第十套综合写作阅读文本，

Argeniavis magnificens.出e largest bird to have ever inhabited Earth, lived six million years ago
。
in the southern pan of South America that roughly co町·esponds t modem-day Argentina. The bird,
which is known only through fossil remains, weighed up to 68 kilograms. There is some debate
about whether this bird was able to fly or whether it had lost its ability to fly at some point during
its evolution.

、
First, there is the problem of lifting oft' into the air. Based on its skeletion, the bird's total
wingspan was nearly seven meters. Wings this long would have hit the ground if the bird had tried
。 。
t lift ff from a standing po.sition. Modern flying birds have wing-to-b创y proportion.� that allow
them to take off without bitting the ground with their wings.

Second. even if the bird had managed to lifl off, it d 。由 not appear to have had en。ugh muscle
strength to make continuous flight possible As large as it was, the Argentavis does not appear to
have had sufticient muscles to keep its huge wings moving. It is highly improbable that its
muscl 也 could move its wings fast enough to keep it in the air for extended periods.

Third, according to the theory of evolution, animals only have abilities that give them an
。
advantage in their struggle to survive. Flying w uId not have given this giant bird any advantage.
。
It did not need t fly in order to escape predato白， because of its size it had no pr创ators. It could
not use Oying t。 hunt because it would have been such a clumsy and inefticient flier that it could
not possibly have captured enough food The bir，乱therefore, probably lost the ability to ny during
its evolution.

听力文本·

Now listen to part of a lecture on the topic you just read about.

Your reading gives r伺sons to doubt由at this giant bird could fly, however it is quite
‘
probable that it did fly. There s really noihing mysterious about how this bird got off the ground,
flew around, and fed itself. First, instead of taking off from a standing position， 由e bird could
have used a running start. It could have stretched out its wings，阳n down a small bill, and lifted
。ff into the wind. The 吨ion where the bird s fossils were discovered contains many such hills.
’

Also, the bird ’s strong thighbon部 and large f时t suggest it could run and this method for getting
into lhe air could explain why it bad ihose characteristics. Second, there’s no reason why the bird
。
would have had to keep flapping its wings in order to stay in the air. It c uld have stayed in the air
by catching so-called thermals; warm c町rents of air that rise up into the atmosphere. Many large
。
birds, such as c odors and eagles, use such currents to glide for hours wiihout moving their wings.
Third, the ability to fly would have been ve巧’usefuI for th陆bird. Why? Because it was probably a
scavenger.η，at is, it r.训。n animals that were already dead. ra巾。r than hunting live animals.
。 。
Scavengers o且en ne创 t look for dead anima Is ver a large ar，剧 ， so that they can fmd sufficient
food and how could Argentavis magnificens scavenge succ也sfully? By flying. That way it could
cover ihe large distanc臼 n 创出sary for successful scavenging.
Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they respond to the spec，白c
points made in the reading passage.

范文·

The reading passage and the lecture debate whether a giant bird called Argentavis
。
magni且cens was able to fly or not. The 1>as凶 ge proposes three theories, which are all c nt.radicted
。
by thefoU wing lecture.

f‘
First, the passage sugg出ts that the bird would have difficulty lifting of into the air.
The b甘心 ’ wingspan was nearly seven meters and it would hit the ground when it tried t lift of 。 f

from a standing position. However, the lecture challenges that the bird could have used a running
start to help it Jly. It stretch创。ut its wings, ran down small hill, and lift off into the air. ’The
hypoth时is is supported by many hills in the fossil site of the bird and its physical characteristics,
particularly its strong thighbones and large feet.

Second, the passage proposes阳t the bird does not have enough muscles 1 keep its 。
wings moving fast enough to fly in the air. Yet the lecture opposes, arguing that the bird did not
n出d to flap its wings, and could catch the so-called thermals, warm currents of air allowing them
。
t glide for hours without moving their wings. Many other birds such as eagles and condors also
use this method.

According to the final theory in the reading, flying wouId not give this bird
evolutionary advantage. It is because flying would neither help them 出cape from predators. nor
help them capture food. Therefore the bird may have lost its flying ability during evolution. But
the lecture holds the opposite opinion. It claims that the bird could be a 四avenger. that is, it fed on
dead animals. It n由ded to look for dead animals over a large area and flying could help them
cover larger distances.

In this wa且the readi鸣。f the passage was undermined by the l出ture.

