懒笔记
2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1)
CET-6 · 来自 2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 · Part II Section B (1) · 听力

2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1)

议论文 · 听力 · 真题文章逐层精读

本页是 2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 文章的精读视角页——这篇议论文全文 262 词、4 段，CEFR 难度 C1（C1 级在英语六级文章中占 58%），作者立场为「消极批判」；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六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6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 的听力原文，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。

Scientists often use specialized jargon terms while communicating with laymen. Most of them don't realize the harmful effects of this practice. In a new study, people exposed to jargon when reading about subjects like autonomous vehicles and surgical robots later said they were less interested in science than others who read about the same topics, but without the use of specialized terms. They also felt less informed about science and less qualified to discuss science topics. It's noteworthy that it made no difference if the jargon terms were defined in the text. Even when the terms were defined, readers still felt the same lack of engagement as readers who read jargon that wasn't explained.

The problem is that the mere presence of jargon sends a discouraging message to readers. Hillary Schulman, the author of the study, asserts that specialized words are a signal. Jargon tells people that the message isn't for them.

There's an even darker side to how people react to jargon. In another study, researchers found that reading scientific articles containing jargon led people to doubt the actual science. They found the opposite when a text is easier to read. Then people are more persuaded.

Thus, it's important to communicate clearly when talking about complex science subjects. This is especially true with issues related to public health, like the safety of new medications and the benefits of vaccines. Schulman concedes that the use of jargon is appropriate with scientific audiences. But scientists who want to communicate with the general public need to modify their language. They need to eliminate jargon.

PARAGRAPHS · 逐段精读

4 段逐段主旨与解读

逐段拆解2021年6月英语六级真题第1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 Hidden Harm of Scientific Jargon

    Scientists unknowingly harm public engagement by using jargon, which reduces interest and confidence in science even when terms are defined.

    这个 opening paragraph 为整篇文章的 thesis 奠定了 empirical foundation。通过 present research findings，作者 establish 了 jargon 确实 causes harm 这个 factual basis。特别是 even when defined 这个发现，为后面要 argue 的 eliminate jargon 提供了 strong rationale。这个段落的作用是 create urgency 和 justify 文章的 overall argument，让读者意识到这不是一个 minor issue，而是需要 serious attention 的 communication problem。

    识别问题陈述和初始证据
  2. P2

    Jargon as an Exclusionary Signal

    Jargon functions as an exclusionary signal that tells readers the message is not intended for them.

    这个 short but critical paragraph 提供了 theoretical explanation，把第一段的 empirical findings 提升到 conceptual level。通过 introduce signaling theory，作者 explain 了 why jargon is harmful beyond comprehension。这个段落对整体 argument 的价值在于它 shift the focus from symptoms to causes，为后面要提出的 solution（eliminate jargon）提供了 theoretical justification。如果 jargon 只是 comprehension problem，define it 就够了；但如果是 exclusionary signal，那必须 eliminate it。

    识别因果机制和专家解释
  3. P3

    Jargon Undermines Scientific Credibility

    Jargon undermines trust in science itself, while clear writing enhances persuasiveness and credibility.

    这个 paragraph 把 jargon problem 的 seriousness 推向 climax。前两段 establish 了 jargon reduces engagement 和 signals exclusion，这段 add 了最 critical consequence：doubt in science。这对文章 thesis 的价值在于它 raise the stakes，让 eliminate jargon 从 nice-to-have 变成 must-do。特别在 public health context（第四段会提到），doubt in science 可能导致 vaccine hesitancy 等 serious issues。这段通过 present worst-case scenario，为最后的 call to action 创造了 strong motivation。

    识别递进论证和对比结构
  4. P4

    The Case for Eliminating Jargon in Public Communication

    Scientists must eliminate jargon when communicating with the public, especially on critical issues like public health, while jargon remains appropriate for scientific audiences.

