雅思閱讀中所謂的對(duì)長(zhǎng)句的處理就是指能清楚地知道這個(gè)長(zhǎng)句的主干在是什么呢，基本上指的就是這個(gè)長(zhǎng)句的主謂賓或主謂表是什么。這樣的話，就大大減輕了考生的負(fù)擔(dān)和壓力。因?yàn)橹鞲傻膯卧~往往都相對(duì)而言比較簡(jiǎn)單，并且，主干上的意思基本上就是作者的要表達(dá)的意義。當(dāng)然，還有一個(gè)點(diǎn)是能弄懂長(zhǎng)句的比較有立竿見(jiàn)影的好處就是出題者的出題特點(diǎn)。下面是小編為您收集整理的雅思閱讀長(zhǎng)難句分，供大家參考!

　　雅思閱讀長(zhǎng)難句分析

　　我們先來(lái)看幾個(gè)例子

　　1. 題目：Research completed in 1982 found that in the United States soil erosion……(C3T2P2)

　　A reduced the productivity of farmland by20 per cent

　　B was almost as severe as in India and China

　　C was causing significant damage to 20 per cent of farmland

　　D could be reduced by converting cultivated land to meadow or forest

　　原文：The United States, where the most careful measurements have been done, discovered in 1982 that about one-fifth of its farmland was losing topsoil at a rate likely to diminish the soil’s productivity.

　　很明顯，原文是一個(gè)長(zhǎng)句，而對(duì)于長(zhǎng)句的處理就是找出主干，我們可以看出來(lái)，這個(gè)句子的主干是The United States discovered in 1982 that about one-fifth of its farmland was losing topsoil。所以答案就非常明顯應(yīng)該選擇C。所以你會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)很多考生都會(huì)選的A項(xiàng)經(jīng)過(guò)對(duì)此長(zhǎng)句的分析，它根本就不在此長(zhǎng)句的主干，也就是說(shuō)這是對(duì)作者要表達(dá)的意思的補(bǔ)充說(shuō)明。從這里我們可以看出，出題者對(duì)干擾項(xiàng)的出題思路，干擾項(xiàng)所在的位置都是定位句子的非主干部分。

　　2. 題目：Paragraph B How the port changes a city’s infrastructure (C2T2P3)

　　原文：Port cities become industrial, financial and service centers and political capitals because of their water connections and the urban concentration which arises there and later draws to it railway, highways and air routes. Water transport means cheap access, the chief basis of all port cities. Many of the world’s biggest cities, for example, London, New York, Shanghai, Istanbul, Buenos Aries, Tokyo, Jakarta, Calcutta, Philadelphia and San Francisco began as ports—that is, with land-sea exchange as their major function—but they have since grown disproportionately in other respects, so that their port functions are no longer dominant. They remain different kinds of places from non-port cities and their port functions account for that difference.

　　做這一道題的時(shí)候，考生只要知道出題者的出干擾項(xiàng)的思路，就不會(huì)選How the port changes a city’s infrastructure這個(gè)小標(biāo)題。很多考生之所以會(huì)選這個(gè)答案，很大程度上是因?yàn)榫洌篜ort cities become industrial, financial and service centers and political capitals because of their water connections and the urban concentration which arises there and later draws to it railway, highways and air routes. city’s infrastructure想對(duì)應(yīng)的就是railway, highways and air routes。然而我們可以看到這個(gè)長(zhǎng)句的主干是：Port cities become industrial, financial and service centers and political capitals。故這個(gè)小標(biāo)題是個(gè)干擾項(xiàng)。

　　3. 題目：Paragraph B Ottawa International Conference on Health Promotion

　　Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion (C2T1P2)

　　原文：At the Ottawa Conference in 1986, a charter was developed which outlined new directions for health promotion based on the socio-ecological view of health. This charter, known as the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, remains as the backbone of health action today. In exploring the scope of health promotion it states that:

　　Good health is a major resource for social, economic and personal development and an important dimension of quality of life. Political, economica, social, cultural, environmental, behavioural and biological factors can all favour health or be harmful to it.(WHO, 1986)

　　The Ottawa Charter brings practical meaning and action to this broad notion of health promotion. It presents fundamental strategies and approaches in achieving health for all. The overall philosophy of health promotion which guides these fundamental strategies and approaches is one of ‘enabling people to increase control over and to improve their health’ (WHO, 1986).