第十一套综合写作阅读文本：

The British Library owns a fourteenth-century handwritten book containing four poems
considered to be among the finest of the English Middle Ag 时， The unknown author is referred to
as the Pearl Poet after the title of one of the poems in the man础cript、Several th 四ries have been
put forward about the Pearl 'Poet's identity.
John Massey
One theory suggests that the Pearl Poet was John Massey. John was known to have lived in
northw出t England, where the poems of the Pearl manuscript were produced. Moreover, the
surviving manuscript of John ’s p伺m ， “Saint Erkenwald，”is in the same handwriting as the British
。
Library ’s manuscript f the poems of the Pearl Poet. Th出e facts make a g 。“ arg 山nent that the
P四 rl Poet was John Massey.
 Hugh
According to a second 1heo厅， the fourteenth-ce.nrury poet阳。wn as little Hugh aulho阳d the
poems. Historical re,;ords indicaie the Hugh ,vrole a poem called “η1e Adventure ofGawain."
which some have hypothesize is !he 姐me as one of the four Pearl Poet poems ， “SirGw削n and the
”
Green Knight The poems of the Pearl Poe! make 出tensive use of alliteration-pairs of 叫acent
words that begin with the same consonant sound (for example, large lake )-and it is known that
Hugh wrote alliterative verse. The shared subject matter and use of alliteration support the identity
of Hugh as the Pearl Poet.
No single author
A third theory argu出 that the four poems in the manuscript were in fact writt巳n by several
authors rather than a single one. The only thing all the poems have in common is that they
mention plac由 in !he same region of England. So perhaps the manu四ript repr，时朋阳 a collection
of poems by several authors from the same region

听力文本z

Now listen to part of a lecture on the topic you just read about二

’
While the suggestions fo门 he 'Pearl Poet ’s identity may sound plausible, once we consider all the
’
fac阻， they are not convincing. First, John Massey. II s true the manuscript of John Massey·s间。m,
St. Erkeuwald, and the manuscript of the ‘Pearl Poet' are in the same hand,vriting, but this does
not mean that their author was the same person. In the 14th cen阳ry, books were reproduced by
copying and so, most handwritten books from that period are in 岛时，not the original documents
wriuen by their author鸟but copi臼 made by professional copyists, so all that the handwriting
’
similarity means is that John's poem and the ·Pearl Poet po ems were copied by the same person.
’ ‘
Second, it s true that Hugh and the Pearl Poe!' both used alliteration and wrote a poem about a
character called Gawain. but deψite this connection they were probably not the same per四n since
their poems were written in different dialects of English. At the ti.me, people from different regions
of England used quite diffe阳、t vari 剖i邸，or dialects, of English. All Hugh’S S山、，iving poems are
丁

。
in the regional dialect spoken in Yorkshire、 but the ·Pearl Poet ’ 、盯。te in a very d泊 erent dialect of
English from a different region of England, s Hugh was probably not the writer of the 'Pe-arl Poet'
‘
poems. Finally, there probably was a single Pearl Po出· The similarity among the poems goes
beyond mentioning the same places. 羽田poems 。f the Pearl manuscript also share the 四me

vocabulary. There are some very uncommon words that app回r in two or more of the poems Some
。f these words appear in n。 other works of Iiterature. It s very unlikely that several diffe阳、l
’

writers would have used the same unique words. The shared vocabulary is a strong indication that
all fo町 poems were wriuen by a single author.

。
Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure t explain how they challenge the sp 四i.fic
theories presented in the reading passage.

范文．

The reading passage and lecture debate the Pearl Poet's real identity. The reading
pas姐ge prop础。s three theori邸 which are all contradicted by the following lecture.
，

The first theory in the reading sugg臼臼ihat the Pearl Poet was John Massey. It is
because John lived in the 制 。 。
me place where the p ems f the Pearl manuscript were produced:
northwc.�t England. ln addition, the surviving manuscript of John’s poem was in the same
。
handwriting as the poem of ihe Pearl Poet. H wever, the lecture challenges this出eo,y by pointing
out that books in 14'" century were reproduced by copying. Therefore the poems of John and the
。
P曲rl Poet poems were probably c pied by the same person. Thus the similari守in handwriting
does not indicate that they were wrillen by ihe same author.

The second theory in the reading propos皑白at the fourteenth-century p et lillle 。

Hugh wrote the poem屯because of the shared subject matt町 and sin1ilar 出e of alliteration. Yet the
lecture states that although there is some conn时tion between the character and alliteration, they
’
were written in different dialects of English. Hugh s surviving poems are in the regional dialect of
’
Yorkshire, but lhe Pearl P侃t s are in a very di.f丁l erent dialect. indicating that Hugh probably was
not the author of the poems.

According阳ihe third theory in the reading, the poems were written by several
different author善企·om the same region. It is because they mention places in lhe same region of
。
England However, the lecrure c ntends there was probably only one Pearl Poet. The similarities
include not just mentioning the 回m e places, but also the same vocabulary. There are some unusual
。
words that叩pear in two or more of lhe p ems and in no other literature. It's not quite possible
that several dil悦rent authors used the same v cabulary. 。
ln this way, the reading passage was undermined by the l出ture.

第十二套综合写作阅读文本：

Orcas are large predatory whales whose typical coloration is mostly black wiih some white
patch盹 h r 四enl years, howev吨sightings of an unusual, almost completely white orca have
been reported in the northern Pacific Ocean. One sighting of a white orca occurred near Alaska in
“ ”
2000. Another sighting of a white orca-nicknamed Iceb鸣 by scienti山－ was made off the
coast of Russia in 2010.

