2019年 考研英语一阅读理解（四选一） 第 4 篇 · 36–40 题答案与解析

The Supreme Court decision Thursday will____ 是不完整陈述句，让选项做谓语补完判决的直接结果，无 infer/imply 字样。

Q36 是一个空缺谓语的陈述句：主语 The Supreme Court decision Thursday，情态动词 will 之后由选项补完动词词组。结构平铺直叙，无陷阱。

• A)无中生有

  better businesses\' relations with states 即改善企业与各州的关系，原文从未讨论企业-州关系是否好转。

• B)以偏概全

  put most online businesses in a dilemma 说大多数网店陷入两难，原文只点名小型线上零售商 online-only retailers, especially smaller ones 会有麻烦，远未涉及 most。

• C)✓ 正确
  • States will be able to force more people to pay sales tax when they make online purchases↔make more online shoppers pay sales tax

  make more online shoppers pay sales tax 是定位句前半段的纯粹同义改写，与预判完全吻合，故选 C。

• D)与原文相反

  force some states to cut sales tax 让各州减税与原文 a big financial win for states 让各州得利的方向相反，判决是帮各州收税而非减税。

It can be learned from paragraphs 2 and 3 that 表面像推断，实则限定在两段内做事实归纳，无需跨段推理。

形式主语 it 句 It can be learned from paragraphs 2 and 3 that the overruled decisions____，that 从句缺谓语由选项补完。无陷阱。

• A)无中生有

  have led to the dominance of e-commerce 把旧判决说成促成电商主导地位，第 2、3 段从未讨论电商是否占据主导。

• B)张冠李戴

  have cost consumers a lot over the years 把受损方说成 consumers 消费者，原文里旧判决 cost them billions of dollars 的 them 指代 states 各州，受损方是州而非消费者。

• C)无中生有

  were widely criticized by online purchasers 说旧判决被网购者广泛批评，第 3 段只说大多数消费者 didn't realize they owed it and few paid——他们对税并不知情，更谈不上批评。

• D)✓ 正确
  • states said cost them billions of dollars in lost revenue annually↔were considered unfavorable by states

  were considered unfavorable by states 在评价主体（states）与极性（unfavorable）上都与预判吻合，故选 D。

According to Justice Anthony Kennedy, the physical presence rule has____ 问 Kennedy 对 rule 的明确表态，是原文直引的观点细节。

Q38 主干为 the physical presence rule has + 选项补完的过去分词短语；状语 According to Justice Anthony Kennedy 指明观点归属。结构清晰。

• A)过度推断

  hindered economic development 说阻碍经济发展，原文只提到 significant revenue losses to the States 各州税收损失与 long-term prosperity 长期繁荣，是州层面的财政问题，未上升到国家经济发展层面。

• B)与原文相反

  brought prosperity to the country 说该规则给国家带来繁荣，与 Kennedy limited states' ability to seek long-term prosperity 限制各州追求繁荣 的判断完全相反。

• C)✓ 正确
  • has prevented market participants from competing on an even playing field↔harmed fair market competition

  动作 prevented...from competing → harmed，对象 market participants ... on an even playing field → fair market competition，预判核心要素全部对上，故选 C。

• D)与原文相反

  boosted growth in states' revenue 说促进各州税收增长，与 significant revenue losses to the States 让各州税收大幅减少 完全相反。

Who are most likely to welcome the Supreme Court ruling? 是直接问受益群体的疑问句，答案来自原文中明确点名为受益方的句子。

Q39 是特殊疑问句，主语 Who，谓语 are，most likely 为程度修饰，to welcome 不定式作表语补足语；选项是名词作主语补完。

• A)与原文相反

  Internet entrepreneurs 互联网创业者，对应原文尾段 Small businesses and internet entrepreneurs are not well served at all by this decision——他们恰恰是反对方，不会 welcome。

• B)✓ 正确
  • a victory for big chains with a presence in many states↔Big-chain owners

  Big-chain owners 与定位句 victory for big chains 在受益对象上完全一致，与预判吻合，故选 B。

• C)无中生有

  Third-party sellers 是第三方卖家。原文 third-party sellers who use the site don't have to 只说他们此前不必代收税，并未对其将欢迎或反对新判决作任何表态。

• D)与原文相反

  Small retailers 小型零售商，对应 The losers, said retail analyst Neil Saunders, are online-only retailers, especially smaller ones——他们正是判决的输家，更不可能欢迎。

In dealing with the Supreme Court decision Thursday, the author____ 问的是作者整体如何呈现该事件，必须串读全文才能作答。

Q40 由状语 In dealing with the Supreme Court decision Thursday 引导，主句 the author____ 缺谓语由选项补完。状语提示讨论对象，主句留空动词。

• A)✓ 正确
  • States will be able to force more people to pay sales tax when they make online purchases under a Supreme Court decision Thursday↔gives a factual account of it
  • Retail trade groups praised the ruling↔discusses its consequences

  gives a factual account of it and discusses its consequences 中两个动作 give a factual account / discuss consequences 正好对应作者前后两段使命，与预判完全吻合，故选 A。

• B)无中生有

  describes the long and complicated process of its making 说作者描写判决的漫长复杂制定过程，全文从未叙述法院如何审理、辩论、表决等任何过程性细节。

• C)过度推断

  presents its main points with conflicting views on them 说作者陈列判决要点并附冲突观点。全文确有不同反应（连锁称赞、小卖家反对），但作者并未列出判决的 main points 要点清单，只引了 Kennedy 单人观点；conflicting views 描述也偏强，原文是利益分析而非观点对撞。

• D)偷换概念

  cites some cases related to it and analyzes their implications 说作者引用相关案例并分析其含义。文中只在第 3 段提到 The cases the court overturned 这一被推翻的旧判决，但作者并未独立列举多个相关案例来讨论，重心是新判决本身的影响，不是案例分析。