2022年 考研英语一阅读理解（四选一） 第 4 篇 · 36–40 题答案与解析

题干 The personal grievance provisions of the ERA are intended to____ 问的是「被设计来做什么」这一客观事实，没有 infer/imply 字样。

The personal grievance provisions of the ERA are intended to____ 主干是 provisions are intended to do sth，被动语态＋不定式，选项就是这个不定式的内容。结构无陷阱。

• A)无中生有

  punish dubious corporate practices 谈「惩罚可疑企业行为」，但原文只说该条款 prevent…firing without good cause，是约束而非惩罚，且对象是 dismissal 行为而非泛 corporate practices。

• B)偷换概念

  improve traditional hiring procedures 谈「改良招聘流程」，但 dismissals must be justified 与 guard the jobs of ordinary workers from "unjustified dismissals" 全部围绕解雇，不涉及招聘。

• C)与原文相反

  exempt employers from certain duties 是「免除雇主义务」，但条款做的恰恰相反——给雇主加上 show cause 与 procedurally fair 两道义务（Employers must both show cause and act in a procedurally fair way）。

• D)✓ 正确
  • guard the jobs of ordinary workers↔protect the rights of ordinary workers
  • ordinary workers↔ordinary workers

  预判要的是「保护普通工人」，D 项 protect the rights of ordinary workers 在受益对象与立法目的两点上都与定位句对应，是唯一在两点上全等的选项。

It can be learned from Paragraph 3 that the provisions may____ 中 can be learned 与 may 都是推断信号，要求从段内事实做一步合理延伸。

It can be learned from Paragraph 3 that the provisions may____ 是 It + 被动 + that 从句结构，that 从句的主语是 the provisions，选项是 may 后面的动词短语；句式平铺直叙，无陷阱。

• A)✓ 正确
  • a handbrake on boosting productivity and overall performance↔hinder business development
  • create difficulties for businesses↔hinder business development

  预判要的是「拖累企业」，A 项正是把 handbrake 比喻去掉、把 productivity 上位为 business development 的标准推断题答案。

• B)张冠李戴

  undermine managers' authority 谈「削弱管理者权威」，但本段说的是「无法解雇差管理者」，受影响的是企业／老板的解雇权，不是管理者自己的权威。

• C)无中生有

  affect the public image of the firms 谈「影响企业公众形象」，但第 3 段只谈生产率、绩效、业务成败，未涉及「公众形象」维度。

• D)过度推断

  worsen labor-management relations 谈「恶化劳资关系」，但第 3 段对比的是「差管理者 vs 好管理者」和「普通工人岗位保留 vs 丢失」，并未涉及劳资双方对立关系。

Which of the following measures would the Productivity Commission support? 原文只点出该机构对生产率低的归因，「会支持哪条措施」需要由归因反推一步。

Which of the following measures would the Productivity Commission support? 是 Which + 名词 + would + 主语 + 动词 的虚拟语气问句；would 提示推断、support 是立场动词，结构简洁无陷阱。

• A)无中生有

  Imposing reasonable wage restraints 谈「合理薪酬管制」，但 P5 委员会的归因落在「管理能力」而非「管理者薪酬」上，没有任何句子支持工资管制立场。

• B)与原文相反

  Enforcing employment protection laws 谈「加强用工保护法」，但全文（含 P5）的论点恰恰是这类法律 act as a constraint on firm productivity，委员会立场必然与「加强它」相反。

• C)与原文相反

  Limiting the powers of business owners 谈「限制企业主权力」，但全文都在说应给企业主松绑（解雇差管理者的权），委员会自然不会支持反向限权。

• D)✓ 正确
  • the low quality of managerial capabilities↔Dismissing poorly performing managers
  • as a cause of the country's poor productivity growth record↔Dismissing poorly performing managers

  预判要的是「换掉差管理者」，D 项 Dismissing poorly performing managers 是把诊断结论变成对症措施的唯一选项。

What might be an effect of ERA's unjustified dismissal procedures? 问的是已被原文明说的后果之一，might 是事实层面的「可能列举之一」，不是推断信号。

What might be an effect of ERA's unjustified dismissal procedures? 主干是 What might be an effect，of 短语限定 effect 的归属对象；句式直白，无陷阱。

• A)与原文相反

  Highly paid managers lose their jobs 谈「高薪管理者丢工作」，但原文恰恰说这类条款让差管理者难以被解雇 constraining firms from firing poorly performing, high-earning managers，方向相反。

• B)✓ 正确
  • therefore on workers' wages↔Employees suffer from salary cuts
  • firms pay staff less↔Employees suffer from salary cuts

  预判要的是「工资被压低」，B 项 Employees suffer from salary cuts 在 P5 与 P6 都有直接原文支撑，是唯一一项被原文两次明示的后果。

• C)与原文相反

  Society sees a rise in overall well-being 谈「社会整体福祉上升」，但 Stringent job dismissal regulations adversely affect productivity growth and hamper both prosperity and overall well-being 明说是 hamper（损害），方向相反。

• D)与原文相反

  Employers need to hire new staff 谈「雇主需要招新人」，但 employers are more cautious about hiring new staff 说的恰是雇主更不愿招人，方向相反。

It can be inferred that the "high-income threshold" in Australia____ 直接用 inferred 标明本题需从原文做一步合理推断。

It can be inferred that the "high-income threshold" in Australia____ 是 It + 被动 + that 从句，主语是带引号的术语，谓语和选项相连构成完整陈述；引号只是术语标记，不是修辞，不必过度解读。

• A)无中生有

  has secured managers' earnings 谈「保住了管理者的收入」，但 P8 只说门槛划定了保护边界，未谈管理者收入是否被保障；况且该门槛针对的是雇佣保护，不针对薪酬本身。

• B)张冠李戴

  has produced undesired results 谈「产生了不良后果」，但 P8 对澳大利亚做法是中性陈述其机制；唯一被作者评价为「不良」的是新西兰 2016 年那次失败的 Bill（the mechanisms proposed were unwieldy）。

• C)✓ 正确
  • excluding employees earning above a specified "high-income threshold" from the protection of its unfair dismissal laws↔is beneficial to business owners
  • constraining firms from firing poorly performing, high-earning managers is a handbrake on boosting productivity and overall performance↔is beneficial to business owners

  预判要的是「利好企业主」，C 项是唯一同时被定位句机制和全文论点链双重支撑的选项。

• D)张冠李戴

  is difficult to put into practice 谈「难以落地」，但澳大利亚的门槛是已经在用的现行做法（Australia deals with the unjustified dismissal paradox by excluding 用一般现在时陈述），无落地难的暗示；新西兰版本才被评为 unwieldy。