    这个 concluding paragraph 把整篇文章的 argument 转化为 actionable recommendation。前三段 establish 了 what the problem is（jargon harms engagement and trust），这段 specify what to do about it（eliminate jargon for public）。特别重要的是它 provide nuance by distinguishing scientific and public audiences，这 prevent oversimplification。Public health examples 不只是 illustration，而是 demonstrate real-world urgency，把 abstract argument 变成 practical imperative。这个段落 complete 了文章的 argumentative arc：problem → explanation → consequences → solution，fully support 了文章 thesis。

    识别建议性陈述和行动号召
SELF CHECK · 段落自检题

4 道逐段细节自检题

针对2021年6月英语六级真题第1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 new study; specialized terms

    What did the new study find about people exposed to specialized terms?

    • A They preferred reading about autonomous vehicles and surgical robots.
    • B They understood the science better after reading defined terms.
    • C They expressed a decreased interest in science and felt less informed.
    • D They were encouraged to communicate with scientific experts.
    • E They found specialized terms helpful for deep understanding.
    • F They felt more qualified to discuss science than before.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：C

    该选项高度还原了原文中 less interested in science 以及 less informed about science 的内容。命题障碍在于将原文的分散信息进行了 synthesis，合并为一个完整的 semantic unit。

    情感极性过滤法 直接锁定 第1段，利用极简对比法：文中大量出现 less，直接寻找选项中包含 decrease 或 less 语义的描述，排除所有 positive connotations，即可秒杀 正确项。

  2. 第 2 段 定位词 discouraging message; Hillary Schulman

    What is the discouraging message sent by the presence of jargon?

    • A The scientific study is poorly designed and unreliable.
    • B The authors of the message are lack of scientific knowledge.
    • C The text contains too many definitions of complex words.
    • D The intended audience does not include the general readers.
    • E The information provided is outdated for the laymen.
    • F The readers are incapable of learning any science.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：D

    原文提到 message isn't for them，这里的 them 指代 readers。正确项将此进行了 paraphrase，将“不适合他们”转化为“受众不包含他们”，逻辑严密。

    末句逻辑映射法 直接寻找原文末尾的 isn't for them，在选项中寻找 matching 的否定表达（does not include/not for），实现 mapping 定位。

  3. 第 3 段 定位词 darker side; doubt

    What is the 'darker side' to how people react to specialized scientific language?

    • A It encourages people to do their own scientific experiments.
    • B It shows that people are more persuaded by complex texts.
    • C It leads to a lack of interest in public health issues.
    • D It helps people to distinguish between real and fake science.
    • E It makes readers question the credibility of the scientific facts.
    • F It reduces the amount of scientific articles people read.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：E

    原文提到 lead people to doubt the actual science。正确项将 doubt 替换为 question，将 actual science 替换为 credibility of scientific facts，属于 perfect paraphrase。

    反义逻辑推导法 利用反义对应法。段落结尾说 easier text 使人 persuaded，反推可知 jargon text 使人 not persuaded。在选项中寻找与 not persuaded 或 skeptical 相关的词汇即可锁定 正确项。

  4. 第 4 段 定位词 Schulman; communicate; general public

    What should scientists do according to Schulman when communicating with the public?

    • A They should only focus on issues related to public health.
    • B They should use more complex terms with scientific audiences.
    • C They should define every specialized term they use.
    • D They should stop communicating complex science topics.
    • E They should ask the public to learn more scientific terms.
    • F They should get rid of technical jargon to be better understood.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：F

    原文使用了 eliminate jargon 和 modify their language。正确项用 get rid of 替换了 eliminate，符合议论文结论部分“提出对策”的特征。

    对策动词精准匹配 搜索文末的 need to 后的核心动词。原文是 eliminate，选项中 matching 的是 get rid of。议论文结尾的对策往往是 simple and direct 的动作词。

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

    术语使用降低公众科学参与度

    这个 opening paragraph 通过 a new study 的 findings 来 establish 核心 problem：scientists 使用 jargon terms 会让 laymen 产生 negative effects，包括 less interested in science、less informed、less qualified to discuss，而且即使 defined the terms 也无法 solve this issue。

