发布时间 : 星期一 文章2020江苏高考英语二轮培优新方案：专题限时检测（二十七） 任务型阅读（二）+Word版含解析更新完毕开始阅读f8b4453150d380eb6294dd88d0d233d4b04e3f50
专题限时检测(二十七) 任务型阅读(二)
(限时24分钟)
A
(2019·泰州模拟)
Who's Really Addicting You To Technology?
“Nearly everyone I know is addicted in some measure to the Internet”， wrote Tony Schwartz in The New York Times. It's a common complaint these days. A steady stream of similar headlines accuses the Net and its offspring apps, social media sites and online games of addicting us to distraction.
There's little doubt that nearly everyone who comes in contact with the Net has difficulty disconnecting.Then who's at fault for its overuse? To find solutions, it's important to understand what we're dealing with. There are four parties cooperating to keep you connected: the tech, your boss, your friends and you.
The technologies themselves and their makers are the easiest suspects to blame for our distraction. Online services like Facebook, Google, twitter and the like rely on advertising revenue, so the more frequently you use them, the more money they make. No wonder these companies employ teams of people focused on improving their services to be as attractive as possible.
Good as these services are, there are simple steps we can take to keep them from coming too close. However, less than 15 percent of smartphone users are willing to adjust their notification settings — meaning the remaining 85 percent of us default to (默认) the app makers' every preset devices.
While companies like Facebook harvest attention to generate revenue from advertisers, other technologies have no such agenda. Take email, for example. We check email at all hours of the day — we're obsessed, because that's what the boss wants. For almost all white-collar jobs, email is the primary tool of corporate communication. A slow response to a message could hurt not only your reputation but also your livelihood.
Your friends are also responsible for the addiction. Think about this familiar scene. People gathered around a table, enjoying food and each others' company. Then, during an interval in the conversation, someone takes out their phone to check who knows what. Barely anyone notices and no one says a thing.
The reality is taking one's phone out at the wrong time is more than an impolite behavior because, unlike other minor offense, checking tech is contagious (传染). Once one person looks at their phone, other people tend to do the same, starting a chain reaction.
The technology, your boss, and your friends, all influence how often you find yourself using (or overusing) these gadgets. But there's still someone who deserves careful examination — the person holding the phone.
When people are doing something difficult they'd rather not do, the phone is used to transport
them elsewhere. They can easily escape discomfort temporarily, by answering email or browsing the web under the excuse of so-called“research”. The truth is that we are working unproductively out of our bad habits.
Personal technology is indeed more attractive than ever, which doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to control our use of technology, instead, we should come to terms with the fact that it's more than the technology that's responsible for our habits. Our workplace culture, social norms and individual behaviors all play a part.
Who's Really Addicting You To Technology？ ●More and more people are getting addicted to some (1)________ to A common phenomenon the Internet nowadays. ●Those who have difficulty disconnecting often lay (2)________ on the Net and its offspring apps. ●Some online services like Facebook are The technologies designed attractively for (3)________ reasons. ●Most people won't (4)________ to make any adjustment to the preset devices. ●Emails are widely used for communication in many companies. Your boss ●White-collar employees check emails hourly as a delayed response may (5)_______ them reputation Four suspects and livelihood. ●A check on the phone is often taken for (6)______ though it's sometimes impolite with Your friends friends around. ●One tends to (7)________ suit when seeing his friends surfing on the phone. ●Technologies can be used as a good excuse to You (The users) (8)______ ourselves from something boring or challenging. ●Some bad habits as well as technologies give (9)______ to our distraction. Conclusion
