2021年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section C (1) Should obesity be recognized as a disease?
CET-4 · 来自 2021年12月英语四级真题第2套 · Part III Section C (1) · 阅读理解(四选一)

Should obesity be recognized as a disease?

《肥胖应该被视为一种疾病吗?》 —— 2021年12月英语四级真题第2套文章逐层精读

本文选自 2019年7月 17日刊登在 ww.sciencedaily.com(每日科学网站)上的一篇标题为“Should obesity be recognized as a disease?”(《肥胖应该被视为一种疾病吗?》)的文章。

本页是 2021年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section C (1) 文章的精读视角页——这篇议论文全文 347 词、4 段,CEFR 难度 C1(C1 级在英语四级文章中占 32%),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2021年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section C (1) 的阅读理解(四选一)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。

Should obesity be recognized as a disease?

With obesity now affecting 29% of the population in England, and expected to rise to 35% by 2030, should we now recognise it as a disease? Obesity, in which excess body fat has accumulated to such an extent that health may be adversely affected, meets the dictionary definition of disease, argues Professor John Wilding. He points out that more than 200 genes influence weight. "Thus body weight is strongly influenced by biology—it is not an individual's fault if they develop obesity." Yet the widespread view is that obesity is self-induced and that it is entirely the individual's responsibility to do something about it. Recognising obesity as a chronic disease with severe complications rather than a lifestyle choice "should help reduce the stigma(耻辱) and discrimination experienced by many people with obesity," he adds.

Professor Wilding disagrees that labelling a high proportion of the population as having a disease removes personal responsibility or may overwhelm health services, pointing out that other common diseases, such as high blood pressure and diabetes, require people to take action to manage their condition. He suggests that most people with obesity will eventually develop complications. "But unless we accept that obesity is a disease, we are not going to be able to tackle it," he concludes.

But Dr. Richard Pile, a physician with a special interest in diabetes, argues that adopting this approach "could actually result in worse outcomes for individuals and society." He believes that the dictionary definition of disease "is so vague that we can classify almost anything as a disease" and says the question is not whether we can, but whether we should, and to what end.

If labelling obesity as a disease was harmless then it wouldn't really matter, he writes. But labelling obesity as a disease "risks reducing autonomy, disempowering and robbing people of the intrinsic(内在的) motivation that is such an important enabler of change." What's more, making obesity a disease "may not benefit patients, but it will benefit healthcare providers and the pharmaceutical(制药的) industry when health insurance and clinical guidelines promote treatment with drugs and surgery," he warns.

PARAGRAPHS · 逐段精读

4 段逐段主旨与解读

逐段拆解2021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

    The Case for Recognizing Obesity as a Disease

    Wilding argues that obesity should be recognized as a disease because biological factors shape it and classification can reduce stigma.

    本段承担文章正方论证的奠基作用,它先建立 obesity 是 disease 的理论与现实依据,再指出这一认定具有 reduce stigma 的社会价值。对于全文主旨而言,它完整呈现了“应当认定”的基本逻辑,为后文 Wilding 对反对意见的回应做好铺垫。

    抓住立场与论据
  2. P2

    Answering Objections to Disease Classification

    Wilding refutes concerns about responsibility and argues that recognizing obesity as a disease is necessary to tackle it effectively.

    本段使正方观点更具完整性,因为它预先处理了“疾病标签会让人逃避责任、压垮医疗系统”的 counterargument。通过与 diabetes 等疾病的类比,作者将个人 self-management 与疾病认定并置,强化了全文中“承认疾病才能治理问题”的正方立场。

    识别反驳逻辑
  3. P3

    Questioning the Value of the Disease Label

    Pile challenges disease classification by questioning its vague definition and its potentially harmful consequences.

    本段是全文论证结构的关键转折,它正式引入反方 Pile,并从概念和后果两个角度动摇正方立场。文章主旨要求比较两种 opposing views,而这一段正是形成辩论张力的基础,并为下一段展开具体风险作引导。

    抓住转折与质疑
  4. P4

    The Risks of Medicalizing Obesity

    Pile argues that labeling obesity as a disease can weaken personal agency and favor medical industries over patients.

    本段完成了反方论证的实质展开,它把 第3段 中笼统的 worse outcomes 具体落实为个人能动性下降与产业逐利风险。就全文而言,这一段使争议不再只是定义之争,而成为关于 autonomy、motivation 和医疗利益是否应优先考虑的价值之争。

    拆解具体风险
SELF CHECK · 段落自检题

4 道逐段细节自检题

针对2021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 Professor John Wilding obesity as a chronic disease

    According to Professor John Wilding, recognizing obesity as a chronic disease would primarily help to ______.

