懒笔记
2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A
CET-4 · 来自 2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 · Part III Section A · 完形填空（选词填空）

2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A

议论文 · 完形填空（选词填空） · 真题文章逐层精读

本页是 2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 文章的精读视角页——这篇议论文全文 251 词、4 段，CEFR 难度 B2（B2 级在英语四级文章中占 46%），作者立场为「客观中立」；英文原文之外，本篇已有的 11 项精读维度逐项展开，其中能迁移到其他英语四级真题文章的判断方法（篇章结构、修辞、言外之意、作者态度、体裁速判）随各维度一并讲透。

精读最佳实践

本页解析里的段号（P1）都可以点——点一下，原文在顶部翻开并定位到该段，解析引用的原文同步标亮；合上原文，你还停在刚才读到的位置。点 P1 试试。

PASSAGE · 文章原文

4 段英文原文

以下为2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 的完形填空（选词填空）原文，共 4 段。左侧 P1–P4 是段落编号——本页全部解析（结构、逐段、修辞、自检题）都以它为坐标回指原文，点击解析里的段号，原文即在顶部翻开并定位到该段、引用的原文同步标亮；合上原文仍停在当前阅读位置。原文保持卷面形态，不带翻译与标注。

When my son completes a task, I can't help but praise him. It's only natural to give praise where praise is due, right? But is there such a thing as too much praise?

According to psychologist Katherine Phillip, children don't benefit from constant praise as much as we'd like to think. "Parents often praise, believing they are building their child's self-confidence. However, over-praising can have a negative effect," says Phillip. "When we use the same praise repeatedly, it may become empty and no longer valued by the child. It can also become an expectation that anything they do must be rewarded with praise. This may lead to the child avoiding taking risks due to fear of disappointing their parents."

Does this mean we should do away with all the praise? Phillip says no. "The key to healthy praise is to focus on the process rather than the outcome. It is the recognition of a child's attempt, or the process in which they achieved something, that is essential," she says. "Parents should encourage their child to take the risks needed to learn and grow."

So how do we break the pattern of praise we're all so accustomed to? Phillip says it's important to distinguish between "person praise" and "process praise". "Person praise is simply saying how great someone is. It's a form of personal approval. Process praise is acknowledgement of the efforts the person has just undertaken. Children who receive person praise are more likely to feel shame after losing," says Phillip.

PARAGRAPHS · 逐段精读

4 段逐段主旨与解读

逐段拆解2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 的这篇原文——每段给出英文段落主旨、段落标题与中文解读，并提炼一条「这段为什么这样读」的具体方法。

  1. P1

    Can Praise Go Too Far?

    The author introduces the question of whether excessive praise can be harmful.

    本段承担 introduction 的功能，它没有立即给出结论，而是用一个人人可感的 parenting 场景提出“表扬是否有害”的议题，为文章批评 excessive praise 铺垫。

    抓住段末设问
  2. P2

    The Harm of Constant Praise

    Over-praise can undermine children's growth by creating empty expectations and fear of failure.

    本段是全文的核心论证之一，它回答了首段的疑问，具体证明 excessive praise 的确有害，并解释其如何阻碍孩子的独立性与成长。

    串联负面后果
  3. P3

    Praise the Process, Not Just the Result

    Healthy praise should recognize effort and process to promote children's learning and risk-taking.

    本段在全文中承担 solution 的作用，它避免把文章误读为“不要表扬孩子”，而是提出以 effort-oriented praise 促进真实成长的替代原则。

    抓住转折对策
  4. P4

    Person Praise versus Process Praise

    Distinguishing person praise from process praise helps parents avoid shame-based reactions to failure.

    本段把上一段较抽象的 process-focused principle 转化为可操作的分类标准，同时用 shame after losing 再次强化“避免失败恐惧”的全文主旨。

    对比两类表扬
SELF CHECK · 段落自检题

4 道逐段细节自检题

针对2020年12月英语四级真题第2套这篇原文，每段配 1 道细节题（ 1 个正确项 + 5 个干扰项 ，由懒笔记精读引擎基于本段命制，非试卷原题）。 选项默认中性；点「显示答案与解析」展开正确项、解析与最快解法，现代浏览器会同步高亮正确选项。

  1. 第 1 段 定位词 concern praising children

    What concern does the writer raise about praising children?