Technology (10)__________ is not the root of the problem with our
addition, as many other factors also play a part. 语篇解读：本文是一篇说明文，主要讲述了人们对手机等科技产品上瘾的现象，并从四个角度分析了其中的原因。
1．extent/degree 根据第一段中的“Nearly everyone I know is addicted in some measure to the Internet”可知，作者身边的每个人，在某种程度上都对互联网上瘾。in some measure＝ to some degree/extent “在某种程度上”。
2．blame 根据第一段中的“A steady stream of similar headlines accuses the Net and its offspring apps ...”可知，很多头条都谴责网络和其衍生的应用软件。lay blame on 相当于accuse，意为“把某事归咎于”。
3．economic/financial 结合第三段的内容可知，像Facebook这样的软件靠点击率获利，制作得越吸引人，使用的频率越高，获利越多，所以是为了经济原因。故填economic/financial。 4．bother 根据第四段中的“However, less than 15 percent of smartphone users are willing to adjust their notification settings ...”可知，绝大多数用户都嫌麻烦，不愿意调整通知设置，默认了预先设置的通知。此处用won't bother to do sth. 代替be unwilling to do sth.。
5．cost 根据第五段末句“A slow response to a message could hurt not only your reputation but also your livelihood.”可知，消息回复延迟对于白领而言不仅仅付出了名誉，还有生计来源。cost sb. sth.“使某人付出……的代价”。
6．granted 结合第六段的内容，特别是最后一句“Barely anyone notices and no one says a thing.”可知，朋友聚会时会有人拿出手机看消息，几乎都没有人注意，更没有人会说什么，所以大家把这件事看成是理所当然的。take ... for granted“把……视为理所当然”，固定短语。 7．follow 根据第七段最后一句“Once one person looks at their phone, other people tend to do the same, starting a chain reaction.”可知，当有人看手机时，周围人会效仿，产生连锁效应。follow suit“模仿，效仿”。
8．free/liberate/release 结合第九段的内容可知，科技是我们逃离无聊困难任务的借口。free/liberate/release sb. from doing sth.“使得某人免于做某件事”，固定搭配。
9．rise/birth 结合第九段的内容可知，一些不良习惯和科技产品的诱惑使我们容易注意力不
集中。give birth/rise to“产生，造成”，固定搭配。
10．alone/itself 结合最后一段的内容可知，科技自身并不是根本的原因，是许多其他因素造成的这一问题。
B
(2019·无锡模拟)
Time for Americans to act on climate change
The climate crisis is worsening at a rate that is becoming harder and harder to ignore. For more than two decades, scientific reports have made it clear that global warming is real, that humans cause it and that the consequences will be disastrous.
The scientific community has become increasingly panicked over the past year. The latest assessment from the U．N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change painted a far more terrible picture than its previous analyses, and the long-awaited National Climate Assessment made clear that climate change represents a severe threat to human health as well as our economic security. Out of this panic came the treaty (条约) reached this past weekend by world leaders to keep the Paris climate agreement alive.
Yet many Americans still don't regard the threat as a key priority for our government, and support President Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris treaty. Campaign contributions from fossil fuel companies have convinced elected officials to look the other way. A certain amount of despair has resulted in widespread apathy (漠然)．
But there is another reason that has been discussed far less openly. While a growing number of people understand that climate change will have significant worldwide consequences, many Americans have an intuitive (直觉的) belief that their nation is more capable than others of adapting to a changed environment. Why? Because they have before.
This historical success, however, resulted from the federal government taking science seriously, and making investments to urge revolution and innovation.
But these innovations did not happen by themselves, or simply because of the United States' rich resources. They depended on consistent support from the leaders about the need to take action when faced with crises. This has been especially true in the environmental crisis.
President Bill Clinton had a shockingly modest record of advancing climate security, particularly given that his vice president, Al Gore, had been one of the most outspoken environmentalists in Congress. By far Clinton's biggest accomplishment was assigning Gore to participate in the Kyoto Protocol negotiations. Clinton chose, however, to avoid what surely would have been a terrible fight in the Senate to gain approval of the treaty. While this effort probably would have failed, it would have signaled to the American people how seriously the Democratic Party took climate change.
Thus, the time has clearly arrived for progressive candidates to start campaigning on a platform