    作为 introduction，这个 paragraph 通过 present empirical evidence 来 introduce the central problem，为后续的 deeper analysis 和 recommendation 奠定 factual foundation，让 readers 意识到 jargon 不仅仅是 communication barrier，更是会 actively discourage engagement。

    提出术语阻碍参与的实证发现
  2. 分论点 P2

    术语传递排他性信号

    这个 supporting paragraph 通过 Hillary Schulman's assertion 来 explain the underlying reason：jargon 的 mere presence 就 sends a discouraging message，因为 specialized words act as a signal，告诉 people 这个 message isn't for them，这就 reveal 了为什么 defining terms 也无法 solve the problem。

    作为 first supporting point，这个 paragraph 的 role 是 explain the psychological mechanism behind the phenomenon，从 signal theory perspective 来 illuminate why jargon creates barriers。它 answers the question raised by 引言：why does jargon discourage engagement even when defined？这个 explanation 为 argument 提供 theoretical depth。

    揭示术语造成心理排斥机制
  3. 分论点 P3

    术语削弱科学可信度

    这个 supporting paragraph 通过 introduce another study 来 reveal an even darker side：jargon 不仅 discourages engagement，还让 people doubt the actual science itself。相反，easier to read text makes people more persuaded。这个 finding 把 negative impact 从 engagement level 推进到 trust and credibility level。

    作为 second supporting point，这个 paragraph escalates the severity of the issue，从 'people feel less engaged' 升级到 'people doubt the science'。它 strengthens the argument by showing jargon's harm 不仅是 psychological discomfort，更是 epistemological damage，这为后续的 strong recommendation 提供更 compelling justification。

    揭示术语损害科学信任
  4. 结论 P4

    呼吁科学家改变沟通方式

    这个 concluding paragraph 通过 'Thus' 来 signal conclusion，提出 clear communication 很 important especially for public health issues。它 acknowledge jargon is appropriate with scientific audiences，但 emphasize scientists communicating with general public 必须 modify their language 和 eliminate jargon，这是基于前面 evidence 和 analysis 的 logical conclusion 和 practical recommendation。

    作为 conclusion，这个 paragraph 的 function 是 synthesize previous arguments 并 translate them into actionable recommendation。它不仅 restate the problem，还 provide nuanced guidance（jargon is OK with scientific audiences but must be eliminated for public），并 emphasize urgency through public health examples，这让 entire argument 形成 problem-analysis-solution 的 complete logical chain。

    提出避免术语的行动建议
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6月英语六级真题第1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六级文章。

  1. 首段定位问题 P1

    这个 step 能帮助我们 identify 作者要 discuss 的 central topic。议论文的首段往往 establish context，提出一个需要 address 的 problem 或 现象。在本文中，第1段 指出 scientists 使用 jargon 的 harmful effects，这直接 signal 了文章的 concern 和 direction。

  2. 明确观点陈述 P2

    这个 step 帮助我们 capture 作者的 explicit viewpoint。议论文作者会通过 direct statements 来 clarify 自己的 position。第2段 中 "The problem is that" 和 "asserts that" 直接 reveal 了 core argument：jargon sends a discouraging message，告诉 readers 信息 isn't for them。

  3. 后果深化论证 P3

    这个 step 让我们 understand 问题的 full scope 和 significance。议论文需要 demonstrate why the issue matters。第3段 用 "even darker side" 来 intensify the concern，showing 更严重的 consequence：jargon 导致 people doubt the science itself，这 reinforces 了为什么 avoiding jargon 是 crucial。

  4. 结论建议提取 P4

    这个 step 帮助我们 extract 作者的 ultimate message 和 proposed solution。议论文的 conclusion 通常 transition from analysis to action，提出 what should be done。第4段 用 "it's important to"、"need to eliminate" 明确给出 prescription：scientists 必须 avoid jargon when communicating with the public。

  5. 整合论证链条 P1 P2 P3 P4

    议论文的 thesis 是这些 components 的 organic unity。通过 connecting problem（jargon causes harm）+ explanation（why it discourages readers）+ evidence（even undermines trust）+ solution（eliminate jargon），我们能 accurately capture 作者的 complete argument。