    • A Parents should praise every completed task.
    • B Children dislike receiving praise.
    • C Praise may become excessive.
    • D Praise is due only after major success.
    • E Parents praise children mainly to show affection.
    • F Children need praise to finish difficult tasks.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：C

    该项准确压缩了 第1段 最后的设问：作者并未否定 praise 本身，而是追问是否存在 too much praise 的边界问题。选项使用 may 保留了原文的审慎语气，excessive 与 too much 构成同义替换。障碍在于原文前两句具有明显的正面色彩，考生若只按首句顺读，容易误选“表扬理所当然”类表述；但题干问的是 concern，必须回到 but 后的核心疑问。

    问号后扫极性 时间紧张时，直接抓题干中的 concern，而不要逐句翻译 praise 的所有出现处。它在 第1段 的问号句附近有唯一的逻辑落点。随后实施“极性扫描”：先划掉把作者风险说成肯定主张的选项，以及含 every、only、need 等过强词的选项；剩余中与 concern 的程度边界一致者即为正确项。这比逐项回原文做字面对照更快。

  2. 第 2 段 定位词 Katherine Phillip repeated praise result from

    What may result from repeated praise, according to Katherine Phillip?

    • A Children will become more confident in every situation.
    • B Parents will stop rewarding children for their efforts.
    • C Children may become more willing to take risks.
    • D Children may regard praise as empty and less valuable.
    • E Praise will make children value every task equally.
    • F Children will praise themselves less often.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：D

    第2段 明确说明，同样的 praise 被 repeatedly 使用时，it may become empty and no longer valued by the child。正确项将 no longer valued 释义为 less valuable，并保留 may 的可能性，完整对应“重复表扬”造成的结果。障碍在于段中还提到 self-confidence、expectation 和 fear，考生容易混淆父母的主观意图与实际后果，或在选项中忽略因果方向和情态强度。

    后果全链核验 最快路径是先用 Katherine Phillip 跳至 第2段，再在她的引语中扫描 repeated、same、empty、valued、expectation、risks 等因果节点。不要把答案机械限制在与 repeated praise 同一句出现的直接结果，而应沿 may become、become an expectation、may lead to 等显式关系建立完整后果链。随后核对选项的主体、方向和概率强度，保留受到原文因果链直接支持的正确项。

  3. 第 3 段 定位词 Phillip key to healthy praise healthy praise

    What does Phillip identify as the key to healthy praise?

    • A Focusing mainly on the final outcome.
    • B Avoiding all praise to prevent dependence.
    • C Rewarding children whenever they succeed.
    • D Protecting children from risks and failure.
    • E Recognizing a child's effort and the process of achievement.
    • F Comparing a child's performance with that of others.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：E

    第3段 先提出 focus on the process rather than the outcome，接着将其具体解释为 recognition of a child's attempt, or the process in which they achieved something。正确项综合了 effort、process 和 achievement 三个对应成分，没有误把过程说成最终结果。障碍在于选项可能使用 outcome、success、confidence 等文章中显眼的词；考生必须抓住 rather than 所建立的价值取舍，而不是只选听起来积极的词。

    路标词跳读 直接在题干中圈出 key，再回文做“路标词跳读”。在 第3段 内只读包含 key、rather than、essential 的两句话，因为这类句子已自行标出信息等级。判定时不必逐一翻译每个选项，可先将含 all、whenever、mainly 及与 rather than 反方向的选项批量删除，保留正确项。

  4. 第 4 段 定位词 person praise after losing more likely to react

    According to Phillip, how are children who receive person praise more likely to react after losing?

