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”
上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] 下一页
责任编辑：虫虫
您现在的位置：