請問2023年2月23日雅思閱讀考試真題及答案（2023年8月1日雅思閱讀考試真題答案）

最近經常有小伙伴私信詢問請問2023年2月23日雅思閱讀考試真題及答案（2023年8月1日雅思閱讀考試真題答案）相關的問題，今天，大學路小編整理了以下內容，希望可以對大家有所幫助。

本文目錄一覽：

• 1、請問2023年2月23日雅思閱讀考試真題及答案
• 2、2023年8月1日雅思閱讀考試真題答案
• 3、劍橋雅思閱讀

請問2023年2月23日雅思閱讀考試真題及答案

您好，我是專注留學考試規(guī)劃和留學咨詢的小鐘老師。選擇留學是人生重要的決策之一，而作為您的指導，我非常高興能為您提供最準確的留學解答和規(guī)劃。無論您的問題是關于考試準備、專業(yè)選擇、申請流程還是學校信息，我都在這里為您解答。更多留學資訊和學校招生介紹，歡迎隨時訪問。
前兩天最新一期的雅思考試圓滿結束了，真題及答案也已經新鮮出爐，想必大家都非常感興趣吧。來和小鐘老師看一看2023年2月23日雅思閱讀考試真題及答案。
Passage 1
文章題材：說明文（人文歷史）
文章題目：絲綢之路
文章難度：★★
文章內容：暫無

