做雅思閱讀 記雅思詞匯：Classify（分類）題型

　　CLASSIFY 題型要求考生根據(jù)文章內(nèi)容來確定問題中的句子屬于哪一類。有時(shí)是根據(jù)人物分類，比如，文章中可能會(huì)列舉幾位科學(xué)家就某一問題的不同研究和發(fā)現(xiàn)，請(qǐng)你按照人物的觀點(diǎn)來將其分類;有時(shí)是按照特征來歸類，如，文章中會(huì)列出幾種事物的一些特征進(jìn)行對(duì)比，請(qǐng)你根據(jù)事物的屬性特征來分類;或者，還可以根據(jù)時(shí)間、地點(diǎn)、事件來分類等等。總之，要按照事物發(fā)生、發(fā)展的某一個(gè)特征來分類，縷出線條，把屬于同一類的句子找出來。

　　做分類練習(xí)要掌握這樣一個(gè)要領(lǐng)：即先讀文章后面的問題，找到分類的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，也就是說，看題目要求你按照什么標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來分類，再去閱讀找答案。假設(shè)題目的問題是按照三個(gè)人物來分類的，那么，閱讀時(shí)，就要有意識(shí)地將與這三個(gè)人物有關(guān)的關(guān)鍵句子和內(nèi)容用不同的符號(hào)標(biāo)出來。這樣，文章的脈絡(luò)就自然地分成了三個(gè)部分，根據(jù)問題中各個(gè)句子的內(nèi)容來判斷其所屬類別也就容易多了。又如，題目如果要求根據(jù)年代來分類，就可通過找文中的時(shí)間入手來定位要找的信息點(diǎn)。

　　但是，要注意，有的特征可能既屬于A 又屬于B，所以在做題時(shí)一定要認(rèn)真閱讀，包括題目要求，把握住關(guān)鍵的詞語，這樣才不會(huì)有疏漏。

　　下面，讓我們一起來做sample exercise。

　　Sample exercise

　　The Nature of Things

　　There is something ethereal about human intelligence, something hard-to-pin-down. Its hard even to define. Is intelligence the ability to reason? Does it have to do with memory? Is it aptitude with language? With mathematics? All of the above? Plenty of folks would go so far as to say that you just cant measure intelligence. Take the man credited with creating modern intelligence testing, French psychologist Alfred Binet, who wrote: Intellectual qualities are not superposable and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured. This business is complex and complicated, warned Binet, not a thing, like the hundred yard dash, to have an objective outcome.

　　According to others, however, our picture of intelligence is perfectly lucid. Many scientists believe that we long ago deciphered intelligence testing, thanks to a pair of early-century scientists, Karl Pearson and Charles Spearman, whose work created a means of quantification.

　　Modern intelligence testing is coming up on its one-hundredth birthday, but unlike many of the landmark scientific ideas of a century ago, the idea of testing intelligence, though it has certainly enjoyed moments of prosperity during the twentieth century, has failed to gain a consensus of believers in the sciences. In fact, those scientists who most focus their attention on intelligence are more fractured now than ever about our ability to measure itand our methods of doing so. Where we are, finally, is really where weve been from the outset: confronting the dubious nature of testing, its misuse and sometimes sordid history, and its uncertain future.

　　CLASSIFY 題型要求考生根據(jù)文章內(nèi)容來確定問題中的句子屬于哪一類。有時(shí)是根據(jù)人物分類，比如，文章中可能會(huì)列舉幾位科學(xué)家就某一問題的不同研究和發(fā)現(xiàn)，請(qǐng)你按照人物的觀點(diǎn)來將其分類;有時(shí)是按照特征來歸類，如，文章中會(huì)列出幾種事物的一些特征進(jìn)行對(duì)比，請(qǐng)你根據(jù)事物的屬性特征來分類;或者，還可以根據(jù)時(shí)間、地點(diǎn)、事件來分類等等。總之，要按照事物發(fā)生、發(fā)展的某一個(gè)特征來分類，縷出線條，把屬于同一類的句子找出來。

　　做分類練習(xí)要掌握這樣一個(gè)要領(lǐng)：即先讀文章后面的問題，找到分類的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，也就是說，看題目要求你按照什么標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來分類，再去閱讀找答案。假設(shè)題目的問題是按照三個(gè)人物來分類的，那么，閱讀時(shí)，就要有意識(shí)地將與這三個(gè)人物有關(guān)的關(guān)鍵句子和內(nèi)容用不同的符號(hào)標(biāo)出來。這樣，文章的脈絡(luò)就自然地分成了三個(gè)部分，根據(jù)問題中各個(gè)句子的內(nèi)容來判斷其所屬類別也就容易多了。又如，題目如果要求根據(jù)年代來分類，就可通過找文中的時(shí)間入手來定位要找的信息點(diǎn)。

　　但是，要注意，有的特征可能既屬于A 又屬于B，所以在做題時(shí)一定要認(rèn)真閱讀，包括題目要求，把握住關(guān)鍵的詞語，這樣才不會(huì)有疏漏。

　　下面，讓我們一起來做sample exercise。

　　Sample exercise

　　The Nature of Things

　　There is something ethereal about human intelligence, something hard-to-pin-down. Its hard even to define. Is intelligence the ability to reason? Does it have to do with memory? Is it aptitude with language? With mathematics? All of the above? Plenty of folks would go so far as to say that you just cant measure intelligence. Take the man credited with creating modern intelligence testing, French psychologist Alfred Binet, who wrote: Intellectual qualities are not superposable and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured. This business is complex and complicated, warned Binet, not a thing, like the hundred yard dash, to have an objective outcome.

　　According to others, however, our picture of intelligence is perfectly lucid. Many scientists believe that we long ago deciphered intelligence testing, thanks to a pair of early-century scientists, Karl Pearson and Charles Spearman, whose work created a means of quantification.

　　Modern intelligence testing is coming up on its one-hundredth birthday, but unlike many of the landmark scientific ideas of a century ago, the idea of testing intelligence, though it has certainly enjoyed moments of prosperity during the twentieth century, has failed to gain a consensus of believers in the sciences. In fact, those scientists who most focus their attention on intelligence are more fractured now than ever about our ability to measure itand our methods of doing so. Where we are, finally, is really where weve been from the outset: confronting the dubious nature of testing, its misuse and sometimes sordid history, and its uncertain future.