    • A They are certain to stop taking risks.
    • B They feel proud of their personal qualities.
    • C They value process praise more than other children.
    • D They expect praise only after a victory.
    • E They become eager to explain their efforts.
    • F They are more likely to feel shame.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：F

    第4段 最后直接指出，Children who receive person praise are more likely to feel shame after losing。正确项保留了 more likely 的概率程度、feel 的情感性质和 shame 的核心反应，属于几乎无损的同义复现。障碍在于本段同时出现 personal approval、efforts 和 process praise 等积极或中性概念，考生若未将 person praise 与最后一句的对象精确对应，容易发生概念串线。

    术语右扫 在 第4段 采用“术语右扫法”：先锁定 person praise，不必先读完整定义，立即向右扫描其后与 children、more likely、after losing 相连的谓语信息。题干要求 reaction，因此只保留表示心理或行为反应的正确项；任何只是定义、前文因果或带 certain 等强度升级的选项可瞬间排除。

STRUCTURE · 篇章结构

4 个意群的议论文骨架

按议论文 的行文骨架切分意群，每个意群标注它覆盖的段落与对主旨的作用——逐段读完后回到这里俯瞰全篇，能看清作者为什么按这个顺序行文。

  1. 引言 P1

    过度表扬的质疑

    作者通过 personal anecdote 个人经历引出核心 question：praising 表扬孩子是否会 too much 过度？这个 rhetorical question 反问句直接 introduce 引入了文章要探讨的 central issue 核心问题，为后续的 argument 论证做 preparation 铺垫。

    这个 opening paragraph 开篇段落通过 relatable scenario 亲切场景建立 reader connection 读者联结，让家长产生 resonance 共鸣。rhetorical question 的使用 create suspense 制造悬念，prompts readers 促使读者思考 excessive praise 过度表扬的 potential problems 潜在问题，naturally lead into 自然引入主旨关于 harm 危害的讨论。

    提出表扬过度问题
  2. 分论点 P2

    过度表扬的负面影响

    心理学家 Katherine Phillip 通过 expert testimony 专家证言 explain 解释 over-praising 过度表扬的 negative effects 负面效果：praise 表扬变得 empty 空洞、孩子产生 expectation 期待心理、以及因 fear of disappointment 害怕失望而 avoid risks 规避风险。这个 supporting argument 支撑论点用 scientific perspective 科学视角 validate 验证了引言中的 concern 担忧。

    这个 body paragraph 主体段落 provide concrete evidence 提供具体证据支持主旨中 excessive praise 过度表扬 harm children's development 伤害儿童发展的 claim 论断。通过 listing specific consequences 列举具体后果（dependency 依赖、fear of failure 害怕失败），它 substantiate 证实了 damage mechanism 危害机制，为后续 solution-oriented discussion 解决方案导向讨论 lay groundwork 奠定基础。

    阐述表扬危害机制
  3. 分论点 P3

    健康表扬的正确方法

    Phillip 通过 solution-oriented approach 解决方案导向方法 clarify 澄清不是 eliminate praise 消除表扬，而是 shift focus 转移焦点到 process 过程而非 outcome 结果。强调 recognition of effort 认可努力和 attempt 尝试的 importance 重要性，encourage 鼓励孩子 take risks 冒险以 learn and grow 学习成长。这个 corrective argument 纠正性论点 provide practical guidance 提供实践指导。

    这个 paragraph 段落 operationalize 操作化主旨中 shift from person praise to process praise 从人格表扬转向过程表扬的 core recommendation 核心建议。它 bridge 连接 problem identification 问题识别（意群_2）和 implementation details 实施细节（意群_4），通过 establishing principle 确立原则（focus on process）为 readers 读者 provide clear direction 提供清晰方向，directly support 直接支持主旨中 encourage healthy risk-taking 鼓励健康冒险的 goal 目标。

    提出过程导向方案
  4. 分论点 P4

    区分人格表扬和过程表扬

    通过 practical question 实践性问题引入 implementation details 实施细节，Phillip 明确 distinguish 区分 person praise 人格表扬（saying how great someone is）和 process praise 过程表扬（acknowledgement of efforts）。用 concrete consequence 具体后果（children feel shame after losing）来 illustrate 说明两种 praise types 表扬类型的 differential impact 差异影响。

    这个 concluding body paragraph 结尾主体段落 operationalize 操作化主旨中的 core distinction 核心区分。通过 providing clear definitions 提供清晰定义和 contrasting examples 对比例子，它 enable readers 使读者能够 practically apply 实际应用 process praise 过程表扬的 concept 概念。mention 提及的 negative outcome 负面结果（shame）reinforces 强化主旨中 harm 危害的 urgency 紧迫性，completing 完成从 problem to solution 问题到解决方案的 argumentative arc 论证弧线。

