雅思閱讀如何面對滿篇的生詞

詞彙量對於雅思考試來說很重要，如果詞彙量不足，就會難以看懂雅思閱讀，生詞太多怎麼辦？下面是小編給大家帶來的雅思閱讀如何面對滿篇的生詞，希望能幫到大家!

1、“全文盡帶生僻詞”

筆者發現，很多上雅思閱讀課的學生經常忽視詞彙量的積累，另外有一部分學生在詞彙上下了一定的功夫，但是碰到的問題是，一旦所學的一個特定的詞放到一個特定的語言環境、詞組裏去的時候，學生往往會覺得自己所記的中文意思放到句子裏卻理解不通，因此，在定位到答案所在文章段落某一句的時候，還是不能解答題目，這個是相當可惜的。筆者認爲，總結雅思閱讀裏出現的詞彙，詞組，以及每天花一定時間記憶雅思閱讀高頻詞彙是相當重要的，但是，這個過程要注意方法：記憶詞彙結合一定的語言環境去記，通過一定的語言環境，去理解單詞的內涵，甚至是其表達方式的文化背景。

在這裏，筆者先舉個簡單的例子，大家都知道work是工作，勞動的意思，而在“The new method worked”這個句子裏，work的意思卻是奏效的意思。太簡單了?那好，我們再來看個例子，deny這個詞，很多人都知道是否認，拒絕的意思，大家甚至於列出一大堆同義詞來，比如，refuse, decline, reject 等， 這是個好現象，但是很多學生當碰到 “In the old times, a lot of girls were denied the right of education.”這樣的句子的時候就開始犯難了。否認，拒絕套進去似乎都解釋不通。其實，這個句子裏的deny沒像大家想象的那麼神祕，各位可以用be deprived of 這個詞組來理解它。

在拿到一個單詞的時候，在瞭解了其中文意思，參照了例句之後，大家不妨想一下，如果是我來用這個詞造個句子，我會怎麼用它。用了主動語態之後，我該怎麼把這個詞放到被動語態中去，加上時間狀語、地點狀語、條件狀語等等之後又是怎麼樣的，如果我是外國人，我會怎麼運用它。每個人遣詞造句的思路其實是大同小異的(當然也不乏思維特異的人，不過雅思考試畢竟針對的是廣大的人民羣衆，而不是針對愛因斯坦這樣級別的學生的)，因此雅思閱讀文章的作者也是如此，如果，你在記憶雅思詞彙的時候，能夠靈活運用，注意詞彙的外延，那勢必會對你理解不同的句型，文章帶來好處。

2、緊張、恐懼。

水有源，樹有根，任何面對雅思閱讀的緊張、恐懼心理也是有原因的。筆者認爲考生的這種緊張、恐懼心理最主要有以下幾點：(1)、平日做逍遙遊，不把時間精力放在備考上，因此在上考場的時候，心情無比緊張，拿到“閱讀天書”後，不知如何是好，接着從無比緊張，恐懼發展到“全身心放鬆”，俗稱---放棄;(2)平日還算用功，但是由於時間緊促，備考內容有限，因此學生在上考場的時候，心裏惦記着平時是不是什麼地方沒下好工夫，很多東西貌似都看到過，但是沒把握，因而緊張;(3)平日相當用功，這類考生緊張主要屬於“這終於到了，我一定要考出好成績，不過，萬一。。。。。。，那我的努力豈不白費”型。

　　雅思閱讀材料：debt of America

爲大家整理了一篇關於經濟方面的雅思閱讀材料，這篇雅思閱讀材料的主要內容是介紹了美國兩大黨派關於債務危機達成的相關協議和其他對債務問題的處理辦法。下面是詳細內容，供大家參考，希望給大家帶來幫助。

THE closer the federal government comes to hitting the limit imposed by Congress on its borrowing and thus defaulting on some of its obligations, the more frantically members of Congress churn out schemes to avert the impending disaster. As The Economist went to press, the House of Representatives was poised to vote on the latest plan, put forward by John Boehner, the speaker and leading Republican voice in the debate about the debt ceiling. But the measure’s prospects seem uncertain in the House and even bleaker in the Senate. Several more plans wait in the wings, but all face the same difficulty: passing muster both with the Republican scourges of government who run the House and the more reluctant budget-cutters from the Democratic Party in charge of the Senate and the White House. Meanwhile, the Treasury insists it will run out of money after August 2nd, whereupon it will have to stop paying at least some bills.