　　同樣的道理，我們之間看到，這里的句：At the Ottawa Conference in 1986, a charter was developed which outlined new directions for health promotion based on the socio-ecological view of health.這個(gè)句子的主干就是：a charter was developed。所以小標(biāo)題中的Ottawa International Conference on Health Promotion 就是干擾項(xiàng)的常用的招數(shù)。

　　可以發(fā)現(xiàn)出題者的出題特點(diǎn)，基本上，正確答案一定是主干上的同意轉(zhuǎn)化，而干擾項(xiàng)上的答案都出自定語(yǔ)上。所以這也就是為什么烤鴨若能完全掌握長(zhǎng)句的處理，短期內(nèi)會(huì)有一定的提高。

　　從以上整理的雅思閱讀長(zhǎng)難句實(shí)例講解中就不難看出，這部分對(duì)于雅思閱讀中長(zhǎng)難句把握不好的學(xué)生問(wèn)題多半都處在語(yǔ)法結(jié)構(gòu)分析不清晰，所以要加強(qiáng)的話，語(yǔ)法基礎(chǔ)還是重點(diǎn)。

　　雅思閱讀素材：北京空氣污染

　　前幾天北京的空氣污染，讓市民都不敢出門(mén)，這也是個(gè)時(shí)事新聞，有心的同學(xué)們應(yīng)該準(zhǔn)備相關(guān)素材，以更加全面的進(jìn)行準(zhǔn)備。以下就是關(guān)于環(huán)境類的雅思閱讀素材，供大家參考：

　　2013年1月15日雅思閱讀精選：北京空氣污染——最黑暗的

　　From：The Economist, Jan 14th 2013, 4:49 by T.P. | BEIJING

　　Beijing's air pollution

　　Blackest day

　　ON January 12th of last year, in an article in the print edition of The Economist, we reported that the public outcry over Beijing’s atrocious air quality was putting pressure on officials to release more data about more kinds of pollutants. We also noted that Chinese authorities had already embarked on a wide range of strategies to improve air quality, and that they probably deserve more credit than either foreign or domestic critics tend to give them. But we concluded with the sad reality that such work takes decades, and that “Beijing residents will need to wait before seeing improvements.”

　　On January 12th of this year, Beijing residents got an acrid taste of what that wait might be like, as they suffered a day of astonishingly bad air. Pollution readings went, quite literally, off the charts. Saturday evening saw a reading of 755 on the Air Quality Index (AQI). That index is based on the recently revised standards of the American Environmental Protection Agency (the EPA), which nominally maxes out at 500. For more perspective, consider that any reading above 100 is deemed “unhealthy for sensitive groups” and that anything above 400 is rated “hazardous” for all.

　　Like many Beijing residents, your correspondent has mobile-phone apps that keep up with the pollution readings. At an otherwise pleasant Saturday-evening meal with friends, he joined his companions in compulsively checking for updates.

　　Those previously unseen numbers were hard to believe, but they did seem to match up well enough with the noxious soup we could see, smell and taste outside. We are all far more familiar with the specifics of air-quality measurement than we would like to be. Apart from the AQI readings above 700, we were quite struck to see the readings for the smallest and most dangerous sort of particulate matter, called PM 2.5, which can enter deep into the respiratory system. These are named for the size, in microns, of the particles. A reading at a controversial monitoring station run by the American embassy showed a PM 2.5 level of 886 micrograms per cubic metre; Beijing’s own municipal monitoring centre acknowledged readings in excess of 700 micrograms.

　　For perspective on that set of figures, consider that the guideline values set by the World Health Organisation regard any air with more than 25 micrograms of PM 2.5 per cubic metre as being of unacceptable quality.

　　Chinese authorities have complained about the American embassy's insistence on independently monitoring—and publicly reporting—Beijing’s air quality. And sometimes much is made of the vast differences between those readings and China’s own official ones, which are often less dire. Indeed, a key feature of one of those mobile-phone apps is the side-by-side comparison of those competing data-sets. (It is of course a bad sign that people here need more than one app to keep up with all this.)

　　But on a day like Saturday, the discrepancy between official readings and independent ones hardly seemed to matter; you didn't need a weatherman to know which way the ill wind blew. Or failed to blow, as the case may have been. One expert quoted by Chinese media attributed this spike in pollution to a series of windless days that allowed pollutants to accumulate.

　　But wind can be a problem when it does blow, too. In the outlying provinces that are part of Beijing’s airshed, there is a great deal of heavy industry. Pollution regulations are much harder to enforce there. And, in this colder-than-average winter, people have been burning more coal and wood than usual.

　　It is likely to be many more Januarys to come before China gets the upper hand on its air-pollution problems. Indeed, as we mentioned last January 12th, after nearly sixty years of trying and a vast amount of progress, the city of Los Angeles has yet to meet America's federal air-quality standards. If there is any consolation to what Beijing had to endure this January 12th, it is that it should lend urgency to the public outcry, and help speed things in the right direction.

　　The other consolation is that readings like the ones showing now on Monday midday (in the mid 300s, merely “hazardous” and “severely polluted”) feel fine by comparison.

