GRE阅读文章遇到生词怎么办
任何一次出国考试都是重大挑战，在阅读中，很多同学都害怕遇到生词，往往理解错一个词，意思就会变。下面我们一起来看看以下这篇文章，在GRE考试中，文章阅读遇到生词怎么办。
GRE阅读文章遇到生词怎么办
首先要说的是，在GRE阅读教学的研究当中，语言学家们发现，一篇文章中不认识的单词占全文词汇总量的比例只要控制在8%以内，是绝对不会影响到我们对全文任何观点的理解的。基于这一点，我们大家大可不必因为遇到了几个我们完全没见过的奇形怪状的单词而感到头痛和挣扎。因为它们不足以对我们理解文章产生影响。
但同时，我们在阅读文章的过程中也常常会碰到这样的一种单词，那就是专有名词，尤其是涉及全文主题的专有名词，难道我们就必须一一认识它?答案显然是否定的。什么叫做认识专有名词?从英到汉的翻译叫做认识?还是知道专有名词的特征叫做认识?读者请想想看，我们在阅读理解中有没有遇到过这样的问题提法：What is sedge root? 我想没有，因为这种问法是在问专有名词的翻译。我们遇到的是这样的一些问法：According to the passage， which of the following statements about sedge root is true? What can be inferred from the passage about sedge root? 这些问题的提法却是在问专有名词的文中阐述特征。我们再从文章本身对这个问题做出进一步的分析。
假设原文有这样一句话：Sedge root， a woody fiber that can be easily separated into strands， is essential to basketry production. 请问sedge root的中文翻译“莎草的根” 能够帮助我们解决阅读理解题目吗?我想很难!真正能够帮助我们解决阅读理解题目的应该是这样的文字a woody fiber (木制纤维)和定语从句中的文字部分can be easily separated into strands (能够轻易地被分割成线)。通过以上的分析，想必大家已经非常清楚地认识到，过去我们拼命去死记硬背专有名词的中文释义是多么愚蠢的行为。因为真正的认识应该是对特征的认识，所以一个专有名词和他的中文释义对我们来说是没有任何意义的，毕竟我们对它们都没有任何的概念。
最后很多人都说我们可以从上下文中猜出单词的释义，难道真的是这样么? 认为从上下文中猜出单词的释义是不现实的。例如有这样一句话“Supernova is a massive star which undergoes gravitational collapse.” 我们是不可能从上下文中猜出supernova的释义“超新星”的。而我们真正能够做到的只是从上下文中猜出单词的特征：supernova是巨大的恒星(massive star)，它在进行引力收缩(undergoes gravitational collapse)。于是以后当我们遇到不认识的单词，我们可以再也不用停下来思考单词的释义，也不用费尽思量地去猜所谓的单词的释义，我们需要做的只是静下心来在后面找到单词在文章当中传达的特征就可以。
GRE阅读短篇文章练习
Each of two particular inspection systems that are based on different principles would detect all product flaws but would also erroneously reject three percent of flawless products.Assuming there is no overlap between the products erroneously rejected by the two systems and also no interference between the systems if both operate， using both systems and rejecting only those products found flawed by both would be a way of avoiding all erroneous rejections.
Which of the following most precisely characterizes the reasoning in the argument?
(A)The reasoning is conclusive， that is， the conclusion cannot be false if the statements offered in its support are true.
(B)The reasoning is strong but not conclusive， if the statements offered in support of the conclusion are true， they provide good grounds for that conclu-sion， though it is possible that additional infor-mation might weaken the argument.
(C)The reasoning is weak; the statements offered in support of the conclusion， though relevant to it， by themselves provide at best inadequate grounds for the conclusion.
(D)The reasoning is flawed in that the conclusion is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of evidence offered in its support.
(E)The reasoning is flawed in that the argument treats evidence that a factor is necessary to bring about an event as if it were evidence that the factor is sufficient to bring about that event.
答案：A
GRE考试相关文章：