Since Republicans took control of the House at the beginning of the year, they have given warning that they will not simply wave through an increase in the debt ceiling, as Congress has usually done in the past. Never mind that in April a majority of them voted for an interim budget that assumed that the debt ceiling would be lifted, and for a longer-term budget resolution that would require it to leap by almost $9 trillion over the next decade. America’s deficits, they argued, were unsustainable, and the bargaining power conferred on them by the need to raise the debt ceiling presented a wonderful opportunity to stop the rot.

In a speech in May Mr Boehner explained that he would want dramatic reductions in government spending in exchange for an increase. “We should be talking about cuts of trillions, not just billions. They should be actual cuts and programme reforms, not broad deficit or debt targets that punt the tough questions to the future.” As recently as last week he was discussing just such a deal with Barack Obama, who despite having presented a spendthrift budget earlier in the year had professed a willingness to trim future deficits by as much as $4 trillion. On July 22nd, however, Mr Boehner withdrew from the negotiations, saying that Mr Obama was too eager to raise taxes—something that almost all Republicans in the House had sworn not to do. (By most accounts, Mr Obama was talking chiefly about eliminating or reducing loopholes and exemptions in the tax code, albeit on a grand scale.)

Even as Messrs Boehner and Obama were falling out, the Senate rejected a bill passed by the House that would have slashed spending next year, capped it in future and prevented the debt ceiling from being lifted until Congress approved an amendment to the constitution that barred the federal government from running deficits even as it made it harder to raise taxes. That, the Democrats complained, was far too draconian. The harried Mr Boehner responded on July 25th with a lesser measure that he said would cut spending by $915 billion, and raise the debt ceiling by a little less—only enough to keep the government going for about six months. The bill would also set up a panel of 12 congressmen to recommend another $1.8 trillion of cuts, which if enacted would prompt another $1.6 trillion rise in the debt ceiling. Tax rises would be ruled out from the start.

Many of Mr Boehner’s foot-soldiers in the House are unhappy with this proposal. They complain that it abandons the principles he laid out in May, by resorting to committees and spending caps rather than detailed reforms. Thirty-nine of them have vowed not to vote for any increase in the debt ceiling unless it is accompanied by a balanced-budget amendment—something that Mr Boehner’s bill only offers a vote on. Worse, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) declared on July 26th that his sums did not add up, prompting him to delay a vote on the bill while he rejigged it.

Even if Mr Boehner’s plan scrapes through the House, Harry Reid, the leader of the Democratic majority in the Senate, says it is “dead on arrival” in his chamber: his entire caucus has signed a letter opposing it. Not only does it set the stage for another crisis just a few months from now, Democrats complain, but it also rigs future negotiations on reducing the deficit in the Republicans’ favour. The White House, too, is threatening a veto.

That is the state of play. The fact that Mr Boehner’s plan is too extreme for the Democrats in the Senate and too mild for many Republicans in the House shows how hard it will be to get any other scheme approved by both chambers. Mr Reid has proposed one, which would cut spending by $2.4 trillion or so and raise the debt ceiling by the same amount, enough to keep the government going past next year’s elections. But Republicans don’t like it because almost half of the savings come from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—something that was already on the cards. Meanwhile, Mitch McConnell, the leader of the Republican minority in the Senate, has a scheme to transfer the authority to raise the debt ceiling to the president, which would at least spare Republicans the embarrassment of voting for an increase, even if it does not cut the deficit at all. And there is lots of talk about a short-term increase, if no lasting plan can be agreed on.

In the end, the leaders of the two chambers are likely to put some sort of amalgam of all these plans to a vote, and can probably wring enough votes out of their underlings to secure passage. Mr Obama, for his part, would presumably sign any bill that had won the approval of the Democrats in the Senate. The alternative, most observers assume, is simply too horrible: payments withheld from pensioners, soldiers, government contractors and the like, higher interest rates, chaos in the financial markets and the harm to an already sickly economy that all this would bring.

So far the markets have shown only muted signs of disquiet. Stock prices have continued their slow but steady downward drift of the past week. The dollar slipped against some safer currencies, especially the Swiss franc. The price of insuring against an American default rose. And in auctions of government debt this week, the cost the American government pays to borrow ticked up ever so slightly. But these mild movements seem predicated on the assumption that Congress will pull a rabbit out of a hat within the next few days. The longer the rabbit takes to appear, however, the less quiescent the markets will become. And even if the debt ceiling is raised, ratings agencies are still threatening to downgrade America’s debt—because the long-term fiscal outlook is so grim.

以上就是關於美國債務危機的雅思閱讀材料的全部內容，非常詳細的介紹了相關事件及其發展，包括了一幅數字統計分析圖片。大家可以在備考雅思閱讀考試和雅思小作文的時候，對這篇文章進行適當的參考和閱讀。