以下信息由双博士网校授权本网站发布，文章内容来自《2006年考研英语最新题型应试指导》未经允许，不得转载

第二节选考题型之二 排序题

　　此题型要求考生将一组段落排序，使其意思通顺。因此考生在阅读各个段落时要注意把握它们的中心大意，并且将各段的段落大意整合，理清它们之间的逻辑顺序。

一、解题技巧

　①考生应仔细阅读已经给出的答案，寻找其中的逻辑关系。

　②然后阅读选项和原文，确定预选答案的位置

　③最后通读全文，确定语篇模式，检查答案是否合理。

二、解题方法

　①按照大纲样题所给的情况，这种题目往往只要做对四个，那么最后一个答案自然就出来了。

　②如果最后剩余两个答案没有做出，而自己又没有太大把握，可以在两个位置均选出其中一个答案，这样至少可以选对一道题。

　③在做题时，考生应尽量先确定答案线索比较明确的题目的答案。不用按照题目的顺序答题。

Sample Two

Directions：

The following paragraphs are given in a wrong order. For Questions 1—5, you are required to recognize these paragraphs into a coherent article by choosing from the list A-G to fill in each numbered box. The first and the last paragraphs have been placed for you in Boxes. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. (10 points)

一

［A］ In studies of interpersonal argument, for example, when subjects were asked to deal with contradictory information stemming from conflict between a mother and a daughter or a student and a school, Peng found that Americans were “noncompromising, blaming one side—usually the mother—for the causes of the problems, demanding changes from one side to attain a solution and offering no compromise” in dealing with the conflict.

［B］Americans wear black for mourning. Chinese wear white. Westerners think of dragons as monsters. Chinese honor them as symbols of God. Chinese civilization has often shown such polarities with the West, as though each stands at extreme ends of a global string.  Now a University of California, Berkeley, Psychologist has discovered deeper polarities between Chinese and American cultures—polarities that go to the heart of how we reason and discover truth.

［C］Dialectical thinking also has a Western version, which Americans often consider the highest, most sophisticated form of reasoning, said Peng. This type of reasoning allows people to proceed from thesis to antithesis, to synthesis. In Chinese folk wisdom, by comparison, people do not attempt to work through the contradictions, following a cultural tradition which holds that reality is “multilayered, unpredictable and contradictory,” and is in a constant state of change, Peng said.

［D］“Americans have a terrible need to find out who is right in an argument.” said Peng. “The problem is that at the interpersonal level, you really don’t need to find the truth, or may be there isn’t any.” Chinese people, said Peng, are far more content to think that both sides have flaws and virtues, because they have a holistic awareness that life is full of contradictions. They do far less blaming of the individual than do Americans, he added.

［E］“It can hardly be right to move to the middle when you have just read evidence for a less plausible view. Yet that is what the Chinese subjects did,”said Peng. He believes that this tendency to find the middle way has hampered Chinese efforts to seek out scientific truth through aggressive argumentation, the classic Western method for forging a linear path through contradictory information, which results in identifying right and wrong answers.

［F］His findings go far toward explaining why American cultures seem so contentious and Chinese cultures so passive, when compared to each other. More importantly, the research opens the way for the peoples of the East and the West to learn from each other in fundamental ways. The Chinese could learn much from Western methods for determining scientific truth,and Americans could profit enormously from the Chinese tolerance for accepting contradictions in social and personal life. said Kaiping Peng, a former Beijing scholar, who is now a UC Borkeley assistant professor of psychology.

［G］Compared to this angry, blaming American stance, the Chinese were paragons of compromise, finding fault on both sides and looking for solutions that moved both sides to the middle. In tests of scientific thinking, however, the Chinese came up short. Asked to determine which statement was true—whether, for instance, smoking makes people gain or lose weight—Chinese respondents took the middle road, even when they believed one statement to be less true than another.

