2018年2月雅思真题回忆及解析.doc
- 【下载声明】
1. 本站全部试题类文档,若标题没写含答案,则无答案;标题注明含答案的文档,主观题也可能无答案。请谨慎下单,一旦售出,不予退换。
2. 本站全部PPT文档均不含视频和音频,PPT中出现的音频或视频标识(或文字)仅表示流程,实际无音频或视频文件。请谨慎下单,一旦售出,不予退换。
3. 本页资料《2018年2月雅思真题回忆及解析.doc》由用户(雁南飞1234)主动上传,其收益全归该用户。163文库仅提供信息存储空间,仅对该用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上传内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请立即通知163文库(点击联系客服),我们立即给予删除!
4. 请根据预览情况,自愿下载本文。本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。
5. 本站所有资源如无特殊说明,都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007及以上版本和PDF阅读器,压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 雅思历年真题及答案
- 资源描述:
-
1、2018年2月雅思真题回忆及解析面对雅思考试,适度紧张,可以帮助我们更好地做好考前备考。在这个阶段,建议同学们不妨来看看无忧考网搜集整理的2018年2月雅思真题回忆。2018年2月共举行了4场考试,考试时间为2月1日、2月3日、2月10日、2月24日。以下内容仅供参考。2月1日雅思阅读真题回忆:Passage 1题目 英国农业 话题分类 社会科学题型及对应数量填空题:7 题 判断题:6 题 内容回忆 本文讲英国农业问题,农作物对环境的影响,以及粮食不足的问题。文章一部分讲在非洲进口粮食会更加环保,节省欧洲用地和降低对环境的影响,但后面又说在欧洲本地种植农作物也挺好,不过成本较高。Passage
2、 2题目 古埃及壁画话题分类 人文科学题型及数量 人名观点匹配题、填空题内容回忆 在古埃及壁画上发现海运,由此列出 4 个科学家对此的观点和研究成果。题目回忆 暂缺Passage 3题目 Communication in science/科学界交流话题分类 人文科学题型及数量 选择题(5)、判断题(4)、Summary 填空题(5)内容回忆 参考原文:A Science plays an increasingly significant role in peoples lives, making the faithful communication of scientific developm
3、ents more important than ever. Yet such communication is fraught with challenges that can easily distort discussions, leading to unnecessary confusion and misunderstandings. B Some problems stem from the esoteric nature of current research and the associated difficulty of finding sufficiently faithf
4、ul terminology. Abstraction and complexity are not signs that a given scientific direction is wrong, as some commentators have suggested, but are instead a tribute to the success of human ingenuity in meeting the increasingly complex challenges that nature presents. They can, however, make communica
5、tion more difficult. But many of the biggest challenges for science reporting arise because in areas of evolving research, scientists themselves often only partly understand the full implications of any particular advance or development. Since that dynamic applies to most of the scientific developme
6、nts that directly affect peoples lives global warming, cancer research, diet studieslearning how to overcome it is critical to spurring a more informed scientific debate among the broader public. C Ambiguous word choices are the source of some misunderstandings. Scientistsoften employ colloquial ter
7、minology, which they then assign a specificmeaning that is impossible to fathom without proper training. The term“relativity,” for example, is intrinsically misleading. Many interpret thetheory to mean that everything is relative and there are no absolutes.Yet although the measurements any observer
8、makes depend on hiscoordinates and reference frame, the physical phenomena he measureshave an invariant description that transcends that observers particularcoordinates. Einsteins theory of relativity is really about finding aninvariant description of physical phenomena. True, Einstein agreed withth
9、e idea that his theory would have been better named“Invariantentheorie.” But the term “relativity” was alreadyentrenched at the time for him to change.D “The uncertaintyprinciple” is another frequently abused term. It is sometimesinterpreted as a limitation on observers and their ability to makemeas
10、urements.E But it is not about intrinsic limitations on any oneparticular measurement; it is about the inability to precisely measureparticular pairs of quantities simultaneously? The first interpretation isperhaps more engaging from philosophical or political perspective. Itsjust not what the scien
11、ce is about.F Even the word “theory” can be aproblem. Unlike most people, who use the word to describe a passingconjecture that they often regard as suspect, physicists have veryspecific ideas in mind when they talk about theories. For physicists,theories entail a definite physical framework embodie
12、d in asset offundamental assumptions about the world that lead to a specific set ofequations and predictionsones that are borne out by successfulpredictions. Theories arenat necessarily shown to be correct orcomplete immediately. Even Einstein took the better part of a decade todevelop the correct v
13、ersion of his theory of general relativity. Buteventually both the ideas and the measurements settle down andtheories are either proven correct, abandoned or absorbed into other,more encompassing theories.G “Global warming” is anotherexample of problematic terminology. Climatologists predict more dr
14、astic fluctuations in temperature and rainfall not necessarily that every place will be warmer. The name sometimes subverts the debate, since it lets people argue that their winter was worse, so how could there be global warming? Clearly “global climate change”would have been a better name. But not
15、all problems stem solely from poor word choices. Some stem from the intrinsically complex nature of much of modern science. Science sometimes transcends this limitation: remarkably, chemists were able to detail the precise chemical processes involved in the destruction of the ozone layer, making the
16、 evidence that chlorofluorocarbon gases (Freon, for example) were destroying the ozone layer indisputable. H A better understanding of the mathematical significance of results and less insistence on a simple story would help to clarify many scientific discussions. For several months, Harvard was tor
17、tured months, Harvard was tortured by empty debates over the relative intrinsic scientific abilities of men adwomen. One of the more amusing aspects of the discussion was that those who believed in the differences and those who didt used the same evidence about gender-specific special ability. How c
18、ould that be? The answer is that the data shows no substantial effects. Social factors might account for these tiny differences, which in any case have an unclear connection to scientific ability. Not much of a headline when phrased that way, is it? Each type of science has its own source of complex
19、ity and potential for miscommunication. Yet there are steps we can take to improve public understanding in all cases. The first would be to inculcate greater understanding and acceptance of indirect scientific evidence. The information from an unmanned space mission is noels legitimate than the info
20、rmation from one in which people are on board. I This doest mean never questioning an interpretation, but it also doesmean equating indirect evidence with blind belief, as people sometimes suggest. Second, we might need different standards for evaluating science with urgent policy implications than
21、research with purely theoretical value. When scientists say they are not certain about their predictions, it doest necessarily mean theyvet found nothing substantial. It would be better if scientists were more open about the mathematical significance of their results and if the public didt treat mat
22、h as quite so scary; statistics and errors, which tell us the uncertainty in a measurement, give us the tools to evaluate new developments fairly. J But most important, people have to recognize that science can be complex. If we accept only simple stories, the description will necessarily be distort
23、ed. When advances are subtle or complicated, scientists should be willing to go the extra distance to give proper explanations and the public should be more patient about the truth. Even so, some difficulties are unavoidable. Most developments reflect work in progress, so the story is complex becaus
24、e no one yet knows the big picture.题目回忆27.why the faithful science communication important? Answer: Science plays an increasingly significant role in peoples lives.28.what is the reason that the anther believe for the biggest challenges for science reporting? Answer: C Scientists do not totally comp
展开阅读全文