    • A prove that obesity is caused by a single gene
    • B free individuals from taking any action to manage their weight
    • C reduce the stigma and discrimination faced by people with obesity
    • D ensure that obesity will disappear by 2030
    • E prevent health services from treating people with diabetes
    • F make lifestyle choice the only accepted explanation for obesity
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案:C

    正确项对应 Wilding 的明确预测:把 obesity 看作 chronic disease 而非 lifestyle choice,should help reduce stigma and discrimination。选项用 faced by people with obesity 概括原文的 experienced by many people with obesity,属于同义压缩,没有改变对象、方向或结果。障碍在于题干问 primarily help,原文却先铺陈 dictionary definition、genes 和 personal fault;考生必须分清这些是论据,而 stigma and discrimination 才是该句落脚的 benefit。

    人名后果句直击 时间极紧时,直接用题干中的 Professor John Wilding 和 chronic disease 跳到 第1段,不必从首句开始通读。随后执行“末句优先”法:议论文中人物一段话常先给 evidence,后给 evaluative payoff;只核对该人物最后的 consequence 句。再把正确项与这句做“方向+对象”双重比对:方向必须是 help 后的正向效果,对象必须是 people with obesity。双重吻合即选正确项。

  2. 第 2 段 定位词 high blood pressure and diabetes

    Why does Professor Wilding mention high blood pressure and diabetes?

    • A To argue that obesity is less serious than diabetes.
    • B To prove that obesity can be cured by the same drugs.
    • C To show that health services should ignore obesity.
    • D To show that having a disease does not remove the need for personal action.
    • E To explain why most people with obesity never develop complications.
    • F To recommend that all patients receive surgery immediately.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案:D

    high blood pressure 和 diabetes 被用作 analogy:它们同样是 common diseases,但患者仍 require people to take action to manage their condition。该项准确概括了例子服务的反驳目标,即 disease label 与 personal responsibility 并不矛盾。设置障碍在于原文同时提及 health services,考生若只抓 services 可能误选医疗资源选项;但例子紧接着强调的是 people take action,因此论证重心在个人管理责任。

    例子夹心删名词 先以 high blood pressure and diabetes 秒定位 第2段。不要阅读整段,采用“例子夹心”法:只看该例子所在句的前半句和后半句,前半句识别被反驳的观点,后半句提炼例子证明的原则。然后对选项进行“删名词测试”:把两个疾病名替换成“其他常见疾病”后,仍能成立且能回应前文质疑的,就是正确项。

  3. 第 3 段 定位词 Dr. Richard Pile

    What does Dr. Richard Pile regard as the central issue in classifying obesity as a disease?

    • A Whether obesity fits every dictionary definition of disease.
    • B Whether obesity affects more than 35% of the population.
    • C Whether people with obesity have access to enough health insurance.
    • D Whether genes completely determine an individual's body weight.
    • E Whether doing so is desirable and what purpose it would serve.
    • F Whether doctors can legally prescribe surgery for obesity.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案:E

    Pile 明确把问题从 whether we can 转为 whether we should, and to what end。正确项以 desirable 对应 should,以 what purpose it would serve 对应 to what end,完整保留了“规范判断+目的追问”两层。命题障碍是 dictionary definition 和 vague 都很显眼,但它们只是他提出焦点转换的前提;真正的 central issue 在后面的 but 结构中。

    转折后双维裁决 用 Dr. Richard Pile 定位至 第3段 后,直接寻找“否定前项+转出后项”的 pivot structure,不必逐句译出 definition 的细节。把题干 central issue 与文中的 the question is 对齐,再实行“but 后裁决”法:在 not A but B 中,A 常是被降级的表层问题,B 才是正确项必须概括的判断维度。只要正确项同时覆盖 B 的两个并列维度,即可判定。

  4. 第 4 段 定位词 labelling obesity as a disease intrinsic motivation clinical guidelines

    What harmful effect does Dr. Richard Pile think labelling obesity as a disease may have on individuals?

    • A It will guarantee that individuals receive free surgery.
    • B It will make people more intrinsically motivated to change.
    • C It will prevent pharmaceutical companies from making profits.
    • D It will prove that obesity is harmless to health.
    • E It will remove all clinical guidelines for obesity treatment.
    • F It may weaken their autonomy and intrinsic motivation to change.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案:F

    该项准确压缩 Pile 的原话:labelling obesity as a disease risks reducing autonomy、disempowering and robbing people of intrinsic motivation。weaken 对应 reducing 和 robbing,their 对应 people,to change 对应 change,语义、对象和不确定程度均一致。难点在于原文并列了多个风险,又在后句谈 providers 和 pharmaceutical industry 的获益;题干特意用 on individuals,要求考生锁定个人心理与行动能力层面的后果。

    主体切片极性匹配 以 labelling obesity as a disease 直接定位 第4段,随后不通读,先做“主体切片”:把段内信息快速分成 people、healthcare providers、pharmaceutical industry 三组。题干给 on individuals,就只读 people 这一组附近的风险动词。再做“极性匹配”:正确项必须同时保留负向变化和 may 的非绝对语气;若选项换了主体、反了正负,或用了 will/all,即刻排除。