題型及數量：7填空題+6判斷題
題目及答案：
1、robe
2、taxes
3、gold
4、待補充
5、foreign
6、thread
7、待補充
8、T
9、NG
10、F
11、NG
12、T
13、F
可參考真題：C11T3P1：The Story of Silk
Passage 2
文章題材：說明文（自然動植物）
文章題目：猛犸象
文章難度：★★★★
文章內容：文章介紹了猛犸象及其滅絕的原因猜想。
題型及數量：7填空+6匹配
題目及答案：
14. hunting
15. overkill model
16. disease/hyperdisease
17. empirical evidence
18. climatic instability
19. geographical
20. younger Dryas event
21. A
22. B
23. A
24. B
25. B
26. C
可參考真題：C9T1P3：The History of the Tortoise
考試原文：
Mammoth Kill
Mammoth is any species of the extinct genus Mammuthus， proboscideans commonly equipped with long， curved tusks and in northern species， a covering of long hair. They lived from the Ptiocene epoch from around 5 million years ago， into the Hotocene at about 4，500 years ago， and were members of the family Elephantidae， which contains， along with mammoths， the two genera of modern elephants and their ancestors.
A Like their modern relatives， mammoths were quite large. The largest known species reached heights in the region of 4m at the shoulder and weights up t0 8 tonnes， while exceptionally large males may have exceeded 12 tonnes. However， most species of mammoth were only about as large as a modern Asian elephant. Both sexes bore tusks. A first， *all set appeared at about the age of six months and these were replaced at about 18 months by the permanent set. Growth of the permanent set was at a rate of about l t0 6 inches per year. Based on studies of their close relatives， the modem elephants， mammoths probably had a gestation period of 22 months， resulting in a single calf being born. Their social structure was probably the same as that of African and Asian elephants， with females living in herds headed by a matriarch， whilst hulls lived solitary lives or formed loose groups after sexual maturity.
B MEXICO CITY-Although it’s hard to imagine in this age of urban sprawl and automobiles， North America once belonged to mammoths， camels， ground sloths as large as cows， bear-size beavers and other formidable beasts. Some 11，000 years ago， however， these large bodied mammals and others-about 70 species in all-disappeared. Their demise coincided roughly with the arrival of humans in the New World and dramatic climatic change-factors that have inspired several theories about the die-off. Yet despite decades of scientific investigation， the exact cause remains a mystery. Now new findings offer support to one of these controversial hypotheses： that human hunting drove this megafaunal menagerie （ 巨型動物獸群）to extinction. The overkill model emerged in the 1960s， when it was put forth by Paul S. Martin of the University of Arizona. Since then， critics have charged that no evidence exists to support the idea that the first Americans hunted to the extent necessary to cause these extinctions. But at the annual meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology in Mexico City last October， paleoecologist John Alroy of the University of California at Santa Barbara argued that， in fact， hunting-driven extinction is not only plausible， it was unavoidable. He has determined， using a computer simulation that even a very modest amount of hunting would have wiped these animals out.
C Assuming an initial human population of 100 people that grew no more than 2 percent annually， Alroy determined that if each band of， say， 50 people killed 15 to 20 large mammals a year， humans could have eliminated the animal populations within 1，000 years. Large mammals in particular would have been vulnerable to the pressure because they have longer gestation periods than *aller mammals and their young require extended care.
D Not everyone agrees with Alroy’s asses*ent. For one， the results depend in part on population-size estimates for the extinct animals-figures that are not necessarily reliable. But a more specific critici* comes from mammalogist Ross D. E. MacPhee of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City， who points out that the relevant archaeological record contains barely a dozen examples of stone points embedded in mammoth bones （and none， it should be noted， are known from other megafaunal remains）-hardly what one might expect if hunting drove these animals to extinction. Furthermore， some of these species had huge rangesthe giant Jefferson’s ground sloth， for example， lived as far north as the Yukon and as far south as Mexicowhich would have made slaughtering them in numbers sufficient to cause their extinction rather implausible， he says.
E MacPhee agrees that humans most likely brought about these extinctions （as well as others around the world that coincided with human arrival）， but not directly. Rather he suggests that people may have introduced hyperlethal disease， perhaps through their dogs or hitchhiking vermin， which then spread wildly among the immunologically naive species of the New World. As in the overkill model， populations of large mammals would have a harder time recovering. Repeated outbreaks of a hyperdisease could thus quickly drive them to the point of no return. So far MacPhee does not have empirical evidence for the hyperdisease hypothesis， and it won’t be easy to come by： hyperlethal disease would kill far too quickly to leave its signature on the bones themselves. But he hopes that *yses of tissue and DNA from the last mammoths to perish will eventually reveal murderous microbes.
F The third explanation for what brought on this North American extinction does not involve human beings. Instead， its proponents blame the loss on the weather. The Pleistocene epoch witnessed considerable climatic instability， explains paleontologist Russell W. Graham of the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. As a result， certain habitats disappeared， and species that had once formed communities split apart. For some animals， this change brought opportunity. For much of the megafauna， however， the increasingly homogeneous environment left them with shrinking geographical ranges-a death sentence for large animals， which need large ranges. Although these creatures managed to maintain viable populations through most of the Pleistocene， the final major fluctuation-the so-called Younger Dryas eventpushed them over the edge， Graham says. For his part， Alroy is convinced that human hunters demolished the titans of the Ice Age. The overkill model explains everything the disease and climate scenarios explain， he asserts， and makes accurate predictions about which species would eventually go extinct. “Personally， I’m a vegetarian，” he remarks， “and I find all of this kind of gross-but believable.”
Passage 3
文章題材：說明文（人文研究）
文章題目：大師是怎樣煉成的
文章難度：★★★
文章內容：待補充
題型及數量：4選擇+6判斷+4填空
題目及答案：
27、C
28、C
29、A
30、A
31、NG
32、T
33、NG
34、NG
35、F
36、待補充
37、tuition
38、eight
39、four
40、inherited
可參考真題：C10T2P2：Gifted Children and Learning

以上信息希望能幫助您在留學申請的道路上少走彎路。如果您還有更多問題或需要深入探討，不要猶豫，您可以在我們的留學官方網站上找到更豐富的考試資訊、留學指導和*專家咨詢服務。我們的團隊始終站在您的角度，為您的留學夢想全力以赴。祝您申請順利！