答案及解析

1. F。文章开头即指明中西文化宛如地球的两个端点，并讲述了Berkeley 教授关于中西文化差异的观点。［F］部分“His findings”正好与［B］部分的“discovered”相呼应，补充说明Berkeley 教授这一发现的研究意义。

2. D。前文提出了Berkeley 教授的发现后，后3段则通过彭开平对中国人和美国人在人际关系方面的不同态度进行比较分析，对应2段最后一句“the chinese could learn much from Western…in social and personal life”.

3. A。在分析中国人和美国人在处理人际关系方面的不同观点后，作者随即给出一个例子加以说明“In studies of interpersonal argument for example…”与［D］段中提及的interpersonal level 相对应，以此展开中美两国人在此level 上的不同看法。

4. G。上一段举例表明美国人在人际关系中互相指责，第5段话作为对比，显示了中国人的中庸之道。“Compared to this angry”承接第4段中“American were noncompromising blaming one side…in dealing with the conflict.”

5. E。第5段中肯定了中国人在处理人际关系中的优势后，作者随即指出其在Scientific thinking 上中庸主义的劣势，从末段中hamper 可看出，作者认为在科学问题上也用中庸这种方法是不行的，因此此段应接第5段后。

中心思想

本文论述了中美文明在社会关系和科学问题上的差异，美国人在人际关系中比较好斗，而中国人倾向寻求折中的解决方案，在科学问题中，中国人也经常采用中间路线，美国人的直线前进的方法往往可以辨明正确和错误的答案，作者主张生活中采用中国方式，科学上采用美国方式。

译文

美国人哀悼的时候穿黑衣服，中国人则穿白色衣服。在西方人的眼里龙是怪物，中国人则把龙看作是神的象征；中西方文化宛如地球的两个端点。目前，加利福尼亚大学的心理学教授Berkeley发现中西方文化的差异关键在于推理和发现真理方法的不同。

他的发现进一步说明了中西方文化相比较的时候为什么美国文化如此受争议而中国文化如此消极。更重要的是，这个研究开创了中西方相互学习的基本途径，一位前北京学者彭开平（他目前是Berkeley教授心理学的副教授）说，中国可以从西方检验科学真理的方法上学到很多，美国也可以从中国在社会和个人生活方面接受矛盾的忍耐中受益颇多。

彭开平说，美国人极需要在争论中找出谁是正确的。问题是在人际关系中，你没有必要去找真理，或许根本就不存在真理。彭开平还说，中国人则认为争论双方都有缺点和优点，因为他们总的意识是生活充满着矛盾。他接着说，中国人比美国更少地去责备个人。

例如，在人际关系争议的研究中，当主题是处理来自母女之间或学生与学校之间冲突的矛盾时，彭开平发现美国人在处理冲突中不会妥协，会责备一方（通常是母亲一方），原因是要求一方做出改变而得到解决而不是妥协。

与充满愤怒责备的美国人相比较，中国人则充满中庸之道，他们会找各自的错误，寻求一个双方都能接受的解决方法。然而在科学问题上，中国人显示了其劣势。当被问及哪个表述是正确的时候，比如，吸烟可以让人增肥还是减肥，中国人的回答是折中主义，即使他们认为其中一个表述不比另一个表述更有道理。

彭开平说，当你仅仅看到一个极不具说服力的观点的证据时就采取折中主义是错误的，然而中国人就是这样做的。他认为折中主义的趋势妨碍了中国人通过激烈的争论去寻找科学真理，而争论是在矛盾信息中创造直线前进的经典的西方方法，可以区分正确和错误的答案。

彭开平说，美国人认为最高明、最复杂的推理是西方的辩证思维模式。这种模式的推理是由正题推出反题，进而推出合理性。彭开平说，在中国的智慧寓言中，人们不会试图通过矛盾去解决问题，而是遵循一个文化传统，那就是现实是“多层次的、不可预测和充满矛盾的”，并且是不断变化的。

下一页继续