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

    肥胖症的疾病定义争议引入

    这个 introduction 通过 obesity statistics(29%的英国人口affected)引出核心 debate:should we recognise obesity as a disease?Professor Wilding 提出 pro argument,强调 genetic factors(超过200个genes影响weight)和 biological influence,认为应该 classify obesity 为 chronic disease 来 reduce stigma 和 discrimination。

    这个 opening paragraph 建立了整篇文章的 argumentative framework,introduce 了 controversy 的一方:支持将 obesity label 为 disease 的 position,为后续的 opposing view 做好 contrast 铺垫,同时提供了 background context(prevalence data 和 projected increase)。

    提出正方观点
  2. 分论点 P2

    正方论证的深化与反驳预设

    Professor Wilding 继续 develop 他的 argument,通过 refuting potential counterarguments(担心 remove personal responsibility 或 overwhelm health services)来 strengthen 他的 position。他使用 analogy strategy(对比 high blood pressure 和 diabetes 等 common diseases)证明 disease classification 不会 eliminate personal agency,并且 emphasize 如果不 accept obesity as disease,就 cannot tackle it effectively。

    这个 supporting paragraph 通过 addressing objections 和 providing comparative examples 来 consolidate Wilding's stance,使正方的 argument 更加 robust 和 persuasive,同时为即将出现的 opposing view 创造更 dramatic 的 contrast effect。

    巩固正方论证
  3. 分论点 P3

    反方立场的提出与质疑

    通过 adversative marker "But" 引入 opposing perspective,Dr. Pile 作为 physician 提出 counter-argument,challenge 前面的 disease classification approach。他 criticize dictionary definition 过于 vague,质疑的核心不是 "whether we can" classify obesity as disease,而是 "whether we should, and to what end",这个 reframing 暗示了 pragmatic concerns about consequences。

    这个 counterargument paragraph 实现了 argumentative balance,introduce 对立的 perspective 来 create dialectical structure。它不仅 present opposing view,还通过 questioning the rationale(质疑 definition 和 purpose)为下一段的 detailed critique 做好 transition。

    引入反方观点
  4. 分论点 P4

    反方论证的展开与后果警示

    Dr. Pile 的 argument 进入 detailed elaboration phase,通过 conditional reasoning("If...then" structure)分析 disease labelling 的 potential harms。他 identify 两大 negative consequences:个人层面会 reduce autonomy、disempower people 和 rob intrinsic motivation;systemic 层面会 benefit healthcare providers and pharmaceutical industry more than patients。这种 consequentialist argument 聚焦于 practical outcomes rather than definitional debates。

    这个 concluding argument paragraph 通过 specific consequences 和 stakeholder analysis 来 substantiate 反方 position,使 opposing view 从 abstract objection 转为 concrete critique,balance 了前面 Wilding's detailed argumentation,complete 整个 two-sided debate structure。

    阐述反方理由
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2021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. 首段疑问句锁定争议话题 P1

    议论文的 opening paragraph 通常会 introduce the central issue 或者 pose a question,especially 在 debate 类型的文章中。这个 rhetorical question 直接揭示了文章要 discuss 的 controversial topic,帮助我们快速 lock in 主旨方向。

  2. 报道动词定位对立方 P1 P2 P3 P4

    Debate-style 议论文的核心结构就是 present contrasting viewpoints。通过识别 'argues'、'points out'、'disagrees'、'contends' 等 attribution verbs 和人物的 credentials(Professor、Dr.),我们能快速 map out 辩论的 opposing sides,这直接构成文章主旨的 skeleton。

  3. 因果标记词提取论证链 P1 P2 P3 P4

    主旨不仅需要知道 who says what,更要 capture the reasoning behind each stance。通过快速识别 causal connectors('thus'、'should help'、'could result in'、'risks')和 consequence phrases,我们能提炼出每方的 核心论证逻辑,这构成主旨的 substantive content。

  4. 结论性动词抓取核心主张 P2 P4

    议论文中的 concluding remarks 和 warnings 通常 encapsulate 每方最想 emphasize 的 point。这些 high-level summaries 能帮助我们 verify 之前提取的 arguments 是否准确,并 capture 文章希望 readers 记住的 核心 takeaways。

  5. 平衡综述双方核心观点 P1 P2 P3 P4

    Debate-style 议论文的主旨必须 present both perspectives fairly without bias。通过前面步骤提取的 topic、stakeholders、arguments 和 conclusions,我们现在能 synthesize a balanced statement,这个 statement 应该 acknowledge the controversy 并 equally represent both camps 的 core concerns。

主旨信号词 argues P1 should P1 but P3 risks P4 concludes P2 disease P1

MAIN IDEA · 主旨

这篇文章在说什么

这篇议论文呈现了关于是否应将肥胖归类为疾病的两种对立观点。Wilding教授主张将其归类为疾病以减少耻辱感并促进治疗,而Pile医生则认为将肥胖标记为疾病可能会削弱个人自主性,主要使医疗行业受益而非患者。
This argumentative text presents two opposing views on whether obesity should be classified as a disease. Professor Wilding argues for disease classification to reduce stigma and enable treatment, while Dr. Pile contends that labeling obesity as a disease may undermine personal autonomy and primarily benefit healthcare industries rather than patients.
WORD INFERENCE · 生词推断