2023年8月1日雅思閱讀考試真題答案

您好，我是專注留學考試規(guī)劃和留學咨詢的小鐘老師。在追尋留學夢想的路上，選擇合適的學校和專業(yè)，準備相關考試，都可能讓人感到迷茫和困擾。作為一名有經驗的留學顧問，我在此為您提供全方位的專業(yè)咨詢和指導。歡迎隨時提問！
8月1號進行了八月初的第一場雅思的考試，相信大家對真題以及答案會非常的感興趣、今天就由小鐘老師為大家介紹2023年8月1日雅思閱讀考試真題答案。
一、考題解析
P1 土地沙漠化
P2 澳大利亞的鸚鵡
P3 多重任務
二、名師點評
1.8月份首場考試的難度總體中等，有出現(xiàn)比較多的配對題，沒有出現(xiàn)Heading題，其余主要以常規(guī)的填空，判斷和選擇題為主。文章的話題和題型搭配也是在劍橋真題中都有跡可循，所以備考重心依然還是劍橋官方真題。
2. 整體分析：涉及環(huán)境類（P1）、動物類（P2）、社科類（P3）。
本次考試的P2和P3均為舊題。P2是動物類的話題，題型組合為：段落細節(jié)配對+單選+summary填空，難度中等。題型上也延續(xù)19年的出題特點，出現(xiàn)配對題，考察定位速度和準確度。P3也出現(xiàn)了段落細節(jié)配對，主要是段落細節(jié)配對+單選+判斷。三種題型難度中等，但是文章理解起來略有難度。
3. 部分答案及參考文章：
Passage 1：土地沙漠化
題型及答案待確認
Passage 2：澳大利亞的鸚鵡
題型：段落細節(jié)配對+單選+Summary填空
技巧分析：由于段落細節(jié)配對是完全亂序出題，在定位時需要先做后面的單選題及填空題，最大化利用已讀信息來確定答案，盡量避免重復閱讀，以保證充分的做題時間。
文章內容及題目參考：
A 概況，關于一個大的生物種類
B 一些物種消失的原因，題干關鍵詞：an example of one bird species extinct
C 一種鸚鵡不能自己存活，以捕食另一種鳥為生，吃該鳥類的蛋。題干關鍵詞：two species competed at the expense of oneanother
D 吸引鸚鵡的原因以及鸚鵡嘴的特點。題干關鍵詞：*ysis of reasons as Australian landscapeattract parrots
E 植物是如何適應鸚鵡。題干關鍵詞：plants attract birds which make the animal adaptto the environment
F 南半球對英語的影響
G 兩種鸚鵡從環(huán)境改變中獲益并存活下來。題干關鍵詞：two species of parrots benefit fromm theenvironment change
H 外來物種及本地鸚鵡
I 鳥類棲息地被破壞以及人類采取的措施
J 作者對于鸚鵡問題的態(tài)度
單選題：
why parrots in the whole world are lineal descendants of
選項關鍵詞：continent split from Africa
the writer thinks parrots species beak is for
選項關鍵詞：adjust to their suitable diet
which one is not mentioned
選項關鍵詞：should be frequently maintained
填空題：分布在文章的前兩段
one-sixth
16th century
mapmaker
John Gould
Passage 3：多重任務
題型：段落細節(jié)配對+單選+判斷
參考答案及文章
28 F
29I
30C
31B
32G
33C
34B
35A
36YES
37YES
38NO
39NOT GIVEN
40NO
Passage3： multitasking
Multitasking Debate—Can you do them at the same time？
Talking on the phone while driving isn＇t the only situationwhere we＇re worse at multitasking than we might like to think we are. Newstudies have identified a bottleneck in our brains that some say means we arefundamentally incapable of true multitasking. If experimental findings reflectreal-world performance， people who think they are multitasking are probablyjust underperforming in all-or at best， all but one -of their parallelpursuits. Practice might improve your performance， but you will never be asgood as when focusing on one task at a time.
The problem， according to René Marois， a psychologist atVanderbilt University in Nashville， Tennessee， is that there＇s a sticking pointin the brain. To demonstrate this， Marois devised an experiment to locate nteers watch a screen and when a particular image appears， a red circle，say， they have to press a key with their index finger. Different colouredcircles require presses from different fingers. Typical response time is about half a second， and thevolunteers quickly reach their peak performance. Then they learn to listen todifferent recordings and respond by making a specific sound. For instance， whenthey hear a bird chirp， they have to say ＂ba＂； an electronic soundshould elicit a ＂ko＂， and so on. Again， no problem. A normal personcan do that in about half a second， with almost no effort. The trouble comeswhen Marois shows the volunteers an image， then almost immediately plays them asound. Now they＇re flummoxed. ＂If you show an image and play a sound atthe same time， one task is postponed，＂ he says. In fact，if the second taskis introduced within the half-second or so it takes to process and react to thefirst， it will simply be delayed until the first one is done. The largestdual-task delays occur when the two tasks are presented simultaneously； delaysprogressively shorten as the interval between presenting the tasks lengthens（See Diagram）.
