托福聽(tīng)力備考中如何發(fā)現(xiàn)自身真實(shí)問(wèn)題

由 一網(wǎng)寶 分享時(shí)間：2022-07-24 19:23:00 加入收藏我要投稿點(diǎn)贊

托福聽(tīng)力考試的題型是比較固定的，并不會(huì)突然冒出一些大家沒(méi)見(jiàn)過(guò)要求奇奇怪怪的特殊題型。今天小編給大家?guī)?lái)托福聽(tīng)力常見(jiàn)題型解題思路講解，希望能夠幫助到大家，下面小編就和大家分享，來(lái)欣賞一下吧。

托福聽(tīng)力常見(jiàn)題型解題思路講解：結(jié)構(gòu)題和態(tài)度題

結(jié)構(gòu)題

結(jié)構(gòu)題是以錄音材料的行文結(jié)構(gòu)、展開(kāi)順序作為考查內(nèi)容的題型，常見(jiàn)的提問(wèn)方式有以下幾種：

What is the organization of this passage?

How is the lecture organized?

What method does the professor use to develop his idea?

在實(shí)際考試中，結(jié)構(gòu)題考得并不多，但是解答起來(lái)卻令很多考生感覺(jué)頭疼。因?yàn)槿魏我黄浺舨牧隙疾粫?huì)主動(dòng)講出“本文是一種怎樣的結(jié)構(gòu)”，因此想從講述人所說(shuō)的內(nèi)容中直接找到答案是很困難的。那么想解答這種題目，考生就需要在復(fù)習(xí)時(shí)熟練掌握托福聽(tīng)力的錄音材料有哪幾種常見(jiàn)結(jié)構(gòu)，每種結(jié)構(gòu)有什么特征。只有這樣，在做題的時(shí)候才能夠做到有針對(duì)性地聽(tīng)題。

態(tài)度題

態(tài)度題是考查說(shuō)話人對(duì)某話題所持的態(tài)度的題型。這種題型考查的范圍比較廣泛，有些題目考查說(shuō)話人對(duì)某人的態(tài)度，有些則考查說(shuō)話人對(duì)某事件的態(tài)度，還有的題目會(huì)考查說(shuō)話人對(duì)某觀點(diǎn)的態(tài)度。態(tài)度題常見(jiàn)的提問(wèn)方式如下：

What is the professor’s attitude toward the expert on the television programme?

在解態(tài)度題時(shí)，講話人的語(yǔ)氣和語(yǔ)調(diào)是一個(gè)非常重要的解題因素。在錄音中，如果說(shuō)話人突然出現(xiàn)聲音變大、語(yǔ)調(diào)降低或者說(shuō)話重復(fù)、結(jié)巴等現(xiàn)象，往往都從側(cè)面表明了其對(duì)某一事物所持的態(tài)度。考生在聽(tīng)到這樣的句子時(shí)一定要加以辨識(shí)。

2020托福聽(tīng)力練習(xí)：害羞的魚(yú)類更喜歡追隨同樣膽小的魚(yú)

When you think of a leader, you may think of an individual who is above all bold. But a new study of fish called sticklebacks shows that shy individuals actually prefer to follow fish that are similarly timid.

Researchers had trios of sticklebacks with known personalities play follow the leader. The fish were placed in a tank that had some plastic plants at one end and some food hidden at the other. In some of the groups, a bold fish and a shy fish acted as leaders, while another shy fish followed. And in other groups, it was a bold fish that did the following. The researchers recorded whether the follower sallied forth more frequently with the fish that was behaviorally similar or the one that was different.

What they found is that shy fish were more likely to emerge from under cover when an equally wary fellow was already out there. Bold follower fish did not seem to care which leader they followed.

Of course, no matter which fish a stickleback chose to stick with, the bold fish did lead more expeditions over the course of the experiment than their more retiring friends. That’s because the bold fish initiated more trips, regardless of who might be tailing them. The findings are in the journal Biology Letters.

The researchers write that "when offered a choice of leaders, sticklebacks prefer to follow individuals whose personality matches their own, but bolder individuals may, nevertheless, be able to impose their leadership, even among shy followers, simply through greater effort." We may soon see if such tendencies also hold true in humans, when Americans decide who they’ll follow in November. Unless, of course, something fishy happens.