主旨信号词 harmful effects P1 The problem is that P2 asserts P2 even darker side P3 Thus P4 need to P4

MAIN IDEA · 主旨

这篇文章在说什么

科学家在与公众交流时应避免使用专业术语,因为专业术语会降低读者参与度、减少对科学的兴趣、并削弱对科学发现的信任,即使对术语进行了解释也是如此。清晰、无术语的语言对于有效的科学传播至关重要。
Scientists should avoid using jargon when communicating with the general public because specialized terminology discourages reader engagement, reduces interest in science, and undermines trust in scientific findings, even when terms are defined. Clear, jargon-free language is essential for effective science communication.
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。已收录进英语六级高频真题词集的单词可点击进入词条页。

  • jargon 专业术语、行话

    现在让我们把所有 clues 串联起来。首先,从 scientists 与 laymen 的对比中,我们知道 jargon 是 specialized terms,具有明显的专业性。接着,第二段告诉我们 jargon 的 function——它 sends a discouraging message,让 people 觉得 message isn't for them。第三段进一步揭示 jargon 的 negative impact:它会 lead people to doubt science,因为它降低了 text 的 readability。最后,第四段的 solution 是 eliminate jargon when communicating with general public。这四条线索共同指向一个清晰的结论。

    多层语境递进收窄
  • layman 外行、门外汉、普通大众

    让我们整合这些 clues。首先,通过与 scientists 的 contrast,我们确定 laymen 是 non-professional group。然后,构词法给我们暗示这是一个 collective noun,指某一类人。最后,通过 general public 和 people 的 synonym substitution,我们可以确认 laymen 就是指普通大众、非专业人士。整个推理过程从 opposition 开始,通过 morphology 强化,最终用 synonym 验证。

    对比-构词-同义三角验证
  • concede 承认、让步

    综合这两条 clues,我们可以看到 concede 在 argumentative discourse 中的特殊作用。它出现在 concession-contrast structure 中,用来 introduce 一个与主要 argument 相左但需要被 acknowledged 的观点。全文批判 jargon,但作者仍然 concede 其在 scientific audiences 中的 appropriateness,这体现了 academic writing 中的 nuance 和 fairness。因此 concede 是一个表示让步、承认的动词。

    识别论证结构中的修辞功能
  • persuade 说服、使信服

    现在把 clues 连接起来。第一,通过 opposite 这个 explicit marker,我们建立了 persuaded 与 doubt 的 antonymy relationship,确定 persuaded 表达的是一种信任、接受的状态。第二,通过 passive voice structure 和 comparative form(more persuaded),我们理解这是描述 people 在 readable text 影响下变得更容易相信的状态。两条线索共同指向一个清晰的含义。

    对比标记加语法形式双轨分析
RHETORIC · 修辞手法

5 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。

  • 举例论证

    P1

    作者用 autonomous vehicles 和 surgical robots 这两个具体的 science topics 来 demonstrate jargon 的 negative effects。通过 concrete examples，让 abstract concept 变得 tangible and relatable，帮助 readers 理解 jargon 如何在 real-world contexts 中 discourage engagement。这种 specific illustration 增强了 argument 的 persuasiveness，因为它把 theoretical claim 转化为 readers 能够 visualize 的 scenarios。

    信号词 for instance for example such as like including take... for example consider illustrated by

    仿写： 写 argumentative essay 时，先 state your general claim，然后问自己：what specific instances can illustrate this? 选择 examples 时要确保它们 relatable and representative。模版：「[General claim]. For instance/For example, [specific case 1] and [specific case 2] demonstrate this phenomenon. When [specific scenario], [specific outcome occurs], showing that [connection back to claim].」比如：「Social media affects mental health. For instance, Instagram and TikTok demonstrate this phenomenon. When teenagers spend over three hours daily on these platforms, anxiety levels increase by 30%, showing that excessive exposure correlates with psychological distress.」