    对比两种表扬类型
MAIN IDEA · 速判主旨

5 步定位这篇文章的主旨

不读完全篇也能锁定主旨——以下 5 步按2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 这篇原文的实际行文顺序给出，每步说明看哪里、看出什么，可直接迁移到其他英语四级文章。

  1. 首段反问定调 P1

    议论文的 first paragraph 往往用 question 来 establish 讨论的 scope，这个 question 本身就暗示了作者要 challenge 或 explore 的 issue，是 locating main idea 的 starting point

  2. 专家观点揭示危害 P2

    议论文常用 authority figure 来 strengthen argument，专家的 statement 往往直接 reveal 作者的 stance。这里 psychologist 提出的 'negative effect' 和 specific harms 就是文章要 convey 的 central message

  3. 关键词引出解决方案 P3

    议论文在 identify problem 后必然 propose solution，'the key to' 这类 phrase 标志着从 critique 转向 recommendation，solution 的内容是 complete thesis 不可或缺的部分

  4. 对比方法强化论点 P4

    最后一段的 contrast 是对 solution 的 concrete breakdown，通过 'distinguish between' 和对比 outcomes（'more likely to feel shame'）来 reinforce 为什么需要 shift from person to process praise

  5. 论证链条串联主旨 P1 P2 P3 P4

    议论文的 main idea 不是单一 sentence，而是 argumentative thread 贯穿全文。通过 trace 这条 thread（question → problem → solution → implementation），可以 construct 完整的 thesis statement，避免 partial understanding

主旨信号词 too much P1 negative effect P2 the key to P3 rather than P3 avoid taking risks P2 process praise P4

MAIN IDEA · 主旨

这篇文章在说什么

过度表扬可能会通过造成依赖性和对失败的恐惧来损害儿童的发展。父母应该从人格表扬转向过程表扬,关注努力和尝试而非结果,以鼓励健康的冒险精神和真正的成长。
Excessive praise can harm children's development by creating dependency and fear of failure. Parents should shift from person praise to process praise, focusing on effort and attempt rather than outcomes, to encourage healthy risk-taking and genuine growth.
WORD INFERENCE · 生词推断

4 个生词的上下文推断

不查词典，只用文中线索推出词义——每个词给出推断出的释义与 完整推理链。已收录进英语四级高频真题词集的单词可点击进入词条页。

  • psychologist 心理学家

    现在让我们 connect 这些 clues。首先,word structure 告诉我们这是 someone who studies the mind。然后,context 显示这个 person 作为 expert 被 quoted,discussing children's mental development。最后,her specific focus on self-confidence, praise effects, and behavioral patterns 确认了她研究的是 human psychology。所有这些 evidence 指向同一个 conclusion。

    词根+角色+主题三维验证法
  • outcome 结果;成果

    让我们 synthesize 这些 clues。首先,contrast structure 把 outcome 放在 process 的 opposite side。然后,后续的 explanation 用 achieved something 来 describe process 的 end point。最后,整段的 argumentative logic 把 outcome 定位为 the final result that parents shouldn't focus on exclusively。三条 lines of evidence 都指向:outcome 是 process 完成后的 final result。

    对比关系中的语义定位法
  • distinguish 区分;辨别

    现在 connect 这些 threads。首先,syntactic pattern "distinguish between A and B" 建立了一个 comparison framework。然后,immediately following definitions 证实了这是在 separating two concepts。最后,整段的 pedagogical function 表明这个 separation 是为了让 parents understand and apply the difference。综合来看,distinguish 就是 to recognize and identify the differences between things。

    句式功能双重解码法
  • acknowledgement 认可;承认

    让我们 integrate 这些 insights。首先,definitional context 把 acknowledgement 和 efforts 连接起来,suggesting 某种 recognition。然后,cross-paragraph echo 与 recognition 建立了 semantic connection。最后,contrast with person praise 确认这是 about noticing and valuing actions rather than judging people。All evidence points to:acknowledgement 是 recognizing and showing appreciation for something。