你可能認(rèn)為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者通常都是非常大膽的個(gè)體。但是一項(xiàng)有關(guān)刺魚(yú)的新研究表示，害羞的魚(yú)類更喜歡追隨同樣膽小的魚(yú)。

研究人員將已知性格的三只刺魚(yú)分為一組，觀察它們追隨領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者的情況。刺魚(yú)被放在一個(gè)水箱里，水箱的一頭有一些塑料植物，另一頭藏有一些食物。在有些組中，一只大膽的魚(yú)和一只害羞的魚(yú)充當(dāng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者，而另一只害羞的魚(yú)則跟隨它們。而在其他組中，跟隨的卻是一只大膽的魚(yú)。研究人員記錄了跟隨者采取行動(dòng)的頻率，看它們是跟隨行為相似的魚(yú)出現(xiàn)的次數(shù)更多，還是跟隨性格相反的魚(yú)出來(lái)的次數(shù)更多。

研究人員得出的結(jié)論是，當(dāng)同樣謹(jǐn)慎的魚(yú)出現(xiàn)時(shí)，害羞的魚(yú)更可能從遮蔽物中出來(lái)。大膽的跟隨者似乎并不在乎它們跟隨的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者是誰(shuí)。

當(dāng)然了，在實(shí)驗(yàn)過(guò)程中，無(wú)論一只刺魚(yú)選擇跟隨哪只魚(yú)，大膽的魚(yú)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的探險(xiǎn)多于靦腆的魚(yú)。這是因?yàn)闊o(wú)論是誰(shuí)在跟隨，大膽的魚(yú)發(fā)起的探險(xiǎn)更多。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果發(fā)表在《生物學(xué)通訊》上。

研究人員寫(xiě)道：“在可以選擇領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者時(shí)，刺魚(yú)更喜歡跟隨在個(gè)性上同自己相符的個(gè)體，但是即使在害羞的魚(yú)中間，較大膽的個(gè)體也能通過(guò)加倍努力來(lái)施加它們的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力。”我們很快就會(huì)看到這種趨向性是否同樣適用于人類，因?yàn)槊绹?guó)人將于今年11月決定他們要追隨的人選。除非發(fā)生可疑的事情。

1. sally forth 勇敢投入;

例句：With these desperate speeches he sallied forth upon the desiegers.

說(shuō)完這些絕望的話，他就朝圍攻的人沖去。

2. be likely to do sth. 可能(做…)的;有(…)傾向的;

例句：The fires are likely to permanently deforest the land.

這些火災(zāi)很可能會(huì)徹底毀掉這片土地上的森林。

3. stick with 緊跟;緊隨;和…呆在一起;

例句：Tugging the woman's arm, she pulled her to her side saying: 'You just stick with me, dear.'

她拽著那個(gè)女人的胳膊，將她拉到自己身邊說(shuō)：“親愛(ài)的，你就跟我呆在一起?！?/p>

4. regardless of 不顧;不管;不論;

例句：We will do it regardless of what might happen.

不管情況怎樣，我們決意這樣做。

5. hold true 同樣適用;

例句：This law is known to hold true for galaxies at a distance of at least several billion light years.

這個(gè)定律被普遍認(rèn)為同樣適用于至少數(shù)十億光年之遠(yuǎn)的星系。

2020托福聽(tīng)力練習(xí)：美國(guó)總統(tǒng)候選人或因逃避問(wèn)題受到指責(zé)

This campaign season, there's been plenty of name calling and lots of accusations.

David Clementson, a PhD candidate at The Ohio State University, has been keeping tabs.

"I mean there was one debate where Rubio and Cruz were just all over Trump, accusing him of dodging questions."

"But that doesn't answer the question."

"He didn't answer…"

"You have yet to answer a single serious question about any of this."

Clementson wanted to see if claims of question dodging actually held up, historically—not necessarily in the unique case of Trump.

So Clementson analyzed the transcripts of 14 presidential debates, from 1996 to 2012.

Overall, he found 51 accusations of question dodging—26 by Dems, 25 by Republicans.

A third of the time, the accused candidate did in fact go off-topic.

But in every single case, the accused candidate still mentioned the question topic.

Meaning that most of the time, he says, candidates are unfairly accused of question-dodging.

The results are in the Journal of Language and Social Psychology.

Clementson's advice for the next debate?

"Just because a politician of your partisan affiliation or your party ID is telling you that the other guy can't be believed, doesn't necessarily mean that that politician is accurately detecting deception."

In other words, don't trust'em.

Because the politician doing the accusing may be the one telling lies.

"Lying Ted…h(huán)e's a liar."

美國(guó)總統(tǒng)大選正展開(kāi)激烈爭(zhēng)奪，而其中卻充斥著諸多謾罵及指責(zé)。

美國(guó)俄亥俄州立大學(xué)的博士生大衛(wèi)·克萊門(mén)森，一直在從事這方面的研究。

“我指的是盧比奧和克魯茲曾一度指責(zé)特朗普的逃避問(wèn)題?！?/p>

“但那并不是回答問(wèn)題?！?/p>

“他沒(méi)回應(yīng)…”

美國(guó)總統(tǒng)大選.jpg

“你還沒(méi)有回答這個(gè)非常嚴(yán)肅的問(wèn)題”。

克萊門(mén)森想要看看逃避問(wèn)題的主張是否真的會(huì)變成對(duì)手發(fā)難的軟肋，過(guò)往歷史顯示在特朗普的這種特例情況并不一定。

因此，克萊門(mén)森分析了從1996年到2012年14位總統(tǒng)候選人之間的辯論記錄。