaric practices which were common in the past. Prisons are no longer the grim forbidding places they used to be. Social welfare systems are in operation in many parts of the world. Big efforts are being made to distribute wealth fairly. These changes have come about not because human beings have suddenly and unaccountably improved, but because positive steps were taken to change the law. The taw is the biggest instrument of social change that we have and it may exert great civilizing influence. If we banned dangerous and violent sports, we would be moving one step further to improving mankind. We would recognize that violence is degrading and unworthy of human beings.
1. It can be inferred from the passage that the author’s opinion of nowadays’ human beings is _____.
2. The main idea of this passage is _____.
3. That the author mentions the old Romans is _____.
4. How many dangerous sports does the author mention in this passage?
5. The purpose of the author in writing this passage is _____.
问题1选项
A.not very high
B.high
C.contemptuous
D.critical
问题2选项
A.vicious and dangerous sports should be banned by law
B.people are willing to pay vast sums money to see violence
C.to compare two different attitudes towards dangerous sports
D.people are bloodthirsty in sports
问题3选项
A.to compare the old Romans with today’s people
B.to give an example
C.to show human beings in the past know nothing better
D.to indicate human beings are used to bloodthirsty
问题4选项
A.Three
B.Five
C.Six
D.Seven
问题5选项
A.that, by banning the violent sports, we human beings can improve our selves
B.that, by banning the dangerous sports, we can improve the law
C.that we must lake positive steps to improve social welfare system
D.to show law is the main instrument of social change
第1题:A
第2题:A
第3题:D
第4题:B
第5题:A
第1题:
【选项释义】
It can be inferred from the passage that the author’s opinion of nowadays’ human beings is _____. 从文章中可以推断出作者对当今人类的评价是_____。
A. not very high A. 不是很高的
B. high B. 高的
C. contemptuous D. 轻蔑的
D. critical D. 挑剔的
【考查点】推理判断题
【解题思路】结合全文内容可知,作者在第一段指出:现在的我们和罗马人的区别在于,罗马人诚实的承认他们暴力且嗜血,而我们则使用各种理由来掩盖自己和罗马人一样的本性。第二段作者以暴力的体育运动为例进行阐述,但在第三段指出,人们努力进行改善,比如社会福利和法律,尽管没有成功但有所改观。作者一直站在客观的角度阐述事实,并没有体现出轻蔑和批判的语气,并且对人们还抱有期望,所以作者只是对现在的人们评价不高,选项A更加恰当。
【干扰项排除】B、C、D选项根据解析可知属于曲解原文。
第2题:
【选项释义】
The main idea of this passage is _____. 这篇文章的主旨是_____。
A. vicious and dangerous sports should be banned by law A. 邪恶和危险的运动应该被法律禁止
B. people are willing to pay vast sums money to see violence B. 人们愿意花大量的钱观看暴力
C. to compare two different attitudes towards dangerous sports C. 比较两种对危险运动的不同态度
D. people are bloodthirsty in sports D. 人们在运动中是嗜血的
【考查点】主旨大意题
【解题思路】根据上一题的分析可知,作者是不希望看到暴力危险的体育运动的,所以作者希望法律能够禁止暴力危险的体育运动,选项A符合原文。
【干扰项排除】
B选项在文章第二段提到:Spectators are willing to pay vast sums of money to see violence.(观众愿意为观看暴力而支付巨额的金钱。),属于文章细节,故不能用于总结全文;
C选项只在第一段提到,概括不够,不能用于总结全文,属于以偏概全;
D选项在文中第一段提到:Human beings remains as bloodthirsty as ever they were.(人类仍然和以前一样嗜血。)属于文章细节,故不能用于总结全文。
第3题:
【选项释义】
That the author mentions the old Romans is _____. 作者提到古罗马是为了_____。
A. to compare the old Romans with today’s people A. 将古罗马人和现代人进行比较
B. to give an example B. 给出一个例子
C. to show human beings in the past know nothing better C. 说明过去的人类不知道更好的事情
D. to indicate human beings are used to bloodthirsty D. 表示人类习惯于嗜血
【考查点】推理判断题
【解题思路】根据原文第一段:Human beings remains as bloodthirsty as ever they were.(人类仍然和以前一样嗜血。)可知作者之所以提到罗马人,不仅仅是以此来举例或者是和现在的人进行比较,因为在第二段,作者提到现在的人们喜欢暴力节目并对暴力现象视而不见,所以作者真正的目的在于强调现在的人们和以前的罗马人一样嗜血,故选项D更恰当。
【干扰项排除】
A、B选项根据解析可知属于曲解原文;
C选项,在文章第一段提到,但是过去的人类不知道更好的事情是过去的一种现象而不是作者提到古罗马的原因,属于张冠李戴。
第4题:
【选项释义】
How many dangerous sports does the author mention in this passage? 作者在这篇文章中提到了多少种危险的运动?
A. Three A. 3
B. Five B. 5
C. Six C. 6
D. Seven D. 7
【考查点】事实细节题
【解题思路】原文第一段提到的危险体育运动有:boxing(拳击);bearbaiting(捕熊);第二段提到:hunting(打猎);bull-fighting(斗牛);cars crashing(赛车)。所以选项B正确。
【干扰项排除】A、C、D选项根据解析可知属于曲解原文。
第5题:
【选项释义】
The purpose of the author in writing this passage is _____. 作者写这篇文章的目的是_____。
A. that, by banning the violent sports, we human beings can improve our selves A. (表明)通过禁止暴力运动,我们人类可以改善自我
B. that, by banning the dangerous sports, we can improve the law B. (表明)通过禁止危险的运动,我们可以改善法律
C. that we must lake positive steps to improve social welfare system C. (表明)我们必须采取积极措施改善社会福利制度
D. to show law is the main instrument of social change D. 表明法律是社会变革的主要工具
【考查点】推理判断题
【解题思路】根据第三段的最后两句话:If we banned dangerous and violent sports, we would be moving one step further to improving mankind. We would recognize that violence is degrading and unworthy of human beings.(如果我们禁止危险和暴力的体育运动,对于改善人类我们又迈进了一步。我们将认识到暴力是人类的堕落和不值得。)由此可知,作者认为通过禁止暴力运动,人们能够改善自我。选项A符合原文。
【干扰项排除】B、C、D选项在文章最后一段提到,但不是作者的写作目的,属于答非所问。