    定义互文对比三角印证法
RHETORIC · 修辞手法

4 处修辞手法与仿写

每处修辞给出它在本文的具体用法、同类信号词清单与一份可直接套用的 写作仿写建议——读完能认，也能写。

  • 引用论证

    P2 P3 P4

    作者通过引用 psychologist Katherine Phillip 的专业观点来支撑论点。这种 expert testimony 增强了文章的 credibility，让读者相信 over-praising 的负面影响不是作者的个人臆断，而是有 psychological research 支持的结论。Phillip 的多次发言贯穿全文，形成了一个 authoritative voice，有效地说服读者接受 process praise 优于 person praise 的核心主张。

    信号词 According to says states argues claims points out explains notes emphasizes As [expert] suggests Research shows Studies indicate

    仿写： 当你写 argumentative essay 时,如果想让观点更有 weight,可以寻找相关领域的 experts 或 studies。比如讨论 screen time 对儿童的影响时,你可以写:'According to child development specialist Dr. Smith, ...' 这样的引入。模版可以是:【According to [expert/source], "[quote]" + 解读这个quote如何支持你的thesis】。记住要在引用后加上你自己的 interpretation,说明这个 evidence 如何 connect 到你的 main argument。

  • 因果论证

    P2

    文章在 第2段 中建立了清晰的 cause-effect chain:over-praising (cause) 导致多个 negative consequences。具体来说,constant praise 会让孩子产生 expectation,进而导致 fear of taking risks。这个 causal reasoning 直接支撑了文章的 thesis,即 excessive praise 是 harmful 的。通过展示 logical consequences,作者让读者理解到看似 positive 的行为(praising)实际上可能带来 counterproductive results,这种 cause-effect logic 让论证更加 compelling。

    信号词 lead to result in cause may lead to can have a negative effect bring about contribute to give rise to consequently as a result therefore thus due to because of

    仿写： 写议论文时,当你要说明某个 behavior 或 policy 的问题,可以使用 causal chain。比如讨论 procrastination,你可以写:'When students delay their work, this leads to increased stress levels, which may result in poor performance.' 模版是:【When/If [condition/action], this leads to/results in/causes [immediate effect], which may further lead to [ultimate consequence]】。关键是要建立 clear logical links,让每个 step 都 follow naturally from the previous one。

  • 对比论证

    P4

    文章在 第4段 中进行了关键的 contrast:'person praise' vs 'process praise'。通过 distinguish 这两种 praise types,作者清晰地展示了 right approach 和 wrong approach 的区别。这个 comparison 不仅帮助读者理解 what to avoid,更重要的是明确了 what to do instead。对比中提到 'Children who receive person praise are more likely to feel shame',这个 contrasting consequence 强化了 process praise 的优越性,让文章的 recommendation 更有 practical value。

    信号词 distinguish between in contrast however on the other hand whereas while unlike compared to rather than instead of conversely alternatively different from

    仿写： 当你想 advocate for 某个 approach 时,对比论证非常有效。比如讨论学习方法:'Passive learning involves simply reading and memorizing. Active learning, in contrast, requires students to engage with material through questions and practice.' 模版是:【[Concept A] is [characteristics]. [Concept B], in contrast/however, is [contrasting characteristics]. This difference leads to [different outcomes]】。关键是要确保 contrast 是 meaningful 的,能够 illuminate 你的 main point,而不是为了 contrast 而 contrast。

  • 反问修辞

    P1 P3

    文章在 第1段 用了两个 rhetorical questions 来 open the discussion:'It's only natural to give praise where praise is due, right?' 和 'But is there such a thing as too much praise?' 第一个问题 establishes common belief,第二个立即 challenge 它,creating tension 并引出文章要探讨的 core issue。在 第3段,'Does this mean we should do away with all the praise?' 这个 rhetorical question anticipates reader's potential misunderstanding,然后用 'Phillip says no' 来 clarify。这些问题不需要读者回答,而是 guide reader's thinking,让文章的 logical flow 更加 engaging 和 clear。

    信号词 right? Is there...? Does this mean...? But... Isn't it...? Don't we...? How can...? Why should...? What if...? Can we really...?