Because a white orca is so unusual, some scientists have suggested that Icebe，毡， the whale seen off
the coast of Russia, was the same animal as the orca 。
en earlier near Alaska. H wever, there are
。
辑

convincing arguments that Tceberg and the Alaskan white orca are ac阳ally tw- ζli:ffere r刘
individuals.

。
Slight Colorati n DiJTerences
First, although all the photographs made during the s电htings show very light-color 配l animals, the
orca seen in Alaska appears to be just slightly darker than Iceberg. Such di盘:erences in coloration
suggest that th出e were tw 。 distinct animals that were independently sighted in the northern
Pacific.
Sightings Far Apart
Second. the sightings were very far刮目ri.η1e Alaskan orca was seen near the central Aleutian
Islands, a long string of islands that extend, westward from the mainland of Alaska. Iceberg was
S时n near the Commander falands, off the c凶拙。f Russia. More than 1,500 kilometers separate the
two locations. Typicall弘orcas tend to stay n回f the mainland coast and not travel such long
distances

Age Estimates
Third, when scientists 捕w the Alaskan white orca in 2000, they estimated that it was around
twenty years old, based on t.he size of its dorsal {back) tin. When researchers saw Iceberg, their
estimate of its age, bas旺l on the Jin size, was alsοaround 阳enty year辛－but that was in 2010,
when the Alaskan orca would have been thirty! The estimat出 again suggest quite剖rongly t.hat
these are two differ创t individuals.

听力文本：

Now listen to part of a lecture on the topic you just read about.

Despite what the reading says, it's perfectly possible that the white orca called
‘ Iceburg · by Russian scientists is in fact the same individual that was spotted earli町 near Alaska.
‘
For one thin且， the exact color of an Orca s skin can change a bit仕om season to season. The reason
for this is algae. Algae are small plant organ陆ms that grow on whale skin during some parts of the
year. Algae growth would make white skin look a bit darker. The Alaskan sighting occurred during
a d1日益rent 民ason than the Russian sighting， 抽 if we take into account the seasonal variation in
algae growth it could have been the same whale seen both tim醋 only one time it was cover自l
，

’
with more algae than the other time. Second, about the distance problem ... it s important to know
that. Orca's live in groups that have di白马rem lifestyles. Some groups hunt mammals, while other
。
groups hunt fish. The mammaI-eating Orcas tend to stay near c astlines and not migrate t沽， ju剖
like the reading sai也however scientists have determined that Iceberg belongs to a fish-hunting
group. Fish-hunting Orc盹 follow migrating fish and can travel over 2000 kilometers in the open
ocean, so it wouldn't have been unusual for Iceberg to travel between Alaska and Russia. Th，时，
age estimates based on the size of the dorsal fin are not necessarily acc町ate. You s阔 after an ，

Orea reach出 20 years of age its dorsal fine doesn't grow anymore, so when皿ientists see an Orea
。 。
with a fully grown dorsal fin, that Orca couId be 20 years Id, but it could also be 25 r 30 years
old，即 Iceberg could easily have been older than the scientists estimated, which means it could
have been the same Orca as the one seen in Alaska earlier.

Summarize山e points made in the lecture being sure to 队.plain how they respond to the specific
arg皿nents pre回ntecl in the reading passage.

范文．

The reading passage and lecture debate whether lcebe毡， the white whale seen off
the coast of Russia, was the same a阳mal as the orca seen earlier near Alaska. The reading passage
proposes three arguments to demo邸trate that they are diffe由nt, but the lecture holds the opp曲ite
op皿10n.

。
First, the readir、g prop 凶es that slight colorati n difference constitut臼 evidence they
盯e tw 。 distinct animals. The orca seen in Alaska appears to be slightly dark町 than Iceberg.
。
However, the lecture challenges by identifying the fact that orca’ s c lor skin could change from
s四”n to season. The cause of the chance is algae. They grow on whale skin which would make
。
the skin look darker. The Alaskan s也hting ccurred in a di必rent season. At one time there was
。
m re algae on the skin.

Second, the reading states that the two anin1als are spotted at very separate locations.
But orcas usually tend to stay near the mainland coast and not travel very long distances. But the
。
lecture argues that different groups of rcas hunt different prey, which leads to the differences in
locations. One group hun国mammals and tends to stay near coastline and not move very far. The
other group likes to hunt fish and therefore is more likely to migrate following the fish.

Finally, based on the reading, age diJierences between the two species suggest that
they are two distinct animals, based on the size of the dorsal fin.圳、e Iceberg was estimated t be。
rwenl)•飞while the Alaskan orca was 出timated to be thitl)•. But the lecture contends that the
measurement by dorsal fin is not very accura阳. The dorsal fin stops growing at age 20. The
。
Iceberg seen could be a lot Ider than scie刚刚s estimated.

In this way, the reading passage was undermined by the lecture.