　　(Picture credit: AFP)

　　北京空氣污染——最黑暗的

　　去年1月12日，我們?cè)谟∷娴摹督?jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)人》中報(bào)道了公眾關(guān)于北京惡劣空氣質(zhì)量的呼吁迫使官方發(fā)布更多種類污染物數(shù)據(jù)一事。我們也注意到中國(guó)政府開(kāi)始著手于采用多種策略來(lái)提高空氣質(zhì)量，因此他應(yīng)該受到來(lái)自國(guó)外或者國(guó)內(nèi)評(píng)論家更多的信任。但令人沮喪的現(xiàn)實(shí)是，這些工作需要花費(fèi)數(shù)十年來(lái)完成，“在情況有所改觀以前，北京居民還需等待些許時(shí)日。”

　　今年1月12日，北京居民的等待換來(lái)的卻是辛辣的感覺(jué)，因?yàn)樗麄兘?jīng)歷了空氣質(zhì)量出奇惡劣的。毫不夸張地，污染物讀數(shù)飆升，超過(guò)了記錄。星期六晚上，空氣質(zhì)量指數(shù)為755.這個(gè)指數(shù)是基于美國(guó)環(huán)境保護(hù)署最近修改的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，名義上的值為500.有更多觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為，指數(shù)只要高出100就會(huì)“不利于敏感人群的健康”，高出400的話，就會(huì)對(duì)所有人“有危險(xiǎn)”。

　　像很多北京居民一樣，我們記者的移動(dòng)手機(jī)應(yīng)用程序可以時(shí)刻更新污染指數(shù)。本應(yīng)該是一次和朋友相聚其樂(lè)融融的周六晚餐，他卻與同伴們不斷地檢查著數(shù)據(jù)的更新。

　　先前沒(méi)有看到的那些數(shù)字有些難以置信，但是從我們看到聞到外面濃厚的毒霧來(lái)判斷，應(yīng)該也差不多。雖然我們不愿承認(rèn)，但我們對(duì)測(cè)量空氣質(zhì)量的細(xì)節(jié)心知肚明。除了空氣質(zhì)量指數(shù)超過(guò)700之外，PM 2.5——空氣中最小但最危險(xiǎn)并可以進(jìn)入呼吸系統(tǒng)的一種懸浮顆粒——的讀數(shù)讓我們十分震驚。它們是按照粒子微米下的體積來(lái)命名的。來(lái)自一座有爭(zhēng)議的美國(guó)大使館監(jiān)測(cè)站的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，PM 2.5的水平達(dá)到了886微克每立方米;北京市當(dāng)?shù)貦z測(cè)中心承認(rèn)數(shù)據(jù)超過(guò)了700微克。

　　基于這一組數(shù)據(jù)，有觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為，根據(jù)世界衛(wèi)生組織指定的指導(dǎo)值，凡是PM 2.5高于25微克每立方米，即被認(rèn)為是不能接受的空氣質(zhì)量。

　　中國(guó)官方一直就美國(guó)大使館對(duì)北京空氣質(zhì)量堅(jiān)持獨(dú)自檢測(cè)并發(fā)布表示抱怨。有時(shí)候，美國(guó)的指數(shù)會(huì)與中國(guó)官方的有很大差異，中國(guó)的通常會(huì)相對(duì)緩和一些。的確，移動(dòng)手機(jī)應(yīng)用的主要特征之一就是那些相互競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的數(shù)據(jù)收集站的平行比較。(當(dāng)然，這里的人們需要不止一個(gè)應(yīng)用程序來(lái)更新這些數(shù)據(jù)，這并不是個(gè)好的現(xiàn)象。)

　　但是在這樣一個(gè)星期六，官方的數(shù)據(jù)與獨(dú)立監(jiān)測(cè)站之間的差異也顯得不重要了;你也不需要?dú)庀髥T來(lái)告訴你渾濁的氣體是朝哪邊吹的。或者說(shuō)，事實(shí)上是根本沒(méi)有在流動(dòng)。引用中國(guó)媒體的報(bào)道，一位專家將這次污染指數(shù)爆表歸罪于連續(xù)幾天無(wú)風(fēng)導(dǎo)致的污染物積聚。

　　但是當(dāng)起風(fēng)的時(shí)候，也會(huì)出現(xiàn)問(wèn)題。在北京氣流區(qū)域的邊遠(yuǎn)省份有很多重工業(yè)。這些地區(qū)的污染管理更難實(shí)施。此外，在這個(gè)比平時(shí)要寒冷的冬季，人們燒了更多的煤和木柴。

　　看來(lái)，中國(guó)還需要很多年才能在空氣質(zhì)量問(wèn)題上有所成效。確實(shí)，正如我們?cè)谌ツ?月12日提到的那樣，洛杉磯通過(guò)大約六十年的努力和大量進(jìn)展才達(dá)到了美國(guó)聯(lián)邦空氣標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。如果說(shuō)對(duì)北京在這個(gè)1月12日必須承受的壓力有些許安慰的建議，那就是北京應(yīng)該更為緊迫地應(yīng)對(duì)民眾呼吁，并且促進(jìn)事物往正確的方向發(fā)展。

　　另一個(gè)慰藉就是像星期一中午發(fā)布的指數(shù)(大概300過(guò)半，僅僅是“對(duì)人危險(xiǎn)的”和“嚴(yán)重污染”)在相比之下就容易接受多了。

　　以上就是講述近日來(lái)北京空氣重度污染的雅思閱讀材料全部?jī)?nèi)容，非常詳細(xì)的介紹了相關(guān)的話題，大家可以在備考雅思閱讀考試和雅思小作文的時(shí)候，對(duì)這篇文章進(jìn)行適當(dāng)?shù)膮⒖己烷喿x。