  • 引用论证

    P2

    作者 cite Hillary Schulman 这位 study author 的 assertion 来 strengthen the argument。通过引用 expert opinion，文章获得了 authoritative support，让 claim about jargon 更 credible。Schulman 的 quote "Jargon tells people that the message isn't for them" 直接 addresses the psychological mechanism，用 expert voice 来 validate 前面提出的 findings，增强了 argumentative force。

    信号词 asserts argues claims states notes according to as X points out maintains contends emphasizes

    仿写： 在 essay 中使用 expert citation 时，先 introduce the source's credentials，然后 present their view，最后 connect it back to your point。模版：「[Expert name], [credential/role], [verb like asserts/argues/notes] that [quoted or paraphrased statement]. This [supports/demonstrates/confirms] [your argument] because [explanation of relevance].」例如：「Dr. Jane Smith, a leading neuroscientist at MIT, argues that "sleep deprivation fundamentally impairs cognitive function." This supports the need for later school start times because it establishes the biological basis for teenage learning difficulties.」

  • 因果论证

    P1 P2 P3

    文章建立了多重 cause-effect relationships。首先，jargon (cause) leads to reduced interest, feeling less informed, and feeling unqualified (effects)。其次，jargon presence (cause) sends discouraging message (effect)。第三，jargon in scientific articles (cause) leads to doubt in science (effect)，而 easier text (cause) results in more persuasion (effect)。这些 causal chains 构成了文章的 logical backbone，demonstrating how jargon systematically undermines science communication。通过 showing clear causation，作者 makes the argument that eliminating jargon isn't just preferable — it's necessary。

    信号词 led to results in causes because since as a result consequently thus therefore hence so leads people to

    仿写： 构建 causal argument 时，clearly identify your cause and effect，然后 explain the mechanism connecting them。模版：「When/Because [cause], [effect] occurs. This happens because [mechanism explanation]. As a result/Consequently/Thus, [further implication].」举例："When students use smartphones during lectures, their retention rates drop by 40%. This happens because divided attention prevents deep encoding of information. As a result, they perform significantly worse on assessments despite attending class." 注意要 avoid correlation-causation fallacies，provide reasonable explanations for the causal link。

  • 对比论证

    P3

    文章在 第3段 中 create a sharp contrast: jargon-filled text (causing doubt) versus easier-to-read text (increasing persuasion)。这个 stark opposition 强化了作者的 central argument，showing that text accessibility 直接 determines reader response。通过 juxtaposing opposite outcomes，作者 makes the consequences of jargon 更 visible and compelling。这种 black-and-white comparison 让 readers clearly see why eliminating jargon matters — it's the difference between doubt and trust。

    信号词 the opposite while whereas in contrast on the other hand however but conversely unlike instead

    仿写： 使用 contrast 时，select two clearly opposed elements 然后 highlight their key differences in parallel structure。模版："[Element A] leads to [negative outcome], while/whereas [Element B] results in [positive outcome]. The former [description], but the latter [contrasting description]." 例如："Traditional lectures lead to passive learning and low retention, whereas active learning strategies result in deep understanding and long-term memory formation. The former positions students as mere recipients of information, but the latter engages them as active constructors of knowledge." 用 parallel structure 能 maximize the impact of contrast。

  • 因果论证

    P4

    在 第4段 中，作者用 "Thus" 引出 conclusion，建立 causal logic: 因为 jargon causes harm (前面段落建立的 causes)，所以 clear communication is important (consequence/implication)。这个 therefore-style reasoning 把前面的 evidence 转化为 actionable conclusion。特别是在 public health context，作者 shows the stakes are high: poor communication about medications and vaccines 的 consequences 是 serious，所以 eliminating jargon becomes not just advisable but essential。

    信号词 thus therefore hence consequently as a result for this reason it follows that this means that

    仿写： 在 essay conclusion 中使用 causal reasoning 时，summarize the established causal relationships 然后 draw logical implications。模版："Thus/Therefore, given that [summary of causal evidence], it is [important/necessary/essential] to [action/policy]. This is especially true [specify critical context] where [explain high stakes]." 例如："Therefore, given that misinformation spreads six times faster than accurate information on social media, it is essential to implement fact-checking mechanisms. This is especially true during public health crises where false claims about treatments can cost lives."

