这篇文章是来自于去年12月的四级英语泛读部分（题目本来有10道，但我只挑了前7道选择题，后面3道是填空题，有点难，但高考阅读以选择题为主，所以这个同学们以后再准备吧~）。高考阅读就是需要泛读，基本上各地都是5篇文章吧，不可能每篇文章都逐字逐句地读过去。而我做这篇文章的时候，四级单词表才背到字母C，所以看这篇文章的时候，满眼„„都是„„生词„„满眼都是„„整句整句地看不懂„„ 我想这种情况可能跟一些同学面对高考阅读文章时的感觉一样，先被大片的生词打击了信心。
但是这篇文章的前7道选择题我做了全对。这说明什么呢？生词很多很可怕？文章很长很可怕？泛读嘛！高考也是要泛读！我们连蒙带猜地跳跳跳跳过去，题目能做对不就行了？ 不再多说了，我们来秒杀它吧~
A Grassroots Remedy
Most of us spend our lives seeking the natural world. To this end, we walk the dog, play golf, go fishing, sit in the garden, drink outside rather than inside the pub, have a picnic, live in the suburbs, go to the seaside, buy a weekend place in the country. The most popular leisure activity in Britain is going for a walk. And when joggers (慢跑者) jog, they don’t run the streets. Every one of them instinctively heads to the park or the river. It is my profound belief that not only do we all need nature, but we all seek nature, whether we know we are doing so or not.
But despite this, our children are growing up nature-deprived (丧失). I spent my boyhood climbing trees on Streatham Common, South London. These days, children are robbed of these ancient freedoms, due to problems like crime, traffic, the lo
ss of the open spaces and odd new perceptions about what is best for children, that is to say, things that can be bought, rather than things that can be found.
The truth is to be found elsewhere. A study in the US: families had moved to better housing and the children were assessed for ADHD—attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (多动症). Those whose accommodation had more natural views showed an improvement of 19%; those who had the same improvement in material surroundings but no nice view improved just 4%.
A study in Sweden indicated that kindergarten children who could play in a natural environment had less illness and greater physical ability than children used only to a normal playground. A US study suggested that when a school gave children access to a natural environment, academic levels were raised across the entire school.
Another study found that children play differently in a natural environment. In playgrounds, children create a hierarchy (等级) based on physical abilities, with the tough ones taking the lead. But when a grassy area was planted with bushes, the
children got much more into fantasy play, and the social hierarchy was now based on imagination and creativity.
Most bullying (恃强凌弱) is found in schools where there is a tarmac (柏油碎石) playground; the least bullying is in a natural area that the children are encouraged to explore. This reminds me unpleasantly of Sunnyhill School in Streatham, with its harsh tarmac, where I used to hang about in corners fantasising about wildlife.
But children are frequently discouraged from involvement with natural spaces, for health and safety reasons, for fear that they might get dirty or that they might cause damage. So, instead, the damage is done to the children themselves: not to their bodies but to their souls.
One of the great problems of modern childhood is ADHD, now increasingly and expensively treated with drugs. Yet one study after another indicates that contact with nature gives huge benefits to ADHD children. However, we spend money on drugs rather than on green places.
The life of old people is measurably better when they have access to nature. The increasing emphasis for the growing po
pulation of old people is in quality rather than quantity of years. And study after study finds that a garden is the single most important thing in finding that quality.
In wider and more difficult areas of life, there is evidence to indicate that natural surroundings improve all kinds of things. Even problems with crime and aggressive behaviour are reduced when there is contact with the natural world.
Dr William Bird, researcher from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, states in his study, “A natural environment can reduce violent behaviour because its restorative process helps reduce anger and impulsive behaviour.” Wild places need encouraging for this reason, no matter how small their contribution.
We tend to look on nature conservation as some kind of favour that human beings are granting to the natural world. The error here is far too deep: not only do humans need nature for themselves, but the very idea that humanity and the natural world are separable things is profoundly damaging.
Human beings are a species of mammals (哺乳动物). For seven million years they lived on the planet as part of nature.
Our ancestral selves miss the natural world and long for contact with non-human life. Anyone who has patted a dog, stroked a cat, sat under a tree with a pint of beer, given or received a bunch of flowers or chosen to walk through the park on a nice day, understands that.
We need the wild world. It is essential to our well-being, our health, our happiness. Without the wild world we are not more but less civilised. Without other living things around us we are less than human.
Five ways to find harmony with the natural world Walk: Break the rhythm of permanently being under a roof. Get off a stop earlier, make a circuit of the park at lunchtime, walk the child to and from school, get a dog, feel yourself moving in moving air, look, listen, absorb.
Sit: Take a moment, every now and then, to be still in an open space. In the garden, anywhere that’s not in the office, anywhere out of the house, away from the routine. Sit under a tree, look at water, feel refreshed, ever so slightly renewed. Drink: The best way to enjoy the natural world is by yourself; the second best way is in company. Take a drink outside
with a good person, a good gathering: talk with the sun and the wind with birdsong for background.
Learn: Expand your boundaries. Learn five species of bird, five butterflies, five trees, five bird songs. That way, you see and hear more: and your mind responds gratefully to the greater amount of wildness in your life.
Travel: The places you always wanted to visit: by the seaside, in the country, in the hills. Take a weekend break, a day-trip, get out there and do it: for the scenery, for the way through the woods, for the birds, for the bees. Go somewhere special and bring specialness home. It lasts forever, after all. 问题：
1. What is the author’s profound belief?
[A] People have quite different perceptions of nature [B]. People must make more efforts to study nature. [C]. People instinctively seek nature in different ways.
[D] People should spend most of their lives in the wild
恒之点评：答案C。我们的原则是“先看问题后看文章”，这个以后就不强调咯~这道题好像暂时没法在文中圈，那就先放着，但是要先把题目仔细看一遍，把它问的东西记在心里，至少得有个印象。然后看文章时，看到第一段发现有一句“It is my profound belief that not only do we all need nature, but we all seek nature, whether we know we are doing so or not.”出现了~profound belief，那我们仔细看看这个句子(既然这篇文章我们很多词很多句子都看不懂，那难得看见一句懂的，又是很重要的设题区，是不是要仔仔细细抓住它研究个透彻呢？当然这个研究的速度也要适当放快点~)not only的倒装句型在高中应该挺熟了吧？不管profound belief是什么意思，我们只要知道这个句子里，that后面的内容都是作者的profound belief就行！“我的profound belief就是，我们不仅仅都需要大自然，我们还都在寻找着大自然，不管我们自己有没有意识到。”但是只了解这个好像暂时还不能够解题，因为你看得懂所有选项吗？所以我们还得看看这个句子的前面。第一段其实算没什么生词的，第一句就是中心句：我们大多数人都在寻找着大自然。然后，to this end(是啥？不管„„)，我们遛狗，打高尔夫，钓鱼。。。。。。然后再一直看到最后一句：我们不仅仅都需要大自然，我们还都在寻找着大自然，不管我们自己有没有意识到。
这下明确了吧~我们看看C选项，instinctively虽然不知道是什么意思，但它只是一个修饰动作的副词，我们一定一定需要了解是
什么意思吗？比如我们说中文，“我在打字”跟“我在快乐地打字”，这个“快乐地”我们如果跳过的话对我们知道这个句子讲什么影响不大对吧？那么跳过instinctively，C选项讲的就是人们通过不同的途径寻找大自然，不正是第一段所讲？A选项的perception我看不懂是什么意思，所以做题的时候就暂时放到一边，B选项不符合第一段的意思（为什么我们做这题要重视第一段，因为这题是围绕着那个profound belief问的，所以我们要重视profound附近的句子），结果看到C选项的时候，发现，太完美了，就是这个意思！然后看看D，也不符合第一段意思，所以就抱着80%的信心选了C。至于A选项的perception，我们也不能因为是生词就让它永远是生词吧？得查一查然后抄到小本子上积累下来，这才是学英语呀~
2. What does the author say people prefer for their children nowadays?
[A] Things that are natural. [B] Things that are purchased. [C] Urban surroundings.
[D] Personal freedom.
恒之点评：答案B。这题虽然也没法圈，但是我们看了第一段已经找到一个方向了，就是作者的观点是“大自然对人类是重要的！”，然后看到第二段，虽然生词还是很多，但我们把看懂的部分串联起来，不就有了思路吗？我们看第二段：“But despite this, our children are growing up nature-deprived (丧失). I spent my boyhood climbing trees on Streatham Common, South London. These days, children are robbed of these ancient freedoms, due to problems like crime, traffic, the loss of the open spaces and odd new perceptions about what is best for children, that is to say, things that can be bought, rather than things that can be found.”其实不懂的，或者说读起来感觉不顺的地方还是挺多的对吗„„我们这样猜着看完吧：“但尽管这样，如今的儿童正伴随着‘丧失自然’（只要抓住意思就好，剩下的管他呢）成长。我童年时爬树„„#￥%#￥而如今的孩子„„@#￥#￥%„„由于犯罪，交通，open space的失去„„@#￥@%，也就是说，那些能被买到的东西，而不是那些能被找到的东西。” 读得真吃力啊 = =
但凭着这些我们足够了解作者的观点了，再加上我们本来就通过第一段知晓了作者的主要观点呢~ 作者在第二段想说，如今孩子
被物质的东西包围着，失去了与自然亲密接触的机会，因此孩子们身上开始出现了犯罪等等问题„„
不能与自然接触是孩子的错吗？是如今的家长的错。这题的问题是 如今的人们拿什么来“爱”他们的孩子，我们清楚，答案是：硬邦邦的物质(而不是自由的与自然接触的机会)。那哪个选项贴近这个答案呢？就是B了，能被买到的东西。A的答案是相反的。C的urban有没同学不知道这个词呢？其实高中卷子上见挺多的了„„就是“都市的”，形容词。Urban surroundings就是都市环境吧，没有B来得符合，毕竟说到都市环境的话，我们先想到高楼大厦钢筋水泥，跟“能被买到的东西”概念上还是有点差距的。D是个人自由„„这„„没什么关系吧„„不考虑了。 3. What does a study in Sweden show?
[A] A good playground helps kids develop their physical abilities.
[B] More access to nature makes children less likely to fall ill.
[C] Natural views can prevent children from developing ADHD.
[D] The natural environment can help children learn better.
恒之点评：答案B。这题可以圈，在第四段开头就有一个a study in Sweden„但是我们要注意陷阱，这一段有两个study，一个是Sweden的，一个US的，同学们一定要看清楚两个study分别指出了什么。Sweden的study指出了与自然接触密切的孩子身体素质更好，而US的study指出的是当学校给孩子与自然环境接触的机会，孩子的成绩也能提高。所以这题同学千万别选成D了，因为那是US的研究结果。会不会有人错选A呢？我们注意看一下，a good playground，一个好的游乐场所，这个“好的”是什么标准呢？有人认为是都市好有人认为是郊区好，这个good的概念太模糊了，所以不能选。
4. Children who have chances to explore natural areas ________.
[A] tend to develop a strong love for science [B] are more likely to fantasise about wildlife [C] tend to be physically tougher in adulthood
[D] are less likely to be involved in bullying
恒之点评：答案D。这题虽然也不能圈，但也没什么好怕的，我们只要耐住性子往下看答案就自然出来了。我们一直看看看看看看到第六段吧。第六段第一句就很耐人寻味“Most bullying (恃强凌弱) is found in schools where there is a tarmac (柏油碎石) playground; the least bullying is in a natural area that the children are encouraged to explore.”大部分的恃强凌弱都是发生在有着柏油碎石操场的学校。而在自然地方生长的孩子们之中就很少发生这种事。（那个，插播一句，虽然说文章里有些生词括号里就有中文翻译，但同学们最好也把那个生词给记一下，至少要有个印象吧，不然你看到后面又看到这个词了结果没注释又不认得这个词了怎么办？比如bullying这个词问题选项里又出现了）其实只要看到这一句就知道作者的潜台词是什么了吧？都市里长大的孩子爱恃强凌弱，而大自然里长大孩子较单纯，很少发生这种事。所以这题就可以做了，选D不解释。Be involved in„这个词我以前说过很重要很常见吧？这不又出现了~~ 5. What does the author suggest we do to help children with ADHD?
[A] Place them under more personal care.
[B] Provide more green spaces for them. [C] Find more effective drugs for them.
[D] Engage them in more meaningful activities.
恒之点评：答案B。这题可以圈，ADHD四个大写字母在文中挺好找的~一个是在第三段出现，一个是在第八段出现。但第三段虽然有ADHD，但看完了第三段还是不能做这道题。看完第八段就能做了。我们来看第八段：“One of the great problems of modern childhood is ADHD, now increasingly and expensively treated with drugs. Yet one study after another indicates that contact with nature gives huge benefits to ADHD children. However, we spend money on drugs rather than on green places.”前面看不懂没关系，我们只要看one study after another indicates that contact with nature gives huge benefits to ADHD children. However, we spend money on drugs rather than on green places就够了。其实这还是围绕着作者的中心观点嘛~ 大自然对多动症孩子好，但是人们还是在往昂贵的药上砸钱„„所以对于多动症的孩子来说，他们最需要的是什么呢？大自然~所以这题也可以做了，答案B。D选项那个什么engage看不懂真的不要紧啊，你只要确定B就是那个正确答案就够了，况且后面说的more meaningful activities，更有意义的活动，是作者说的吗？
6. In what way do elderly people benefit from their contact with nature?
[A] They enjoy a life of better quality. [B] They look on life optimistically. [C] They become good-humoured. [D] They are able to live longer.
恒之点评：答案A。elderly 就是old噢，这个常识得记住啊~第九段讲的就是大自然对老人如何有益了。其实只要看第九段第一句就够了“The life of old people is measurably better when they have access to nature. ”measurably这个adv知不知道真的不重要，你完全可以把它遮住盖住，它只是一个修饰，不是主要部分。剩下的部分没有什么理解障碍了吧？所以这段第一句就是中心句了吧~ 接近自然的老年人的生活更美好。答案就是这么简单啊~这能不能叫秒杀呢？其实高考阅读真的不难啊~ 7. Dr William Bird suggests in his study that ________. [A] access to nature contributes to the reduction of violence
[B] it takes a long time to restore nature once damaged
[C] humanity and nature are complementary to each other。 [D] wild places may induce impulsive behaviour in people。
恒之点评：答案A~
这题又可以圈了，Dr William Bird(好名字啊)在第十一段开头呢。这题也完全没必要看前面bla bla bla地讲一大堆，无非就是介绍这个Dr是谁嘛~只要看states in his study, “A natural environment can reduce violent behaviour就够了。他认为一个自然的环境能减少人的暴力行为。那前后的“废话”是不是几乎可以忽略不计了呢？
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容