雅思阅读怎样才算精读

雅思阅读中词汇、结构、写作背景…你真的精读了那些真题的文章吗?一起来学习一下吧，下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。

雅思阅读 怎样才算精读?

精读是什么?有些同学觉得做好标记就可以，有些同学觉得是把握文章的主旨和态度，还有些同学觉得是要在雅思阅读中抓住所有细节。读法当然人各有志，然而雅思考试是有题库的，现有的真题文章是我们最好的训练材料，精读作为一种好的阅读习惯，需要耐心地培养。

那么，怎么样才算精读了一篇阅读真题呢?你可以参考这两个标准：

1、 不要求每个单词都背下来，但对重要位置上的生词应在查阅好以后记录，关键句和长难句要对照着翻译出来。打个比方，这不是让你把100多集的连续剧每集都背下来，而是让你复述情节发展的线索，而这离不开对生词节点的打通。

2、 读懂文章主旨、作者态度和写作结构，对写作背景有所准备。从雅思标准中可以看出，做对题目要求深刻的理解，所以基础不好或者词汇量低的同学更应该把握文章大意，而提高方法也在于用精读好好训练自己。

虽然考场上没看懂一个例子或者一个长句，可能最后也不影响你做对题目，但是不掌握逻辑走错方向的情况还是挺多的。因此希望大家克服怕麻烦的心理，备战阅读。

这具体的方法论，小编在这里给大家奉上剑桥雅思真题精讲里的做法：

首先你可以列出篇章结构：这是一篇什么主题的文章?考察的重点是信息大意还是归纳总结?里面出现的题型有哪些?有了最基础的了解，你就可以将它分类在笔记本里，然后进一步解读：这篇文章主要讲了一个什么故事，或者探讨了什么问题。如果有条件，利用词典把刚才不明白的地方搞懂，大致能翻译出来主要情节。

接着，你可以把读懂这篇文章时用到的必要词汇和词组摘录下来，加以背诵;如果读懂对你来说不是问题，那你就在这些词汇的基础上进行拓展，争取多接触到高频词。

然后就是重要的难点解析了，把文本里自己读不懂的句子，或者中心段落进行整体的翻译，看看它们和答案直接存在着怎样的联系。一方面就锻炼了你的翻译水平，一方面也让你了解了出题思路，是一种综合性的训练。

最后，再把自己的错题记录下来，但不要把正确答案标在一边——复习时你就可以再重新思考一下，不走进同样的谬误了。

毕竟雅思阅读考察的大部分题目都是指向中心的，所以大规模地泛读不是很能提高分数。希望大家都能利用精读法训练自己，在考场上飞快抓住文章中关键词读懂文章内容，考出好成绩。

雅思考试阅读理解备考辅导

The screw tightens

ONE can almost hear the gates clanging: one after the other the sources of funding for Europe’s banks are being shut. It is a result of the highly visible run on Europe’s government bond markets, which today reached the heart of the euro zone: an auction of new German bonds failed to generate enough demand for the full amount, causing a drop in bond prices (and prompting the Bundesbank to buy 39% of the bonds offered, according to Reuters).

Now another run—more hidden, but potentially more dangerous—is taking place: on the continents’ banks. People are not yet queuing up in front of bank branches (except in Latvia’s capital Riga where savers today were trying to withdraw money from Krajbanka, a mid-sized bank, pictured). But billions of euros are flooding out of Europe’s banking system through bond and money markets.

At best, the result may be a credit crunch that leaves businesses unable to get loans and invest. At worst, some banks may fail—and trigger real bank runs in countries whose shaky public finances have left them ill equipped to prop up their financial institutions.

To make loans, banks need funding. For this, they mainly tap into three sources: long-term bonds, deposits from consumers, and short-term loans from money markets as well as other banks. Bond issues and short-term funding have been seizing up as the panic over government bonds has spread to banks (which themselves are large holders of government bonds). This blockage has been made worse by tighter capital regulations that are encouraging banks to cut lending (instead of raising capital).

Markets for bank bonds were the first to freeze. In the third quarter bonds issues by European banks only reached 15% of the amount they raised over the same period in the past two years, reckon analysts at Citi Group. It is unlikely that European banks have sold many more bonds since.

Short-term funding markets were next to dry up. Hardest hit were European banks that need dollars to finance world trade (more than one third of which is funded by European banks, according to Barclays). American money market funds, in particular, have pulled back from Europe. Loans to French banks have plunged 69% since the end of May and nearly 20% over the past month alone, according to Fitch, a ratings agency. Over the past six months, it reckons, American money market funds have pulled 42% of their money out of European banks. European money market funds, too, continue to reduce their exposure to France, Italy and Spain, according to the latest numbers from Fitch.

雅思考试阅读理解备考辅导

The euro zone's unexploded ordnance is no longer nuclear

THE euro-zone crisis is not solved and is not likely to be solved soon, but the greatest immediate danger has been avoided. Two points worth stressing.

1) The euro-zone economy has some "unexploded ordinance" in it that is likely to explode eventually, but no one really knows whether it is a grenade, a 1000kg bomb, or a nuclear device; what leaders did last week and are doing this week is making sure it is NOT a nuclear device.

Europe still faces a number of vortices that could pull down the euro zone if allowed to get going: the "Greek" austerity-budget deficit vortex, and the "Lehman vortex" that sucked Dexia below water, as per the diagram below.

However, euro-zone leaders seen to have finally rendered the worst vortex inoperable, namely the "Irish" vortex where by shocks pull down banks, banks pull down governments and then the vortex spreads to the next government in line. In this case it would have been Greek restructuring pulling down banks that forced nationalisation that forced downgrades that drove up yields which then made the governments insolvent. As this might rapidly have reached Italy and Spain, the "nuclear" outcome was truly scary—the sort of thing that had Charles Wyplosz talking about 1930s-like outcomes.

The first revelation is that they have now finally admitted that backstopping the banks is absolutely essential, mostly via recapitalisation. I’d guess that they’ll flub the job at the EU and G20 summits but that doesn’t really matter. They are now at "battle stations" when it comes to the banks, so we won’t have a Lehman-like moment that then brings down the world’s third largest debtor (Italy). Either national governments, or the EFSF will make sure the banks remain intact regardless.

The second revelation is that regardless of what they do to scale up the EFSF, it won’t be big enough to backstop sovereigns in a way that will prevent contagion. However, this doesn’t matter as the ECB will be forced to step in—just as it did in August and for exactly the same reason. Contagion spreading to Italy, Spain, Belgium, Malta, France etc would spell a very rapid and very ugly end to the euro zone. Besides, they have the ready excuse that they employed in August about orderly markets and monetary policy. But not all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds. The law of unintended consequences will be fully enforced.

2) Their half-hearted solution on the banks will almost surely lead to a recession. The most likely outcome is that the bank recapitalisation scheme gives Europe’s stronger banks a chance to create a credit crunch instead of taking government money. This is especially true since German banks are resisting both forcible recapitalisation and further write-down of Greek debts. The euro-zone governments are probably going to insist on the former but not on the latter. As the figure above shows, the recession is likely to start up all three of the vortices again, so we’ll be back at the drawing board in a few month’s time. But at least we’ll have avoided a truly historic crisis. Now let’s just hope the Greek street plays along with the role assigned to them this weekend. If euro-zone leaders don’t do enough to help the Greeks—to make sure they see a light at the end of the tunnel—we may see political chaos and a disorderly default that would severely test my hypotheses that the nuclear-threat has been removed.