IMPLIED MEANING · 言外之意

4 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。

  • 术语定义无效性的反常现象

    P1
    It's noteworthy that it made no difference if the jargon terms were defined in the text. Even when the terms were defined, readers still felt the same lack of engagement

    让步类 Even when even when even if even though although though while

    这个 implication 揭示了一个 counterintuitive finding:仅仅解释术语 explaining terminology 不足以解决问题。言外之意是 jargon 的危害不在于理解障碍 comprehension barrier,而在于心理排斥 psychological rejection。这为全文主旨服务,因为它否定了一个 obvious solution(定义术语),迫使读者 forcing readers 接受作者的核心论点—必须彻底消除 eliminate jargon 而非仅仅解释它。这个 revelation 使论证更有说服力 persuasive,因为它 preemptively addresses 了读者可能的反驳 potential objection。

  • 专业术语的符号学意义

    P2
    specialized words are a signal. Jargon tells people that the message isn't for them

    隐喻类 a signal a barrier a bridge a wall a weapon a tool a gateway

    将 jargon 比作 signal 的言外之意是:术语使用不是 innocent mistake 或 carelessness,而是一种 boundary-marking behavior 边界标记行为。这个 metaphor 暗示科学家可能在 unconsciously 或 deliberately 排斥 exclude 外部群体 outsiders,维护 maintain 专业群体的 exclusive identity。这个 implication 使文章主旨更具 critical edge,从单纯的 communication advice 上升到对科学共同体 scientific community 的 gatekeeping behavior 的批评 critique。它强化了消除 jargon 的紧迫性 urgency,因为问题涉及 inclusivity 和 accessibility。

  • 术语使用的信任悖论

    P3
    There's an even darker side to how people react to jargon. In another study, researchers found that reading scientific articles containing jargon led people to doubt the actual science

    递进类 even darker side worse still more troubling more seriously what's worse even more concerning beyond that

    "darker side" 的言外之意是:jargon 不仅造成 communication failure,更破坏了 epistemic trust 认识论信任。从 disengagement 到 doubting science 的递进 progression 暗示这是一个 vicious cycle—术语使用导致 alienation,alienation 导致 distrust,distrust 威胁 threaten 科学的社会基础 social foundation。这个 implication 将文章主旨从 practical communication advice 提升到 societal stakes,暗示 jargon 问题关乎 public health crises 和 scientific literacy。这使第四段提到的 vaccines 和 medications 的例子变得更有 urgency 和 moral weight。

  • 学术交流的双重标准

    P4
    Schulman concedes that the use of jargon is appropriate with scientific audiences. But scientists who want to communicate with the general public need to modify their language

    转折类 But but however yet nevertheless nonetheless on the other hand

    这个让步-转折 concession-contrast 的言外之意是:科学家需要 code-switch—在同行交流 peer communication 和公众传播 public communication 之间切换不同的 language registers。暗示当前的主要问题 primary problem 不在学术圈内部 within academia,而在科学与公众的 interface。这个 distinction 强化了文章主旨,因为它 clarifies 改革的 target audience—不是要求所有科学写作 eliminate jargon,而是特别针对 public-facing communication。这种 nuanced position 使建议更 practical 和 defensible,避免了 oversimplification 的批评。同时暗示科学传播 science communication 是一个需要 specialized skills 的独立领域 distinct field。

AUTHOR ATTITUDE · 作者态度

作者态度：消极批判

结论先行：本文作者态度为消极批判（ Critical and concerned about jargon use in science communication）。下面是按步骤还原的判断过程与文中的态度信号词。

  1. 识别开篇问题定性词 P1

    议论文的 opening paragraph 通常会 reveal 作者的 initial stance 初始立场，通过识别 harmful effects 这类 negative descriptors 消极描述词，我们能快速 grasp 作者对 jargon 持 critical view 批判性观点，而不是 objective description 客观描述。