5 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。

  • adversely 负面地;不利地;有害地

    现在我们把三条 clues 串起来。首先,从 morphology 角度,adversely 的 structure 暗示了 'opposite' 或 'against' 的 meaning。然后,从 immediate context 看,'such...that' structure 表明 excess fat 达到了某种 degree,会对 health 产生某种 result。最后,从整个 discourse 的 medical warning tone 来看,这个 result 必然是 negative 的。所以,adversely 的 meaning 应该是 '负面地、不利地'。

    词法+句法+语篇三层验证法
  • stigma 污名;耻辱;社会偏见标签

    让我们整合这些 clues。从 parallel structure 看,stigma 和 discrimination 是同类的 negative social phenomena。从 verb collocation 看,它是需要 reduce 的 undesirable thing。从 argumentation purpose 看,它是 society 加在 people with obesity 身上的某种 negative label 或 judgment。综合起来,stigma 应该是指 '污名、耻辱感',是 society 对某个 group 的 negative stereotype 和 judgment,导致这个 group 感到 shame 和被 marginalized。

    并列对比+动词搭配+立场分析
  • overwhelm 使不堪重负;压垮;应接不暇

    现在 integrate 这些 clues。从 morphology,over- prefix 表明某种 excessive state。从 parallel structure,overwhelm 和 remove responsibility 都是 negative consequences。从 domain knowledge,在 healthcare context 中,大量 patients 会给 limited resources 带来 pressure。所以 overwhelm 的 meaning 应该是 '使不堪重负、压垮',specifically 指 demand 或 workload 超过了 system 的 capacity to handle。

    前缀含义+宾语特征+领域场景
  • autonomy 自主权;自主性;自我决定能力

    整合这些 threads。从 morphology,'auto-' + '-nomy' 指向 self-governance。从 parallelism,autonomy 和 empowerment、intrinsic motivation 是同类的 personal capacities,都关于 individual 的 agency。从 argumentation logic,autonomy 是 people 能够 make their own decisions 和 take action to change 的 capacity。综合来看,autonomy 是 '自主权、自主性',指 individuals 有 freedom 和 ability 来 govern themselves 和 make their own choices。

    词法拆解+语义场定位+因果关系
  • pharmaceutical 制药的;药物的;药学的

    把这些 pieces 组合起来。从 morphology,pharmaceutical 和 pharmacy 共享 root,指向 medicines。从 immediate context,pharmaceutical industry 和 drug treatment 直接 linked。从 argumentation,它是 healthcare sector 的一个 profit-seeking component。所以 pharmaceutical 的 meaning 是 '制药的、药物的',pharmaceutical industry 就是 '制药行业',specifically 指 manufacture 和 sell medicines 的 industry。

    词根嫁接+句法功能+角色定位
RHETORIC · 修辞手法

6 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

    P1 P3

    作者引用了 dictionary definition of disease 来支持论点,Professor Wilding 利用这个权威定义指出 obesity 符合 disease 的标准,因为 excess body fat 已经 accumulated 到可能 adversely affect health 的程度。这种 authoritative reference 增强了论证的 credibility,让读者感觉这不是个人观点,而是基于established standards 的客观判断。同时,Dr. Pile 也引用了同一个 definition,但指出它 too vague,形成了对权威定义的 counter-interpretation,体现了议论文中对同一 evidence 的不同解读可以支撑相反的 arguments。

    信号词 according to as defined by research shows studies indicate experts argue evidence suggests data reveals scholars point out as stated in the definition indicates

    仿写: 当你想要增强某个论点的 authority 时,可以采用这种方法:首先 identify 一个与你话题相关的权威来源,比如 official definition、research findings 或者 expert statement;然后在提出自己观点前或后,用 "according to..."、"as defined by..." 这样的 transitional phrases 引入;最后 explain 这个引用如何 support 你的 main point。模版:According to [权威来源], [核心定义/观点]. This [supports/demonstrates/indicates] that [你的论点], because [解释关联性]。比如:According to the WHO classification system, mental health disorders include persistent anxiety. This supports the argument that workplace stress should be treated as a health issue, because chronic stress exhibits the same persistent patterns.

  • 举例论证

    P1 P2

    Professor Wilding 提供了 concrete examples 来支持他的观点,他指出 "more than 200 genes influence weight",这个具体的 numerical evidence 说明 body weight 是 strongly influenced by biology。此外,他还举了 "high blood pressure and diabetes" 作为 comparable examples,说明把某种 condition 定义为 disease 并不会 remove personal responsibility。这些 specific instances 让抽象的论点变得 tangible and relatable,特别是拿其他常见疾病做对比,能让读者更容易理解和接受 obesity as a disease 这个观点。

    信号词 for example for instance such as including like specifically in particular to illustrate as an illustration consider the case of take...as an example

    仿写: 使用举例论证时,要遵循 "claim-example-explanation" 的结构:先提出你的 main point,然后用 "for example"、"such as"、"for instance" 引入具体的 example,最后 explain 这个例子如何 support 你的论点。选择 examples 时要考虑它们的 typicality 和 relatability。模版:[论点]. For example/instance, [具体例子with details]. This demonstrates/illustrates that [解释例子如何支撑论点]. 比如:Regular physical activity significantly improves mental health. For instance, a 30-minute daily walk has been shown to reduce symptoms of depression by up to 40% in clinical studies. This demonstrates that even modest exercise interventions can produce measurable psychological benefits.