    仿写： 使用 rhetorical questions 时要 strategic。可以在 introduction 用它来 hook reader:'We all want success, but do we understand what true success means?' 或在 body paragraphs 用它来 transition:'Does technology always make life easier?' 然后立即给出你的 answer 或 analysis。模版:【[Rhetorical question that challenges common belief/introduces tension] + 紧接着的 answer 或 elaboration】。注意不要 overuse,每个 section 最多一到两个,否则会显得 gimmicky。

IMPLIED MEANING · 言外之意

7 处话里有话

作者没有明说、但靠信号词传递出来的态度与暗示——每处给出原文片段、信号词类型与解读。

  • 过度表扬的潜在危害

    P1
    It's only natural to give praise where praise is due, right? But is there such a thing as too much praise?

    反问句 right? isn't it? don't you think? or is it? really? does it? can we?

    作者先 acknowledge 一个 widely accepted practice(表扬是应该的),然后立刻用两个 rhetorical questions 来 cast doubt。第一个 right? 是 seeking agreement,但第二个 But is there such a thing as too much praise? 才是 real punch。这个 implication 是:praise 可能 excessive,可能 harmful。这为全文的 thesis 奠定基础 — 即 over-praising 的 negative effects。它的 value 在于 softly introduce 一个 controversial viewpoint,避免 directly confronting readers' beliefs,让 argument 更容易被 accept。

  • 专家观点对常见做法的否定

    P2
    Parents often praise, believing they are building their child's self-confidence. However, over-praising can have a negative effect

    转折类 However But Yet Nevertheless Nonetheless On the contrary In contrast

    这个 however 的 implication 非常 critical。它 establishes 一个 gap between parental intention(建立自信)和 actual outcome(负面影响)。言外之意是:well-meaning parents 其实在 unknowingly harming 孩子。这个 contrast 强化了文章的 core message — 即使 motivation 是 positive,practice 也可能 backfire。对 thesis 的 value 在于它 introduces expert validation,将 casual observation 提升到 scientific conclusion 的 level,让 argument 更有 persuasive power。

  • 重复表扬导致价值贬损

    P2
    When we use the same praise repeatedly, it may become empty and no longer valued by the child. It can also become an expectation

    情态词 may might can could would may lead to might result in

    这两个 may 和 can 看似 cautious,但 implication 是这些 negative outcomes 很 likely。言外之意是:过度表扬会经历一个 degradation process — 从 meaningful 变成 meaningless,最终 create dependency。这个 progressive deterioration 的 description 让 argument 更 convincing。对 thesis 的 contribution 是它 explains the mechanism,不只说 over-praising is bad,而是 show how it gradually erodes 孩子的 intrinsic motivation 和 risk-taking ability,这 strengthen 了文章的 analytical depth。

  • 避免极端化的平衡立场

    P3
    Does this mean we should do away with all the praise? Phillip says no.

    反问句+否定回应 Does this mean... Phillip says no. Does this mean... No. Should we... Not necessarily. Does it follow that... Not quite. Must we... Not at all. Is it saying... No. Are we suggesting... Absolutely not.

    这个 implication 是作者在 manage readers' potential overreaction。言外之意是:批评 over-praising 不等于 reject all praise。这个 clarification 很 strategic,因为它 prevents readers from dismissing 整个 argument as too radical。对 thesis 的 value 在于它 establishes credibility — showing 作者不是 extremist 而是 seeking optimal balance。这让后续的 solution(process praise)更容易被 accept,因为它是 modification 而非 elimination。

  • 过程导向才是关键

    P3
    The key to healthy praise is to focus on the process rather than the outcome.

    强调结构 The key to... is to The secret lies in What matters most is The crucial factor is The essential point is The critical element is What really counts is

    The key to 的 implication 是这是解决问题的 fundamental principle,不是 optional suggestion。言外之意是:如果只能记住一点,就记住 process over outcome。这个 dichotomy(process vs. outcome)是全文的 pivotal insight。对 thesis 的 value 巨大 — 它 transforms 批评变成 constructive guidance,提供 actionable solution。Rather than 的使用 reinforces 这个 shift,明确告诉 parents what to stop and what to start,让 argument 完整且 practical。

  • 人格表扬的本质问题

    P4
    Person praise is simply saying how great someone is. It's a form of personal approval.

    模糊限制语 simply just merely only nothing but no more than little more than

    Simply 的 implication 是 person praise 过于 shallow 和 superficial。言外之意是:这种表扬 lacks substance,只是 surface-level approval 而非 meaningful recognition。It's a form of personal approval 进一步 reinforce 这个 criticism — approval 听起来 conditional and judgmental。对比下一句 process praise 的 detailed definition,这个 contrast 让 person praise 显得 inadequate。对 thesis 的 value 是它 conceptually distinguish 两种 praise,让 parents 能 identify 自己的 mistake 并 understand why 需要 change。

  • 人格表扬导致羞耻感

    P4
    Children who receive person praise are more likely to feel shame after losing

    概率表达 more likely to tend to are prone to have a tendency to are inclined to often result in frequently lead to

    More likely to 的 implication 是 person praise 创造了 psychological vulnerability。言外之意是:这种表扬方式让孩子把 failure 看作 personal inadequacy,从而 experience shame。这是文章最 powerful 的 emotional appeal — shame 是极其 negative 的 feeling。对 thesis 的 value critical — 它 provides concrete, relatable consequence 来 support 为什么要 adopt process praise。Parents 能 immediately understand why 改变 matters,因为没人想让孩子 experience shame。这个 ending 给全文一个 emotionally compelling conclusion。

AUTHOR ATTITUDE · 作者态度

作者态度：客观中立

结论先行：本文作者态度为客观中立（ Rational and Balanced）。下面是按步骤还原的判断过程与文中的态度信号词。

  1. 首段设问定调 P1

    议论文开头如果用question而不是statement开场，说明作者在adopt一种探究式的opening，而不是一开始就摆出strong opinion，这提示我们作者态度大概率偏向neutral，需要在后文继续追踪。

  2. 专家引用代言 P2 P3 P4

    在议论文里，如果作者频繁借助第三方authority来support argument，说明作者的态度更偏向objective reporting，而不是带着强烈personal emotion或bias去写。

  3. 让步反驳结构 P2 P3

    concession structure（先acknowledge一部分负面，再否定extreme结论）是议论文里典型的balanced argument写法，说明作者不是一边倒地批判praise，而是想呈现一个rational、moderate的立场。

  4. 首尾呼应定态度 P1 P4

    议论文的态度往往落在最后的conclusion或者recommendation段，本文第4段给出具体的actionable建议，说明作者的态度是constructive的，希望用process praise替代单纯的person praise，而不是简单否定praise本身，所以整体判定为客观中立中带建设性。

文中的态度信号词

  • According to P2

    这个citation信号说明作者不是自己下judgment，而是borrow expert authority来support观点，体现出一种objective reporting的态度，而不是personal opinion的宣泄。

    同类词 says Phillip Phillip says as ... states research shows

  • However P2

    这个转折词把"over-praising负面效果"和前面"parents believe praise建立self-confidence"的看法对立起来，提示作者不满足于单一角度，要给出更nuanced的view。

    同类词 but yet although nevertheless

  • no P3

    面对"Does this mean we should do away with all the praise?"的反问，直接用"no"回答，说明作者/expert并不走向消极批判的extreme，而是保留praise的positive价值，只是要调整方式。

    同类词 not necessarily far from it on the contrary certainly not

  • should P3

    "Parents should encourage their child to take the risks"中的should是recommendation modal，表明作者在给出actionable建议，态度从单纯descriptive转向constructive。

    同类词 must need to ought to it's important to

  • essential P3

    "It is the recognition of a child's attempt... that is essential"用essential强调process praise的重要性，说明作者认可并倾向于推崇这种praise方式，而非全盘否定praise。

    同类词 key crucial vital necessary

GENRE · 速判体裁

30 秒判定这是一篇议论文

体裁决定读法与出题套路。以下判断步骤与标志词全部以本文为例，可直接迁移到其他英语四级 真题文章。

如何快速判断这是一篇议论文？

  1. 开头提出争议性问题 P1

    第1段 中作者用了两个 questions：'It's only natural to give praise where praise is due, right?' 和 'But is there such a thing as too much praise?'，这种 questioning approach 明确表明作者要讨论一个 controversial topic，而不是像说明文那样解释 how something works，也不是像新闻报道那样报道 what happened。