  2. 追踪证据方向一致性 P1 P3

    议论文作者会通过 evidence selection 证据选择来 reinforce 强化自己的 position 立场。这篇文章连续引用 cite 了两个 studies 研究，都指向 jargon 的 negative impacts 消极影响（less interested、less informed、doubt the science），这种 one-sided evidence 单向证据的堆叠 accumulation 清晰表明作者的 critical stance 批判立场。

  3. 捕捉强化与递进表达 P3

    议论文作者会通过 rhetorical devices 修辞手段来 amplify 放大自己的 viewpoint 观点。文中出现 even darker side 这种 intensifying phrase 强化短语，将问题 escalate 升级到更 severe 严重的层面 level，显示作者不仅 critical 批判，而且 deeply concerned 深感担忧，这比 simple criticism 简单批评更 intense 强烈。

  4. 分析结论建议的绝对性 P4

    议论文的 closing arguments 结尾论证最能 crystallize 凝聚作者的 ultimate position 最终立场。文中使用 need to eliminate 需要消除这种 imperative language 祈使语言和 absolute phrasing 绝对表述，显示作者不仅 disapprove 不赞成 jargon use，而且 advocate for 主张 complete removal 彻底清除，这是 very strong prescriptive stance 非常强烈的规定性立场。

  5. 综合四维度验证态度 P1 P2 P3 P4

    这种 layered approach 层次化方法让我们能 holistically 整体地把握 grasp 作者的 overall stance 整体立场，而不是 rely on 依赖 isolated clues 孤立线索。议论文的 attitude 态度不是通过 single sentence 单个句子体现的，而是通过 entire argumentative arc 整个论证弧线 manifested 显现的。

文中的态度信号词

  • harmful effects P1

    这个 signal word 信号词直接 label 标记了 jargon use 作为一个 problem 问题，而不是 neutral phenomenon 中立现象。在议论文中，作者用 harmful 这类 evaluative adjective 评价性形容词来 characterize 描述某个 practice 做法时，立即 establish 确立了 negative stance 消极立场，为后续的 criticism 批判 set the tone 定下基调。

    同类词 damaging consequences detrimental impacts negative outcomes adverse results destructive influence

  • discouraging message P2

    Discouraging 传递的是 jargon 对 audience 受众产生的 negative psychological effect 消极心理效果。议论文作者通过 highlight 强调这种 emotional impact 情感影响，not only 不仅在 criticize 批评 jargon 本身，also 也在 appeal to 诉诸读者的 empathy 同理心，让读者 relate to 关联到被 excluded 排斥的感受 feeling，从而 strengthen 加强 persuasive power 说服力。

    同类词 demotivating signal off-putting indication alienating communication exclusionary language intimidating expression

  • even darker side P3

    这是一个 escalation marker 升级标记，用 even 和 darker 这种 intensifying combination 强化组合来 amplify 放大问题的 severity 严重性。在议论文的 progression 推进中，作者用这种 graduated language 递进语言来 build momentum 积累势头，将 argument 论证从 bad 坏推向 worse 更坏，显示 deepening concern 不断加深的担忧和 stronger condemnation 更强烈的谴责。

    同类词 more troubling aspect worse consequence graver problem more serious issue deeper concern

  • need to eliminate P4

    这是 imperative recommendation 祈使建议中最 absolute 绝对的表达方式之一。Eliminate 意味着 complete removal 完全清除，不留 room for compromise 妥协余地。配合 need to 这个 strong modal 强情态动词，作者在 prescribe 规定一个 non-negotiable action 不可协商的行动，显示 uncompromising critical stance 毫不妥协的批判立场。

    同类词 must remove should eradicate have to abolish need to get rid of must discontinue

  • doubt the actual science P3

    Doubt 是一个 cognitive verb 认知动词，表达 loss of trust 信任丧失。作者指出 jargon 导致人们 doubt science，这是在 escalate 升级问题的 consequence 后果到 epistemic level 认识论层面——不仅 affect 影响 engagement 参与度，还 undermine 破坏 scientific credibility 科学可信度。这种 framing 框定让 criticism 批判更 profound 深刻，因为涉及 fundamental trust 根本信任问题。

    同类词 doubt the science question the findings distrust the research skeptical of the results lose confidence in