There are at least three points where we seem to getstuck， says Marois. The first is in simply identifying what we＇re looking can take a few tenths of a second， during which time we are not able tosee and recognise a second item. This limitation is known as the＂attentional blink＂： experiments have shown that if you＇re watchingout for a particular event and a second one shows up unexpectedly any timewithin this crucial window of concentration， it may register in your visualcortex but you will be unable to act upon it. Interestingly， if you don＇texpect the first event， you have no trouble responding to the second. Whatexactly causes the attentional blink is still a matter for debate.
A second limitation is in our short-term visual ＇s estimated that we can keep track of about four items at a time， fewer ifthey are complex. This capacity shortage is thought to explain， in part， our astonishinginability to detect even huge changes in scenes that are otherwise identical，so-called ＂change blindness＂. Show people pairs of near-identicalphotos -say， aircraft engines in one picture have disappeared in the other -andthey will fail to spot the differences （if you don＇t believe it， check out theclips at /~rensink/flicker/download）. Here again， though， thereis disagreement about what the essential limiting factor really is. Does itcome down to a dearth of storage capacity， or is it about how much attention aviewer is paying？
A third limitation is that choosing a response to astimulus -braking when you see a child in the road， for instance，or replyingwhen your mother tells you over the phone that she＇s thinking of leaving yourdad -also takes brainpower. Selecting a response to one of these things willdelay by some tenths of a second your ability to respond to the other. This iscalled the ＂response selection bottleneck＂ theory， first proposed in1952.
Last December， Marois and his colleagues published apaper arguing that this bottleneck is in fact created in two different areas ofthe brain： one in the posterior lateral prefrontal cortex and another in thesuperior medial frontal cortex （Neuron， vol 52， p 1109）. They found this byscanning people＇s brains with functional MRI while the subjects struggled tochoose among eight possible responses to each of two closely timed tasks. Theydiscovered that these brain areas are not tied to any particular sense but aregenerally involved in selecting responses， and they seemed to queue theseresponses when presented with multiple tasks concurrently.
Bottleneck？ What bottleneck？
But David Meyer， a psychologist at the University ofMichigan， Ann Arbor， doesn＇t buy the bottleneck idea. He thinks dual-taskinterference is just evidence of a strategy used by the brain to prioritisemultiple activities. Meyer is known as something of an optimist by his has written papers with titles like ＂Virtually perfect time-sharing indual-task performance： Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck＂（Psychological Science， vol 12， p101）. His experiments have shown that withenough practice -at least 2000 tries -some people can execute two taskssimultaneously as competently as if they were doing them one after the suggests that there is a central cognitive processor that coordinates allthis and， what＇s more， he thinks it uses discretion： sometimes it chooses todelay one task while completing another.
Even with practice， not all people manage to achieve thisharmonious time-share， however. Meyer argues that individual differences comedown to variations in the character of the processor -some brains are just more＂cautious＂， some more ＂daring＂. And despite urban legend，there are no noticeable
differences between men and women. So， according to him，it＇s not a central bottleneck that causes dual-task interference， but rather＂adaptive executive control＂， which ＂schedules task processesappropriately to obey instructions about their relative priorities and serialorder＂.