  • 因果论证

    P1 P4

    文章多处使用了 causal reasoning 来建立论点。第1段 中,"it is not an individual's fault if they develop obesity" 是基于 "more than 200 genes influence weight" 这个 cause 得出的 conclusion。第4段 中,Dr. Pile 使用了一系列 cause-effect chains:labeling obesity as a disease 会 "reduce autonomy"、"disempower people"、"rob people of intrinsic motivation",这些都是 negative consequences。这种 causal logic 让论证显得更有 logical rigor,因为它展示了某个 action 或 classification 会带来什么样的 outcomes,帮助读者理解 why 某个立场是合理或不合理的。

    信号词 because since as a result therefore thus consequently if...then leads to results in causes due to owing to so hence accordingly

    仿写: 构建因果论证时,要明确 establish the causal link:先描述 cause(原因、条件、行动),然后用 causal connectors 过渡,最后说明 effect(结果、影响、后果)。确保 causality 是 logical and evidence-based,而不是 mere correlation。模版:Because/Since [原因], [结果] will occur/has occurred. This is significant because [解释影响]. 或者:[原因] leads to/results in/causes [结果], which [进一步解释影响]. 比如:Because smartphones provide constant access to social comparison through social media, adolescent anxiety rates have increased by 25% over the past decade. This is significant because it suggests that technology regulation may be necessary to protect youth mental health.

  • 对比论证

    P1 P2 P3 P4

    整篇文章的 core structure 就是一个大型的 contrast,Professor Wilding 和 Dr. Pile 分别代表了 opposing viewpoints。第1段-2 呈现了 pro-disease-classification 的观点,认为这样可以 "reduce stigma and discrimination";而 第3段-4 则 present 了反对的声音,认为这样 "could result in worse outcomes"。这种 point-counterpoint structure 让读者能够 see both sides of the debate,understand the complexity of the issue。特别是在 第2段 和 第4段 中,两方都讨论了 "personal responsibility" 这个相同的 aspect,但得出了 completely different conclusions,这种 direct contrast 非常有力。

    信号词 but however whereas while on the other hand in contrast conversely on the contrary unlike nevertheless yet although despite instead rather than

    仿写: 运用对比论证时,要 structure your comparison clearly:可以用 block method(先完整介绍 A,再完整介绍 B),也可以用 point-by-point method(每次对比一个 aspect)。使用 contrastive language 来 signal the opposition。模版:While [观点A] argues that [论点A], [观点B] contends that [论点B]. 或者:On one hand, [论点A]. On the other hand, [论点B]. 或者:[观点A] believes..., but/however/whereas [观点B] maintains... 比如:While proponents of remote work argue that it increases productivity by eliminating commute time and office distractions, critics contend that it reduces collaboration and weakens team cohesion, ultimately harming long-term organizational performance.

  • 反问修辞

    P1

    文章开头使用了一个 rhetorical question:"should we now recognise it as a disease?" 这个问题不是为了 seek an answer from the reader,而是为了 introduce the central debate 并 engage the reader's attention。这个 question 紧跟着 alarming statistics(29% affecting, 35% by 2030),让这个 rhetorical device 更加有 impact。它 immediately frames the entire article 的 focus,让读者开始 think about the issue,并期待看到文章如何 address this question。这种 opening strategy 是议论文中常见的 engagement technique。

    信号词 should we can we is it not don't we why should how can we what if isn't it true that who can deny wouldn't it be

    仿写: 使用反问修辞时,要确保你的 question serves a clear purpose:可以是 opening hook、transition between ideas 或者 emphasize a point dramatically。Question 应该和你要讨论的 content directly relevant,并且 answer 应该是 implicit or provided shortly after。模版:Should we [动作/立场]? 或者:Is it not true that [观点]? 或者:How can we [行动] when [矛盾情况]? 比如:Should we continue to prioritize economic growth when climate scientists warn that we have less than a decade to prevent catastrophic warming? This question lies at the heart of current environmental policy debates.