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六级 真题文章。

如何快速判断这是一篇议论文？

  1. 开头段的评价性语言 P1

    第1段 明确提出了 scientists 使用 jargon 的 harmful effects 这个 problem，并通过 research findings 来 support 这个观点。这是典型的 argumentative structure，而不是 expository text 的客观介绍，也不是 news report 的事件报道。

  2. 明确的论点陈述 P2

    第2段 中的 'Jargon tells people that the message isn't for them' 是作者的 core argument。这是一个 debatable claim，需要通过 evidence 来 support。说明文只会 explain how things work，新闻报道只会 report what happened，都不会 take a stance。

  3. 递进式证据堆叠 P3

    第3段 提供了 another study 作为 additional evidence，并通过 'even darker side' 这种 intensifying language 来 deepen the argument。文章不是在 neutrally explaining jargon 的 definition（说明文），也不是在 reporting a single study（新闻），而是在 strategically layering evidence 来 persuade readers。

  4. 结尾的行动呼吁 P4

    第4段 用 'it's important to' 和 'need to eliminate' 这样的 imperative language 来 conclude。这是典型的 argumentative conclusion，在 advocating for change。说明文会 summarize information，新闻会 end with final details，只有议论文会 push for action 或 behavioral change。

  5. 说服意图贯穿全文 P1 P2 P3 P4

    这篇文章从始至终都在 arguing against jargon use，通过 emotional impact（less interested, less informed）和 credibility concerns（doubt the science）来 persuade。说明文会 maintain neutrality 关于 jargon 的 pros and cons，新闻会 focus on reporting the study results without interpretation。只有议论文会 consistently push a viewpoint 并 advocate for change。

哪些词暴露了议论文体裁？

  • harmful effects P1 价值判断词 beneficial detrimental advantageous problematic positive impact
  • asserts P2 观点引导词 argues claims contends maintains insists
  • even darker side P3 论证递进词 even worse more importantly furthermore moreover in addition
  • Thus P4 论证逻辑连接词 thus therefore hence consequently as a result
  • it's important to P4 立场表态词 it's crucial that it's essential to we must should ought to
  • need to eliminate P4 立场表态词 must remove should avoid have to stop ought to abandon need to prevent
SENTENCE INSIGHTS · 句子精讲

4 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 2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 的常见问题

2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 文章的主旨是什么？
科学家在与公众交流时应避免使用专业术语,因为专业术语会降低读者参与度、减少对科学的兴趣、并削弱对科学发现的信任,即使对术语进行了解释也是如此。清晰、无术语的语言对于有效的科学传播至关重要。（英文表述：Scientists should avoid using jargon when communicating with the general public because specialized terminology discourages reader engagement, reduces interest in science, and undermines trust in scientific findings, even when terms are defined. Clear, jargon-free language is essential for effective science communication.）
2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 文章是什么体裁？难度如何？
体裁为议论文，作者立场是消极批判（Critical and concerned about jargon use in science communication）。CEFR 难度 C1，全文 262 词、4 段；在英语六级全部 593 篇真题文章中，C1 级共 343 篇（占 58%）。
2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 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——术语使用降低公众科学参与度；分论点 · 第2段——术语传递排他性信号；分论点 · 第3段——术语削弱科学可信度；结论 · 第4段——呼吁科学家改变沟通方式。
2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 文章的作者态度是什么？
作者态度是消极批判（Critical and concerned about jargon use in science communication）。判断路径：识别开篇问题定性词 → 追踪证据方向一致性 → 捕捉强化与递进表达 → 分析结论建议的绝对性 → 综合四维度验证态度；文中的态度信号词包括 harmful effects（第1段）、discouraging message（第2段）、even darker side（第3段）、need to eliminate（第4段）、doubt the actual science（第3段）。
2021年6月英语六级真题第1套 Part II Section B (1) 文章中有哪些值得积累的生词？
按文中出现顺序共 4 个：jargon（专业术语、行话）、layman（外行、门外汉、普通大众）、concede（承认、让步）、persuade（说服、使信服），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：