还没有登录哦!

[Reading Comprehension]

试题详情

文章:

    Although many lines of evidence indicate that birds evolved from ground-dwelling theropod dinosaurs, some scientists remain unconvinced. They argue that theropods appeared too late to have given rise to birds, noting that Archaeopteryx litho graphica-the oldest known bird-appears in the fossil record about 150 million years ago, whereas the fossil remains of various nonavian maniraptor theropods-the closest known relatives of birds-date only to about 115 million years ago. But investigators have now uncovered bones that evidently belong to nonavian maniraptors dating to the time of Archaeopteryx. In any case, failure to find fossils of a predicted kind does not rule out their existence in an undiscovered deposit.Skeptics also argue that the fused clavicles (the "wishbone") of birds differ from the unfused clavicles of theropods. This objection was reasonable when only early theropod clavicles had been discovered, but fossilized theropod clavicles that look just like the wishbone of Archaeopteryx have now been unearthed. Finally, some scientists argue that the complex lungs of birds could not have evolved from theropod lungs, an assertion that cannot be supported or falsified at the moment, because no fossil lungs are preserved in the paleontological record.

题目:

The primary purpose of the passage is to

选项:

A、compare the development of two hypotheses concerning the evolutionary origin of birds
B、suggest revisions to the standard theory of the evolutionary history of birds
C、evaluate the usefulness of fossil evidence in determining the evolutionary history of birds
D、challenge the theory that birds evolved from ground-dwelling theropod dinosaurs
E、respond to criticisms of the theory that birds evolved from ground-dwelling theropod dinosaurs

答案:

E

提问:

读读D/E感觉差不多。如何辨别

解答:

点赞0
阅读2047
解答: sysadmin

提问:

我想请教慧雯老师 阅读基础课的第5篇文章(The fossil remains of the first flying ...那篇), 问题很细,但是我觉得不弄清的话会对实战产生毁灭性打击: 我在读第一段的时候,直接跳读了- reptiles or birds - 这三个词,因为一般这种插入语一般不都是对前面的话进行解释,可以不读吗, 所以我把第一段的大意概括成了:1、P如何飞的 2、 P是什么 之后看了您讲解的视频,我才意识到“-reptiles or birds -” 对后面的提示作用太重要了,没读这部分对后面第四段的主旨提取是会比较confuse的。我第二段第三段提取主旨的都是正确的,但到第四段,我提取的主旨为:P是热血动物。压根没想到热血动物和鸟能挂上钩,如果第一段读了"-reptiles or birds-", 我再读第四段肯定是能反应过来的。 所以这种双破折号里的东西读不读呢,需要分情况讨论吗?(如果您想说前面句子没读懂,后面双破折号里的内容就应该读的话,那我其实是理解了"what these creatures were"这句话才没读的) 另外,我在读第五段 第一句时,我看到第一个状语by 直接快速扫过了,导致没有注意这三个并列的by , 导致我把each hypothesis has its difficulties直接理解成了第二 三 四段的理论都有其缺陷,但是读到后面内容的时候又发现不是说二 三 四段的,所以就蒙了。 那以后碰到这种状语by 需要读吗,要分情况讨论吗?

解答:

点赞0
阅读2089
解答: 张慧雯老师

提问:

读读D/E感觉差不多。如何辨别

解答:

点赞0
阅读2048
解答: sysadmin老师

问个问题

点我领取
免费专项课程
在线咨询