  • 比喻修辞

    P4

    第4段 中出现了 metaphorical language:"robbing people of the intrinsic motivation"。这里的 "robbing" 不是 literal theft,而是用 theft 这个 concrete action 来 vividly express 剥夺 motivation 的过程。这个 metaphor 让抽象的 psychological impact 变得 tangible and emotionally resonant,因为 "rob" 这个词带有 forceful and unjust 的 connotation,强化了作者对 disease labeling 可能带来的 negative impact 的批判。这种 figurative language 比 simply saying "reduce motivation" 更有 punch and memorability。

    信号词 like as is metaphorically figuratively in a sense so to speak as if resembles

    仿写: 使用比喻时,要选择一个 your audience can relate to 的 concrete image,然后 map its characteristics onto your abstract concept。确保 analogy is apt and illuminating。可以用 explicit form(A is B)或 implicit form(直接用 B 的词汇描述 A)。模版:[抽象概念] is like [具体形象], in that [相似点]. 或者直接用:[抽象概念] [使用具体形象的动词/名词]. 比如:Social media algorithms feed users a steady diet of content that confirms their existing beliefs, creating echo chambers that insulate people from diverse perspectives. 这里 "feed"、"diet"、"echo chambers"、"insulate" 都是把 information consumption 比作 food consumption and acoustic phenomenon,让抽象的 information filtering 变得 concrete and vivid。

IMPLIED MEANING · 言外之意

9 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。

  • 肥胖症由基因决定而非个人过错

    P1
    it is not an individual's fault if they develop obesity

    否定式强调 it is not not...but never hardly rarely by no means far from

    表面上这句话是在 state 一个 fact,但 implication 是在 challenge 社会对肥胖的 stigma。通过强调 'not individual's fault',作者 implicitly criticizes 那些 blame obese people 的观点,为后文的 disease classification argument 铺路。这个 implication 对 main argument 至关重要,因为它 establishes 肥胖的 biological basis,从而 justify 将其视为 disease 而非 lifestyle choice,directly supports Wilding 教授想 reduce stigma 的 objective。

  • 将肥胖归类为疾病能减少污名化

    P1
    should help reduce the stigma and discrimination experienced by many people with obesity

    情态动词表达期待 should help should would could may might ought to

    这个 'should help' 的 implication 是 Wilding 教授的 core motivation 其实是 social justice 而非纯粹 medical classification。通过 suggest 这个 positive outcome,他 subtly reveals disease classification 是一种 means to achieve social change。这对 main argument 的 significance 在于它 exposes 背后的 value judgment: 当前社会对肥胖者的 discrimination 是 unjust 的,disease label 能 legitimize 他们的 condition。这个 implication 让整个 debate 从 medical definition 转向 ethical dimension。

  • 反对者承认疾病标签确有影响力

    P2
    Professor Wilding disagrees that labelling a high proportion of the population as having a disease removes personal responsibility or may overwhelm health services

    反驳式让步 disagrees that rejects the notion that disputes the claim that denies that challenges the view that refutes the idea that does not accept that

    这句的 implication 是反对派的 concerns 关于 personal responsibility 和 healthcare burden 确实是 powerful arguments,强大到 Wilding 必须 explicitly address 它们。通过 draw analogy to hypertension and diabetes,他 implicitly acknowledges disease label 会 shift dynamics,但 argues 这种 shift 不是 problematic。对 main argument 的 value 是它 reveals 整个 debate 的 tension: disease classification 不是 neutral terminology,而是 carries implications about responsibility and resource allocation。这让读者 understand 为什么这个 debate matters beyond semantics。

  • 不承认疾病将无法解决肥胖问题

    P2
    But unless we accept that obesity is a disease, we are not going to be able to tackle it

    条件式否定 unless without if not only if except but for were it not for

    这句的 deep implication 是 Wilding 认为 current approaches to obesity 已经 fundamentally failed,而 disease classification 不是 one option among many,而是 the only viable path forward。'Not going to be able to tackle it' 的 finality 暗示不接受 disease model 就意味着 complete failure to address obesity epidemic。对 main argument 的 significance 是它 raises the stakes dramatically,将 debate 从 semantic question 转变为 public health crisis 的 solution,implying 反对者的 position 不仅 wrong 而且 potentially harmful to millions of people。

  • 疾病定义过于宽泛可随意套用

    P3
    is so vague that we can classify almost anything as a disease

    结果式夸张 so...that such...that too...to enough to sufficiently...to to such an extent that to the point where

    Pile 的 implication 是 Wilding 在 exploit 一个 loose definition 来 push his agenda,rather than 基于 rigorous medical criteria。'Almost anything' 的 hyperbole 暗示 disease classification 不是基于 obesity 的 unique characteristics,而是因为 definition allows it - 这是 circular reasoning。对 main argument 的 impact 是它 shifts focus from whether obesity meets disease criteria 到 whether those criteria themselves are valid。这 undermines disease classification 的 scientific legitimacy,suggesting 这是 political or social maneuver disguised as medical decision。

  • 问题不在能否而在应否及其目的

    P3
    the question is not whether we can, but whether we should, and to what end

    对比式转移焦点 not whether...but whether not...but the question is not...but rather than instead of as opposed to not so much...as

    Pile 的 deep implication 是 Wilding 在 engage in 一个 intellectually superficial debate,focusing on definitions 而 avoiding 真正 important questions about consequences 和 motivations。'To what end' 特别 suggestive - 暗示 disease classification 可能 serves hidden agendas rather than patients' best interests。对 main argument 的 significance 是它 transforms debate from seemingly objective medical question 到 subjective value judgment about what serves society best。这 prepares readers for Pile 后续的 argument that disease label actually harms patients,suggesting Wilding's proposal 可能 well-intentioned but misguided。