  2. 引用专家观点佐证 P2 P4

    第2段 明确引入了 psychologist Katherine Phillip 的 professional opinion，并用 quotes 来 present her argument about over-praising。这种 use of authority 是议论文的标志，因为作者需要 credible sources 来 persuade readers。说明文虽然也会引用专家，但目的是 explain，而不是 argue；新闻报道引用是为了 report facts objectively，而不是 build a persuasive case。

  3. 回应反对意见细化立场 P3

    第3段 开头问 'Does this mean we should do away with all the praise?'，然后 Phillip 说 'no'，这是典型的 addressing potential counter-argument 或者 clarifying a nuanced position。作者不是简单地说 praise is bad，而是在 refine the argument by distinguishing between different types of praise。这种 dialectical approach 是议论文的核心，说明文不需要 address opposing views，新闻报道追求 balance 但不 develop a position。

  4. 结尾提出行动建议 P4

    第4段 不仅 elaborate 了 Phillip 的 theory，还给出了具体的 distinction between 'person praise' and 'process praise'，以及 practical guidance on 'how do we break the pattern'。这种 solution-oriented approach 表明作者不只是 informing，而是在 advocating for a change in parenting behavior。说明文会 conclude with summary of information，新闻会 end with final facts or quotes，但议论文会 push for a shift in perspective or action。

  5. 识别说服性逻辑链条 P1 P2 P3 P4

    这篇文章从 第1段 的 questioning，到 第2段 的 expert-backed criticism of over-praising，再到 第3段 的 nuanced clarification，最后到 第4段 的 practical guidance，完整展现了 argumentative essay 的 persuasive trajectory。它不是 explaining how praise works (说明文)，也不是 reporting on a praise-related incident (新闻)，而是在 argue for a specific approach to praising children。整体的 rhetorical purpose 是 persuasion，这是判断议论文的 ultimate criterion。

哪些词暴露了议论文体裁？

  • but P1 逻辑转折词 however yet nevertheless nonetheless on the contrary
  • However P2 论证逻辑连接词 however moreover furthermore therefore thus
  • should P3 立场表态词 must ought to need to have to it is essential that
  • According to P2 观点引导词 according to says claims argues believes
  • The key to P3 立场表态词 the key to the key is is essential is crucial is important
  • it's important to distinguish P4 立场表态词 distinguish between differentiate the difference is it is crucial to differentiate we must distinguish
SENTENCE INSIGHTS · 句子精讲

7 句真题句逐层精讲

下列真题句各有独立的句子解析页——中文翻译、结构树逐层拆解、成分与时态、考点讲解与真题高频词。点击句子进入完整解析。

FAQ · 常见问题

关于 2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 的常见问题

2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 文章的主旨是什么？
过度表扬可能会通过造成依赖性和对失败的恐惧来损害儿童的发展。父母应该从人格表扬转向过程表扬,关注努力和尝试而非结果,以鼓励健康的冒险精神和真正的成长。（英文表述：Excessive praise can harm children's development by creating dependency and fear of failure. Parents should shift from person praise to process praise, focusing on effort and attempt rather than outcomes, to encourage healthy risk-taking and genuine growth.）
2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 文章是什么体裁？难度如何？
体裁为议论文，作者立场是客观中立（Rational and Balanced）。CEFR 难度 B2，全文 251 词、4 段；在英语四级全部 511 篇真题文章中，B2 级共 234 篇（占 46%）。
2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 文章的篇章结构是怎样的？
全文 4 段按议论文骨架分为 4 个意群：引言 · 第1段——过度表扬的质疑；分论点 · 第2段——过度表扬的负面影响；分论点 · 第3段——健康表扬的正确方法；分论点 · 第4段——区分人格表扬和过程表扬。
2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 文章的作者态度是什么？
作者态度是客观中立（Rational and Balanced）。判断路径：首段设问定调 → 专家引用代言 → 让步反驳结构 → 首尾呼应定态度；文中的态度信号词包括 According to（第2段）、However（第2段）、no（第3段）、should（第3段）、essential（第3段）。
2020年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section A 文章中有哪些值得积累的生词？
按文中出现顺序共 4 个：psychologist（心理学家）、outcome（结果;成果）、distinguish（区分;辨别）、acknowledgement（认可;承认），每个词的词义都可以由文中上下文线索推断得出。

本页数据最后更新：