Question

“Tear them apart！” “Kill the fool！” “Murder the referee(裁判)!”

These are common remarks one may hear at various sporting events. At the time they are made，they may seem innocent(無(wú)辜的，天真無(wú)邪的) enough. But let's not kid ourselves．They have been known to influence behavior in such a way as to lead to real violence. Books have been written about the way words affect us. It has been shown that words having certain meanings may cause us to react in ways quite foreign(陌生的) to what we consider to be our usual behavior. I see the term “opponent” as one of those words. Perhaps the time has come to delete it from sports terms.

The dictionary meaning of the term “opponent” is “enemy”, or “one who opposes your interests.” Thus, when a player meets an opponent, he or she may tend to treat that opponent as an enemy. I remember 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 consider them wet enough. The player went away to rub his gloves across his wet T-shirt and then screamed, “Are they wet enough now?”

In the heat of battle, players have been observed to throw themselves across the court without considering the effect that such a move might have on anyone in their way. I have also witnessed a player reacting to his opponent's intentional and illegal blocking by hitting him with the ball as hard as he could during the course of play. Off the court, they are good friends. Does that make any sense? It certainly gives proof of a court attitude which differs from normal behavior.

Therefore, I believe it is time we elevated(提升)the game to the level where it belongs, setting an example to the rest of the sporting world. Replacing the term “opponent” with “associate” could be a good way to start.

The dictionary meaning of the term “associate” is “friend” or “companion.” You may soon see and possibly feel the difference in your reaction to the term “associate” rather than “opponent”．

1.What did the handball player do when he was not allowed to change his gloves?

A. He refused to continue the game.

B. He angrily hit the referee with a ball.

C. He insisted that the referee was unfair.

D. He wet his gloves by rubbing them across his T-shirt.

2.According to the passage, players in a game may ______.

A. throw the ball at the opponent illegally blocking their way

B. keep on screaming and shouting throughout the game

C. 1ie down on the ground as an act of protection

D. kick the ball across the court with force

3.What is the fourth paragraph mainly about?

A. The player's eagerness to win.

B. The player's bad behavior.

C. The player's attitudes towards the game.

D. The player's totally different behavior on and off the court.

4.What can be concluded from the passage?

A. Players should be educated to respect referees on the court.

B. Replacing the present terms on the court can help reduce violence.

C. Raising the referee's sense of responsibility can help reduce violence.

D. Changing the attitude of players on the sports field can help reduce violence.

Answer 1

1.D

2.A

3.D

4.B

【解析】

試題分析：本文討論的是語(yǔ)言對(duì)行動(dòng)的影響問(wèn)題。開篇是三個(gè)聳人聽(tīng)聞的句子：撕碎他們，宰了那個(gè)白癡，殺了裁判�？梢哉f(shuō)以震撼效果吸引了讀者注意，同時(shí)也引出了語(yǔ)言這個(gè)論題，而這些句子本身又是�，F(xiàn)于體育場(chǎng)的，這就提示了本文所討論語(yǔ)言的范圍。

1.細(xì)節(jié)理解題。本題所說(shuō)的手球隊(duì)員是作者在第三段所舉的一個(gè)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?”這句話的大意是在一場(chǎng)手球比賽中一個(gè)球員請(qǐng)求暫停來(lái)?yè)Q手套（request for a time out for a glove change），但裁判認(rèn)為手套不夠濕拒絕了他的請(qǐng)求。他便把手套在濕T恤上搓濕，并反問(wèn)裁判手套夠不夠濕。顯然D的意思是對(duì)的。這里沒(méi)有提到他是否拒絕繼續(xù)比賽，他絕對(duì)沒(méi)有把球扔向裁判（除非他想被當(dāng)場(chǎng)驅(qū)逐出場(chǎng)），這里不能和第四段的例子混淆（deliberately hitting him with the ball as hard as he could）。 故選D。

2.從四個(gè)選項(xiàng)來(lái)看，題目問(wèn)的是球員們?cè)诒荣悎?chǎng)上的具體反應(yīng)，而在文中具體的例子實(shí)際上只有兩個(gè)，第一個(gè)是第三段的搓手套的例子，第二個(gè)是第四段的故意把球扔到 對(duì)手身上的例子。而第一個(gè)例子在上一道題中已經(jīng)考查過(guò)了，這一道題繼續(xù)考查的可能性不大。由此判斷此題的答案只需要看第二個(gè)例子就可以了。第二個(gè)例子是故 意扔球， B、C在文中都沒(méi)有提到，可以排除，D是說(shuō)把球踢走，而不是把球扔到對(duì)手身上，也不對(duì)。故選A。

3.例說(shuō)明了上述根本原因會(huì)導(dǎo)致失常行為的發(fā)生：一個(gè)球員故意把球狠狠地砸向了非法阻擋他的對(duì)手身上，而這個(gè)對(duì)手在日常生活中還是他的朋友。 故選D。

4.在闡明了語(yǔ)言與行為的這種關(guān)系之后，作者在最后兩小段提出了自己的倡議。前一小段提出以associate替代opponent，最后一段展望了associate所能帶來(lái)的實(shí)際益處。故選B。

考點(diǎn)：日常生活類閱讀