  • 若疾病标签无害则无关紧要

    P4
    If labelling obesity as a disease was harmless then it wouldn't really matter

    反事实条件句 If...then...wouldn't if...then...would if...then...wouldn't were...would had...would have should...would suppose...then

    Pile 的 implication 是 Wilding 在 present disease classification as purely beneficial or at worst neutral,但 reality 是它 carries significant risks。通过 structure argument this way,Pile suggests 他将 provide evidence of actual harm,making 这不是 theoretical debate 而是 practical concern with real stakes。对 main argument 的 value 是它 transitions debate from whether obesity fits disease definition 到 what consequences that label produces,shifting burden of proof to show disease classification is not merely accurate but actually beneficial - 一个 higher standard。

  • 疾病标签削弱自主性和内在动力

    P4
    risks reducing autonomy, disempowering and robbing people of the intrinsic motivation

    风险词语警示 risks may lead to threatens to dangers of potential to could result in apt to

    Pile 的 deep implication 是 disease classification paradoxically 会 undermine 正是 Wilding 想要 achieve 的 goals。通过 highlight loss of autonomy and motivation,Pile suggests disease label 虽然 intended to reduce stigma,actually 可能 create dependency and learned helplessness。这个 implication directly challenges Wilding 的 fundamental premise that disease classification helps patients。对 main argument 的 significance 是它 presents 一个 genuine dilemma: both sides want to help obese people,但 disagree about whether medicalization empowers or disempowers them - 这是 debate 的 true ethical core。

  • 疾病化可能利益医疗方而非患者

    P4
    may not benefit patients, but it will benefit healthcare providers and the pharmaceutical industry

    对比式利益揭示 may not benefit...but...will benefit may not benefit...but will benefit not for...but for serves...rather than benefits...more than helps...not aids...at the expense of

    Pile 的 devastating implication 是整个 disease classification push 可能不是 driven by patient welfare 而是 economic interests。通过 invoke insurance and clinical guidelines,他 suggests 一个 systematic mechanism by which medicalization 会 increase demand for drugs and surgery,benefiting industries rather than individuals。这 fundamentally questions Wilding 的 good faith,暗示 disease label 可能是 commercially motivated masquerading as patient advocacy。对 main argument 的 impact 是它 introduces 一个 cynical interpretation that reframes entire debate from medical/scientific question to political economy critique,leaving readers questioning whose interests disease classification really serves。

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( Neutral presentation with balanced critique)。下面是按步骤还原的判断过程与文中的态度信号词。

  1. 结构平衡性 P1 P2 P3 P4

    当一篇 argumentative essay 用相当的 篇幅 present 两个 opposing views 时,这通常 signal 作者在采取 neutral stance,而不是 advocating for 某一方。

  2. 观点归属标记 P1 P2 P3 P4

    频繁的 explicit attribution 是 objective reporting 的 hallmark。作者通过 clearly labeling 每个 argument 的 source 来 distance himself from 这些 claims,避免 making them his own。

  3. 评价性语言归属 P1 P2 P3 P4

    作者 absence of personal evaluative language 是 neutrality 的关键 evidence。如果 positive or negative judgments 都来自 quoted sources 而非作者本人,这 demonstrate 作者在 maintaining objectivity。

  4. 整体态度综合 P1 P2 P3 P4

    综合前面的 structural balance、consistent attribution 和 lack of authorial evaluation,可以 conclude 作者采取了 neutral stance with balanced critique,他的 role 是 presenting the debate 而非 resolving it。

文中的态度信号词

  • argues P1

    "argues" 这个 reporting verb 在文中 repeatedly appear,它的作用是 create distance between 作者和 presented views。通过使用 "argues" 而非 "proves" 或 "demonstrates",作者 signal 这是 someone else's argument 而非 established fact。

    同类词 points out suggests believes writes warns

  • Professor John Wilding P1

    Specific attribution to named experts 是作者 maintaining objectivity 的重要 strategy。通过 clearly identify 每个 argument 的 source with professional credentials,作者 establish 这些是 expert opinions 而非 his own conclusions。

    同类词 He Professor Wilding Dr. Richard Pile he a physician with a special interest

  • But P3

    "But" 作为 transition word 在这里 introduce 一个 contrasting viewpoint,它的出现 signal 作者在 shifting to present 另一方的 perspective。这种 explicit transition 帮助 reader understand 作者在 deliberately presenting opposing views。

    同类词 Yet However

  • risks P4

    "risks" 是 Dr. Pile 的 argument 中的 evaluative term,但关键在于它被 clearly attributed to him through 前面的 reporting structure。作者 report 这个 cautionary language without adopting it as his own。