Marois agrees that practice can sometimes eraseinterference effects. He has found that with just 1 hour of practice each dayfor two weeks， volunteers show a huge improvement at managing both his tasks atonce. Where he disagrees with Meyer is in what the brain is doing to achievethis. Marois speculates that practice might give us the chance to find lesscongested circuits to execute a task -rather like finding trusty back streetsto avoid heavy traffic on main roads -effectively making our response to thetask subconscious. After all， there are plenty of examples of subconsciou*ultitasking that most of us routinely manage： walking and talking， eating andreading， watching TV and folding the laundry.
But while some dual tasks benefit from practice， otherssimply do not. ＂Certain kinds of tasks are really hard to do two atonce，＂ says Pierre Jolicoeur at the University of Montreal， Canada， whoalso studies multitasking. Dual tasks involving a visual stimulus andskeletal-motor response （which he dubs ＂in the eye and out the hand＂）and an auditory stimulus with a verbal response （＂in the ear and out themouth＂） do seem to be amenable to practice， he says. Jolicoeur has foundthat with enough training such tasks can be performed as well together asapart. He speculates that the brain connections that they use may be somehowspecial， because we learn to speak by hearing and learn to move by looking. Butpair visual input with a verbal response， or sound to motor， and there＇s nodramatic improvement. ＂It looks like no amount of practice will allow youto combine these，＂ he says.
For research purposes， these experiments have to be keptsimple. Real-world multitasking poses much greater challenges. Even the upbeatMeyer is sceptical about how a lot of us live our lives. Instant-messaging andtrying to do your homework？ ＂It can＇t be done，＂ he says. Conducting ajob interview while answering emails？ ＂There＇s no way you wind up being asgood.＂ Needless to say， there appear to be no researchers in the area ofmultitasking who believe that you can safely drive a car and carry on a phoneconversation. In fact， last year David Strayer at the University of Utah inSalt Lake City reported that people using cellphones drive no better thandrunks （Human Factors， vol 48， p 381）. In another study， Strayer found thatusing a hands-free kit did not improve a driver＇s response time. He concludedthat what distracts a driver so badly is the very act of talking to someone whoisn＇t present in the car and therefore is unaware of the hazards facing thedriver.
“No researchers believe it＇s safe to drive a car andcarry on a phone conversation”
It probably comes as no surprise that， generallyspeaking， we get worse at multitasking as we age. According to Art Kramer atthe University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign， who studies how ageing affectsour cognitive abilities， we peak in our 20s. Though the decline is slow throughour 30s and on into our 50s， it is there； and after 55， it becomes moreprecipitous. In one study， he and his colleagues had both young and oldparticipants do a simulated driving task while carrying on a conversation. Hefound that while young drivers tended to miss background changes， older driversfailed to notice things that were highly relevant. Likewise， older subjects hadmore trouble paying attention to the more important parts of a scene than youngdrivers.
It＇s not all bad news for over-55s， though. Kramer alsofound that older people can benefit from practice. Not only did they learn toperform better， brain scans showed that underlying that improvement was achange in the way their brains become active.
Whileit＇s clear that practice can often make a difference， especially as we age， thebasic facts remain sobering. ＂We have this impression of an almightycomplex brain，＂ says Marois， ＂and yet we have very humbling andcrippling limits.＂ For most of our history， we probably never needed to domore than one thing at a time， he says， and so we haven＇t evolved to be ableto. Perhaps we will in future， though. We might yet look back one day on peoplelike Debbie and Alun as ancestors of a new breed of true multitaskers.

希望以上的答復能對您的留學申請有所幫助。如果您有任何更詳細的問題或需要進一步的協(xié)助，我強烈推薦您訪問我們的留學官方網站 ，在那里您可以找到更多專業(yè)的留學考試規(guī)劃和留學資料以及*的咨詢服務。祝您留學申請順利！

劍橋雅思閱讀

因為劍橋系列一直是考官和雅思考生的橋梁，也注定會是雅思考試的風向標，劍九的出版，豐富了考生的備考資料。
那么，《劍九》中傳遞了哪樣的信息，延續(xù)了劍橋家族中哪些不變，又呈現(xiàn)了哪些變化，以及劍九對現(xiàn)在的雅思考試究竟有哪些指導意義?該如何有效而高效的利用起這本真題集，來實現(xiàn)內功與考試高分雙增長的目標?
延續(xù)閱讀經典題型
之前學生中道聽途說有很多猜忌，說在留學大潮的當下，雅思考試為了選拔人才，會在2013年有所變革。
縱觀《劍九》中收錄的四套高水準的劍橋真題，各位考生大可不必慌張，雅思考試在今年，乃至可預見的2014年，這兩年題型上應該不會有新題型出現(xiàn)，依然會延續(xù)劍橋家族中的經典題型。
雅思官網上把閱讀部分題型分成十種，總體上分為五種大題型，和五種小題型。
前者分別是LIST OF HEADINGS 選段意題;MATCHING搭配題;TRUE，F(xiàn)ALSE，NOT GIVEN OR YES，NO，NOT GIVEN判斷題，MULTIPLE CHOICE選擇題 和SUMMARY填空題。
那么五種小題型大部分是大題型SUMMARY的延續(xù)，比如填圖表，填流程，看圖填詞，句子填空，和簡答題。
大題型不能存在僥幸心里，五個題型都應該將解題思路爛熟于心，以在考場上迅速切換思路，爭取速度，力求準確。
《劍九》文章收錄最新
《劍四》、《劍五》中的文章主要集中在2001-2003這三年;《劍六》主要來自2004-2005年，《劍七》多數是2006年和2007年這兩年，于是《劍八》中收錄的文章，主要是考場上2008年考過的文章，部分來自2007年，個別來自2009年，這次《劍九》中收錄的文章，比對了以往的考題，主要來自2009年，個別來自2011年和2012年。
其中有兩篇文章在考場上考察了不下四次，這次也光榮退休到《劍九》的真題集中：IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE? (《搜索外星生物》 來自2002年，2004年6月26日，2007年1月20日，2009年12月19日)，和另外一篇 Venus in transit 《金星凌日》來自2007年5月19日，2008年6月21日，2009年2月28日和2012年4月28日)這就印證了我們一貫的猜測，考場上依然有很多舊題在用，有的甚至能用到4次才退休。
所以我們點題班上為學員整理的內容，還是十分有用的。雖然劍九中收錄的文章較以往劍橋系列已經為最新的了(多為2009年)，但是很多不了解雅思出題動態(tài)的同學依然不滿足，期待能多出現(xiàn)2012年或2011年的題目。
其實這是并無意義的，在雅思考試中，文章文本只是依托，我們的任務是做題得分。
結合了2012年全年47場考試141篇閱讀文章，我們還是能夠洞察出這次劍橋大學考試委員會在編篡劍九的時候還是用了心思的，他們側重了題型的分配，對現(xiàn)在備考有很大的指導作用。
透露題型考察重點
就大題型而言List of headings 題目數量驟降，與2012年全年的7%數字吻合，體現(xiàn)驟降。
Matching題普遍上升，與2012年全年25%的數字，即每次考試近乎10道搭配題，數量一致，其中人名配理論為普通搭配型的重中之重，《劍九》中一共有兩道大題是普通型的搭配，通通都是人名配理論。
另外搭配題中的段落配相關信息型飆升(即如下幾個信息在原文中哪個自然段有所提及型)，請廣大考生注意備考側重。
其它的題型，判斷題仍然占有絕對優(yōu)勢，Multiple choice 單多選題， 并無出眾表現(xiàn)。SUMMARY 從數量上較以往劍橋系列有所下降，但是結合了它繁衍成的小題型來看一點都不少。
那么小題型中，《劍九》中雖沒有出現(xiàn)表格題，但這對我們絲毫沒有影響，因為表格題直接套用填空題的方法即可。
不過有意思的是，簡答題象一匹黑馬沖了出來，其它的劍橋系列都沒怎么出題的簡答題，在《劍九》中大量出現(xiàn)，有兩點發(fā)現(xiàn)：
第一，完善了劍橋系列的閱讀題型，針對簡答題讓考生有題可練，有題能練，而且能夠通過劍九練透。
第二，讓考生意識到，稍微方法不同與SUMMARY的小題型考察數量在增加，除了簡答，完成句子中類似普通MATCHING題的比重也有所增加。
這個趨勢已經從2013年的頭幾個月考試中能夠顯露出來。
如何高效利用《劍九》?
考前兩周當真題沖刺用，結合聽力部分，完全利用《劍九》當模擬題來考察自己的能力。
建議?？紩r間設定在周一和周三，周二和周四進行分析，周五查漏補缺，周六親臨考場。
做題順序建議：按順序即可：Test1- Test2-Test3-Test4 等級為： 中——難——難——中。解釋一下，第一套用中等水平題目驗證一下自己復習的是否充分有效，如果不如預期，停下來分析劍橋6，7，8做過的題目。
分析好了以后再回來操作劍九第二套，而后第三套，經歷了難度遞增之后，最后臨考前加強信心，做第四套。
每每做完套題都不要立刻對答案，這樣就不可避免的會對著答案往文章里去思考，從而不能達到能力的提高。
應該采取三步走，第一步，先嚴格計時做，第二步再可放松時間延時做，最后第三步翻著字典做。
三遍都經歷之后，才可核對答案，記錄下三次的答案是否有出入，找到自己的不足。
延時后能多對幾個的，說明語言還不錯，可能方法上有漏洞，以至于一卡時間，語言就發(fā)揮不出來了。
查字典后能多對上幾個的，說明內功不足，這樣短時間大體上就可以找到自己的問題。
然后需要靜下心來，認真分析。錯題對題都需要回原文，定位分析，推敲答案。
詳情，201303/11/3909.html查看。

以上就是大學路小編整理的內容，想要了解更多相關資訊內容敬請關注大學路。