SAT阅读精讲（7）- 说明文与议论文双段落对比阅读之一

李嘉玉 主讲

在第一讲中，我们定义说明文是“介绍或是报道一个客观的事物”；“议论文是给出主观的观点，并采用一些论据去证明或论证主观观点”。对比说明文和议论文是现实生活中常见到的一种对比阅读。例如：我们看报纸，会发现一些新闻报道旁伴随一些评论。原新闻报道就是说明文，而评论往往是议论文。

试试我们用读新闻报道的方式去读第一个段落；用读评论的心态去读第二个段落。

Passage 1

The intelligence of dolphins is well documented by science. Studies show that dolphins are able to understand sign language, solve puzzles, and use objects in their environment as tools. Scientists also believe that dolphins possess a sophisticated language: numerous instances have been recorded in which dolphins transmitted information from one individual to another. A recent experiment proved that dolphins can even recognize themselves in a mirror something achieved by very few animals. This behavior demonstrates that dolphins are aware of their own individuality, indicating a level of intelligence that may be very near our own.

解析：

我们说，说明文是介绍一个事物。也可能是一个新事物，就像这篇关于海豚智商的报道。它说：“海豚的智商用科学的方法很好地记录下来了。”这是一个topic sentence,如同是一个文章的议论文的主题或是记叙文背景，规范了文章或是短论的内容和逻辑范畴。

在这里，通过第一句我们知道这里所要涉及的是海豚的智商，而且，也明确地告知，所讲述的内容是科学方法记录海豚智商。这里的重点是科学方法。什么是科学方法是读者关心的问题。

首先，什么是“科学”？在广义上说科学是一个过程或是一种方法，如：“科学”=“Critical 思维”+“实验”+“观察”。当然，组成科学的这三部分的先后顺序倒是无所谓。正如下面这个文章结构：

Topic Sentence:

The intelligence of dolphins is well documented by science.

First 观察揭示：

Studies show that dolphins are able to understand sign language, solve puzzles, and use objects in their environment as tools.

Second 科学家相信：

Scientists also believe that dolphins possess a sophisticated language: numerous instances have been recorded in which dolphins transmitted information from one individual to another.

Third 实验证明：

A recent experiment proved that dolphins can even recognize themselves in a mirror something achieved by very few animals. This behavior demonstrates that dolphins are aware of their own individuality.

结果是海豚的智商和我们人类差不多：

Those facts indicated a level of intelligence of dolphins that may be very near our own.

首先，我们发现，如果你对“科学”一词理解正确，那么，Studies show, scientist believe, and experiment prove 这三句的出现就是理所当然 anticipated answers。

进一步，如同在上面所做加工，再完善一下，我们完全可以把一个段落改写成一个文章。而且结构几乎是完全对称。这便是英文写作强调的一种几何美。

下面一段与上面一段完全不同，是议论文；结构上像是对上面一段的直接评论。

Passage2

Are dolphins unusually intelligent? Dolphins have large brains, but we know that brain size alone does not determine either the nature or extent of intelligence. Some researchers have suggested that dolphins have big brains because they need them for sonar and sound processing and for social interactions. Others have argued that regardless of brain size, dolphins have an intelligence level somewhere between that of a dog and a chimpanzee. The fact is, we don't know, and comparisons may not be especially helpful. Just as human intelligence is appropriate for human needs, dolphin intelligence is right for the dolphin's way of life. Until we know more, all we can say is that dolphin intelligence is different.

在读这一段时，对比上一段，我们的重点是找到这个评论对第一个段说明文的认同与不认同。直接评论往往会针对第一段的说明文的某点或是每一点进行细致的讨论或是驳斥。在结尾会给出作者的观点。而这个观点又要是作者在论证过程中致力于推论出的结果。

这段的开头说：“海豚真的有不寻常的智商？”这句其实预示，作者不认为海豚智商了不起。这种问句是反问（rhetorical question）。接下来说：“脑大并不能说明智商高。海豚的大脑个头大是因为要处理声纳信息。还有人说海豚的智商在狗和猩猩的智商之间。这说明我们还还不清楚海豚智商的真相。这些对比研究可能没意义。就像人的智商是针对人生；海豚的智商是适合于海豚的生活。我们唯一知道的是海豚的智商是不同的智商。”

这段的直接结论是：“海豚的智商是不同的智商”。但是，作者仍然认为海豚有智商。这虽然不像第一段所说：“海豚智商和我们人差不多”那么肯定海豚的智商高超，但是没有说海豚没智商。

让我们重新回顾它的逻辑：

脑大 < > 智商高；海豚脑大是为了处理声纳信息。据说海豚智商在狗的和猩猩的之间。但是，这种比较意义不大。正像人的智商为了人的生活；海豚的为海豚的生活。所以，我们知道的只是：海豚有海豚的智商，与其它的不同。

总之，我们认为两段文章的观点有一点是交集的：既海豚是有智商的。但是，两者的不同更大。第一段的观点是海豚的智商与人类差不多；第二段的观点是说海豚的智商如何我们不知道。而且海豚的智商针对海豚的生活而言才有意义。

摹写例子：

The hazard of air pollution is well documented by science. Studies show that air pollution is extended from over populated cities and major industrial areas to medium size cities, and even remote countryside. Scientists also believe that air pollution is causing a sophisticated serial matters to public health. The air pollution came from cars exhaust and industrial wastes were very unhealthy. A recent experiment proved that air pollution can even cause people sick chronically and seriously. Recent surveys demonstrated that people are aware of the hazard of air pollution, indicating a willing to deal with air pollution that is a problem we created by ourselves.

Is air smog unusually hazardous? Air pollution is annoying and hazardous, but we know that the smog in mega cities alone does not determine either the nature or extent of public hazard. Some researchers have suggested that smog is not as dangerous as polluted soil and water. Others have argued that regardless of its source, smog is hazard somewhere between that of polluted water and artificial food supplies. The fact is, we don't know, and comparisons may not be especially helpful. Until we know more, all we can say is that the air pollution in metropolis is exceptionally unwelcome.

作业：

根据本讲的范文逻辑与结构，针对一个题目，摹写一对段落：一个是说明文，一个是议论文。例如：关于食品添加剂的危害，或是气候变化趋势。