    同类词 may could might warns

  • should P1

    文章开头的 "should we now recognise it as a disease" 是以 question form 出现的,这个 modal verb "should" 在 interrogative structure 中使用,表明作者在 raising the issue for debate 而非 advocating for a position。

    同类词 must need to ought to

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. 争议性问题开篇 P1

    说明文会直接陈述 facts 和 information,新闻报道会用 who/what/when/where 的结构报道 events,而议论文必然围绕一个 controversial question 展开,这个 question 本身就暗示存在不同的 viewpoints 和 positions

  2. 对立观点呈现 P1 P2 P3 P4

    说明文只会 present information from one angle,新闻报道虽然可能引述不同 sources,但目的是报道 facts 而非展开 argumentation。议论文必须包含 thesis 和 counter-arguments,通过 contrast 来展开 reasoning

  3. 论证链条完整 P1 P2 P3 P4

    说明文用 facts 和 data 来 inform,新闻报道用 quotes 和 events 来 report,而议论文用 arguments 和 reasoning 来 persuade。议论文中的每个 claim 都会伴随 justification,这是核心区别

  4. 价值判断语言 P1 P3 P4

    说明文保持 neutral tone 和 objective description,新闻报道追求 objectivity 和 balanced reporting,而议论文允许并鼓励 subjective evaluation 和 persuasive language,作者会明确站队并试图 convince readers

  5. 三要素结构完备 P1 P2 P3 P4

    通过检验这三个 elements 的同时存在,可以快速准确地区分议论文与其他 genres。说明文只有 information presentation,新闻报道只有 event reporting with quotes,只有议论文同时具备 debatable issue、multiple perspectives 和 reasoned arguments 这个 triangular structure

哪些词暴露了议论文体裁?

  • argues P1 观点引导词 claims contends maintains asserts insists
  • should P1 立场表态词 ought to must need to have to it is necessary that
  • But P3 论证逻辑连接词 but however yet nevertheless nonetheless
  • disagrees P2 观点引导词 opposes challenges refutes disputes rejects
  • risks P4 立场表态词 threatens to endangers jeopardizes may lead to could result in
  • question P3 论证逻辑连接词 issue problem debate controversy dilemma
  • believes P3 观点引导词 thinks feels holds the view that is of the opinion that is convinced that
  • warns P4 立场表态词 cautions alerts sounds the alarm raises concerns that expresses worry that
SENTENCE INSIGHTS · 句子精讲

18 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 《肥胖应该被视为一种疾病吗?》 的常见问题

2021年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section C (1) 文章 Should obesity be recognized as a disease? 的原文出自哪里?
2021年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section C (1) 文章 Should obesity be recognized as a disease? 选自 2019年7月 17日刊登在 ww.sciencedaily.com(每日科学网站)上的一篇标题为“Should obesity be recognized as a disease?”(《肥胖应该被视为一种疾病吗?》)的文章。
2021年12月英语四级真题第2套文章《肥胖应该被视为一种疾病吗?》的主旨是什么?
2021年12月英语四级真题第2套 Part III Section C (1) 文章 Should obesity be recognized as a disease? 议论文呈现了关于是否应将肥胖归类为疾病的两种对立观点。Wilding教授主张将其归类为疾病以减少耻辱感并促进治疗,而Pile医生则认为将肥胖标记为疾病可能会削弱个人自主性,主要使医疗行业受益而非患者。(英文表述:This argumentative text presents two opposing views on whether obesity should be classified as a disease. Professor Wilding argues for disease classification to reduce stigma and enable treatment, while Dr. Pile contends that labeling obesity as a disease may undermine personal autonomy and primarily benefit healthcare industries rather than patients.)
Should obesity be recognized as a disease?(2021年12月英语四级真题第2套文章)是什么体裁?难度如何?
体裁为议论文,作者立场是客观中立(Neutral presentation with balanced critique)。CEFR 难度 C1,全文 347 词、4 段;在英语四级全部 511 篇真题文章中,C1 级共 163 篇(占 32%)。
2021年12月英语四级真题第2套文章《肥胖应该被视为一种疾病吗?》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——肥胖症的疾病定义争议引入;分论点 · 第2段——正方论证的深化与反驳预设;分论点 · 第3段——反方立场的提出与质疑;分论点 · 第4段——反方论证的展开与后果警示。
Should obesity be recognized as a disease? 一文的作者态度是什么?
作者态度是客观中立(Neutral presentation with balanced critique)。判断路径:结构平衡性 → 观点归属标记 → 评价性语言归属 → 整体态度综合;文中的态度信号词包括 argues(第1段)、Professor John Wilding(第1段)、But(第3段)、risks(第4段)、should(第1段)。
2021年12月英语四级真题第2套文章 Should obesity be recognized as a disease? 中有哪些值得积累的生词?
按文中出现顺序共 5 个:adversely(负面地;不利地;有害地)、stigma(污名;耻辱;社会偏见标签)、overwhelm(使不堪重负;压垮;应接不暇)、autonomy(自主权;自主性;自我决定能力)、pharmaceutical(制药的;药物的;药学的),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: