2010考研英语试题阅读文章来源出处_新浪教育_新浪网
2010考研英语试题阅读文章来源出处
　　2010年的第二篇文章选自于08年2月26号的《经济周刊》。这篇文章有关法律学，谈到了支付方式的专利权，专利权受到威胁以及专利权申请的法律重重障碍。
　　原文如下：
　　A Pending Threat to Patents
　　A case before an appeals court could make it harder to win legal protection for business methods by Michael Orey
　　Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com (AMZN) received one for its "one-click" online payment system. Merrill Lynch (MER) got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box。
　　Now the nation's top patent court appears poised to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 15 said it would use a case pending before it to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D. Crouch, a patent professor at the University of Missouri School of Law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
　　EXPLOSION IN FILINGS
　　Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that ushered in such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank (STT) case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by nascent Internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their portfolios, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM (IBM) noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment firms armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice。
　　The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling。
　　The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the Supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School。
　　第三篇文章是传播学的文章，这篇文章节选于07年2月份的《哈佛经济评价》(Harvard Business Review)，讲述了究竟是什么样的人影响了社会潮流的研究，主要提供了两种观点，一种是影响力主宰潮流，另外是大众主宰潮流，文章的结构形式和我们以前考过的结构类型非常相似。
　　原文如下：
　　The Accidental Influentials
　　In his best-selling book The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell argues that “social epidemics” are driven in large part by the actions of a tiny minority of special individuals, often called influentials, who are unusually informed, persuasive, or well connected. The idea is intuitively compelling C we think we see it happening all the time C but it doesn’t explain how ideas actually spread。
　　The supposed importance of influentials derives from a plausible-sounding but largely untested theory called the “two-step flow of communication”： Information flows from the media to the influentials and from them to everyone else.Marketers have embraced the twostep flow because it suggests that if they can just find and influence the influentials, those select people will do most of the work for them. The theory also seems to explain the sudden and unexpected popularity of certain looks, brands, or neighborhoods. In many such cases, a cursory search for causes finds that some small group of people was wearing, promoting, or developing whatever it is before anyone else paid attention. Anecdotal evidence of this kind fits nicely with the idea that only certain special people can drive trends。
　　In recent work, however, my colleague Peter Dodds and I have found that influentials have far less impact on social epidemics than is generally supposed. In fact, they don’t seem to be required at all。
　　Our argument stems from a simple observation about social influence: With the exception of celebrities like Oprah Winfrey C whose outsize presence is primarily a function of media, not interpersonal, influence C even the most influential members of a population simply don’t interact with that many others. Yet it is precisely these noncelebrity influentials who, according to the two-step-flow theory, are supposed to drive social epidemics, by influencing their friends and colleagues directly. For a social epidemic to occur, however, each person so affected must then influence his or her own acquaintances, who must in turn influence theirs, and just how many others pay attention to each of these people has little to do with the initial influential. If people in the network just two degrees removed from the initial influential prove resistant, for example, the cascade of change won’t propagate very far or affect many people。
　　Building on this basic truth about interpersonal influence,Dodds and I studied the dynamics of social contagion by conducting thousands of computer simulations of populations, manipulating a number of variables relating to people’s ability to influence others and their tendency to be influenced. Our work shows that the principal requirement for what we call “global cascades”C the widespread propagation of influence through networks C is the presence not of a few influentials but, rather, of a critical mass of easily influenced people, each of whom adopts, say, a look or a brand after being exposed to a single adopting neighbor.Regardless of how influential an individual is locally, he or she can exert global influence only if this critical mass is available to propagate a chain reaction.&&&
　　第四篇文章属于经济类，节选于09年4月份的《经济学人》(The Economist)，文章的结构形式和我们以前考过的结构类型相似。
　　原文如下：
　　Messenger, Shot
　　Accounting rules are under attack. Standard-setters should defend them. Politicians and banks should back off。
　　Economist Staff - The Economist
　　April 10, 2009
　　In public, bankers have been blaming themselves for their troubles. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone else: the accounting standard-setters. Their rules, moan the banks, have forced them to report enormous losses, and it's just not fair. These rules say they must value some assets at the price a third party would pay, not the price managers and regulators would like them to fetch. Unfortunately, banks' lobbying now seems to be working. The details may be arcane, but the independence of standard-setters, essential to the proper functioning of capital markets, is being compromised. And, unless banks carry toxic assets at prices that attract buyers, reviving the banking system will be difficult。
　　On April 2nd, after a bruising encounter with Congress, America's Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rushed through rule changes. These gave banks more freedom to use models to value illiquid assets and more flexibility in recognising losses on long-term assets in their income statements. Bob Herz, the FASB's chairman, decried those who "impugn our motives". Yet bank shares rose and the changes enhance what one lobbying group politely calls "the use of judgment by management"。
　　European ministers instantly demanded that the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) do likewise. The IASB says it does not want to be "piecemeal", but the pressure to fold when it completes its overhaul of rules later this year is strong. On April 1st Charlie McCreevy, a European commissioner, warned the IASB that it did "not live in a political vacuum" but "in the real world" and that Europe could yet develop different rules。
　　It was banks that were on the wrong planet, with accounts that vastly overvalued assets. Today they argue that market prices overstate losses, because they largely reflect the temporary illiquidity of markets, not the likely extent of bad debts. The truth will not be known for years. But banks' shares trade below their book value, suggesting that investors are sceptical. And dead markets partly reflect the paralysis of banks which will not sell assets for fear of booking losses, yet are reluctant to buy all those supposed bargains。
　　To get the system working again, losses must be recognised and dealt with. Japan's procrastination prolonged its crisis. America's new plan to buy up toxic assets will not work unless banks mark assets to levels which buyers find attractive. Successful markets require independent and even combative standard-setters. The FASB and IASB have been exactly that, cleaning up rules on stock options and pensions, for example, against hostility from special interests. But by appeasing critics now they are inviting pressure to make more concessions。
　　To reveal, but not to regulate
　　Standard-setters should defuse the argument by making clear that their job is not to regulate banks but to force them to reveal information. The banks, their capital-adequacy regulators and politicians seem to dream of a single, grown-up version of the truth, which enhances financial stability. Investors and accountants, however, think all valuations are subjective, doubt managers' motives and judge that market prices are the least-bad option. They are right. A bank's solvency is a matter of judgment for its regulators and for investors, not whatever a piece of paper signed by its auditors says it is. Accounts can inform that decision, but not make it。
　　Banks' regulators have to take responsibility. If they want to remove the mechanical link between drops in market prices and capital shortfalls at banks, they should take the accounts that standard-setters create for investors and adjust them when they calculate capital. They already do this to some degree. But the banks' campaign to change the rules is making inevitable a split between two sets of accounts, one for regulators and another for investors. The FASB and IASB can help regulators to create whatever balance-sheet they want. But in doing so they must not compromise their duty to investors。
&&& 更多信息请访问：
　　特别说明：由于各方面情况的不断调整与变化，新浪网所提供的所有考试信息仅供参考，敬请考生以权威部门公布的正式信息为准。
点击进入查看更多 、、、、的精彩内容
电话：010-
不支持Flash当前位置：
＞＞＞In an experiment, pet owners are being encouraged to take th..
In an experiment, pet owners are being encouraged to take their pets to work, a move _______ can be good for both the people and the pets. A．that some scientists sayB．in which some scientists sayC．some scientists say that D．some scientists say
题型：单选题难度：中档来源：不详
A根据对a move 到句子最后的这一部分分析，可以确定a move是先行词，同时是前面句子的同位语；而定语从句中缺少主语，因此排除B、D两项。关系代词要紧跟先行词，所以排除C，且此项的这种表达方式变成了宾语从句形式。&
马上分享给同学
据魔方格专家权威分析，试题“In an experiment, pet owners are being encouraged to take th..”主要考查你对&&状语从句，限制性定语从句，主语从句，同位语从句&&等考点的理解。关于这些考点的“档案”如下：
现在没空？点击收藏，以后再看。
因为篇幅有限，只列出部分考点，详细请访问。
状语从句限制性定语从句主语从句同位语从句
状语从句的概念：
状语从句指句子用作状语时，起副词作用的句子。它可以修饰谓语、非谓语动词、定语、状语或整个句子。根据其作用可分为时间、地点、原因、条件、目的、结果、让步、方式和比较等从句。状语从句一般由连词(从属连词)引导，也可以由词组引起。从句位于句首或句中时通常用逗号与主句隔开，位于句尾时可以不用逗号隔开。比较while/as/when：1、as/when引导短暂性动作的动词例句：如：Just as/Just when/When I stopped my car, a man came up to me. 2、当从句的动作发生于主句动作之前，只能用when引导这个从句，不可用as或while。如：When you have finished your work, you may have a rest. 3、从句表示“随时间推移”连词能用as，不用when或while。如：As the day went on, the weather got worse. 比较untill/till： 两个连词意义相同,肯定形式表示的意思是“做某事直至某时”，动词必须是延续性的。否定形式表达的意思是“直至某时才做某事”，动词为延续性或非延续性都可以。正确使用这两个连词的关键之一就在于判断句中的动词该用肯定式还是否定式。肯定句例句：I slept until midnight. 我一直睡到半夜时醒了。 &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Wait till I call you. 等着我叫你。注意：在肯定句中可用before代替：Let's get in the wheat before the sunsets. 否定句例句：She didn't arrive until 6o'clock.&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&I didn't manage to do it until you had explained how. 1、Until可用于句首，而till通常不用于句首。例句：Until you told me, I had heard nothing of what happened. 2、Untilwhen疑问句中，until要放在句首。例句：Until when are you staying? 你呆到什么时候？注意：否定句可用另外两种句式表示。 1）Not until…在句首，主句用倒装。例句：Not until the early years of the19th century did man know what heat is. 2）It is not until…that… 状语从句的用种类：
1、时间状语从句：表示时间的状语从句可由when, as, while, whenever, after, before, till(until), since, once, as soon as(或the moment), by the time, no sooner…than, hardly(scarcely)… when, everytime等引导。 　　e.g. When I came into the office, the teachers were having a meeting. 　　&&&&&& He started as soon as he received the news. 　　&&&&&& Once you see him, you will never forget him. 　　&&&&&& No sooner had I gone to bed than I went to sleep. 　　2、原因状语从句：原因状语从句是表示原因或理由的，引导这类从句的最常用的连词是because, since, as, nowthat（既然）等，for表示因果关系时（它引导的不是从句）为并列连词，语气不如because强。 　　e.g. He is disappointed because he didn't get the position. 　　&&&&&&As it is raining, I will not go out. 　　&&&&& Now that you mention it, I do remember. 　　3、地点状语从句： 　　引导地点状语从句的连词是where和wherever等。 　　e.g. Sit wherever you like. 　　&&&&&&Make a mark where you have a question. 　　4、目的状语从句： 　　引导目的状语从句最常用的词（组）是so, so that（从句谓语常有情态动词）, in order that, in case（以防，以免）等。 　　e.g. Speak clearly, so that they may understand you. 　　&&&&&&She has bought the book in order that she could follow the TV lessons. 　　&&&&& He left early in case he should miss the train. 　　5、结果状语从句： 　　结果状语从句是表示事态结果的从句，通常主句是原因，从句是结果。由so that（从句谓语一般没有情态动词）,so…that, such…that等引导。 　　e.g. She was ill, so that she didn't attend the meeting. 　　&&&&&&He was so excited that he could not say a word. 　　&&&&& She is such a good teacher that everyone admires her. 　　6、条件状语从句： 　　条件状语从句分真实性（有可能实现的事情）与非真实性（条件与事实相反或者在说话者看来不大可能实现的事情）条件句。引导条件状语从句的词（组）主要有if, unless, so(as)long as, on condition that, so(as) far as, if only(=if)。注意：条件从句中的if不能用whether替换。 　　e.g. If he is not in the office, he must be out for lunch. 　　&&&&& You may borrow the book so long as you keep it clean. 　　&&&&&&So far as I know（据我所知）, he will be away for three months. 　　&&&&& You can go swimming on condition that(=if) you don't go too far away from the river bank. 　　&&&&&&If he had come a few minutes earlier, he could have seen her. 　7、让步状语从句： 　　让步状语从句可由although, though, as, even if(though), however, whatever, whether…or, no matter who(when, what,…)等引导。注意：as引导的让步状语从句一般是倒装的。 　　e.g. Though he is a child, he knows a lot. 　　&&&&& Child a she is, he knows a lot. 　　&&&&& Whatever(=No matter what) you say, I'll never change my mind. 　　8、方式状语从句： 　　方式状语从句常由as, as if(though), the way, rather than等引导。 　　e.g.You must do the exercise as I show you. 　　&&&&& He acted as if nothing had happened. 　　9、比较状语从句： 　　比较状语从句常用than, so(as)…as, the more…the more等引导。 　　e.g. I have made a lot more mistakes than you have. 　　&&&&& He smokes cigarettes as expensive as he can afford. 　　&&&&& The busier he is, the happier he feels.使用状语从句时要注意的几个问题：　　
1、在时间和条件（有时也在方式、让步等）从句中，主句是一般将来时，从句通常用一般现在时表示将来。　　e.g. We'll go outing if it doesn't rain tomorrow. 　　&&&&&& I'll write to you as soon as I get to Shanghai. 　　2、有些时间、地点、条件、方式或让步从句，如果从句的主语与主句主语一致（或虽不一致，是it），从句的谓语又包含动词be，就可省略从句中的“主语+be”部分。　　e.g. When(hewas) still a boy of ten, he had to work day and night. 　　&&&&&& If(you are) asked you may come in. 　　&&&&&& If(it is) necessary I'll explain to you again. 　　3、注意区分不同从句：引导的是什么从句，不仅要根据连词，还要根据句子结构和句意来判别。以where为例，能引导多种从句。　　e.g. You are to find it where you left it.（地点状语从句）　　&&&&&& Tell me the address where he lives.（定语从句，句中有先行词）　　&&&&&& I don't know where he came from.（宾语从句）　　&&&&& Where he has gone is not known yet.（主语从句）　　&&&&&& This place is where they once hid.（表语从句）注意：表示“一…就…”的结构 hardly/scarcely…when/before/no sooner…than和as soon as都可以表示“一…就…”的意思。例句：I had hardly/scarcely got home when it began to rain. &&&&&&&&&&& I had no sooner got home than it began to rain. &&&&&&&&&& As soon as I got home, it began to rain. 注意：如果hardly/scarcely或nosooner置于句首，句子必须用倒装结构：例句：Hardly/Scarcely had I got home when it began to rain. &&&&&&&&&&& No sooner had I got home than it began to rain.限制性定语从句的概念：
限制性定语是指对被修饰名词或代词的必需修饰，是被修饰名词或代词不可缺少的修饰语，如果去掉它句子意思往往会不明确或会发生变化。如：The travellers knowing about the floods took another road. 知道发大水的那些游客改道走了。&&&&&&& The boys wanting to play football were disappointed when it rained. 想踢足球的那些男孩子因为下雨而感到失望。关系代词引导的定语从句：
关系代词所代替的先行词是人或物的名词或代词，并在句中充当主语、宾语、定语等成分。关系代词在定语从句中作主语时，从句谓语动词的人称和数要和先行词保持一致。 1）who, whom, that 这些词代替的先行词是人的名词或代词，在从句中所起作用如下： 例：Is he the man who/that wants to see you? 他就是你想见的人吗？（who/that在从句中作主语）&&&&&&&&&&&&&He is the man whom/that I saw yesterday. 他就是我昨天见的那个人。（whom/that在从句中作宾语） 2)Whose用来指人或物，(只用作定语,若指物，它还可以同ofwhich互换）例：They rushed over to help the man whose car had broken down. 那人车坏了，大家都跑过去帮忙。&& &&&&&&& Please pass me the book whose(of which) coverisgreen. 请递给我那本绿皮的书。 3）which, that 它们所代替的先行词是事物的名词或代词，在从句中可作主语、宾语等。例如：A prosperity which/that had never been seen before appears in the countryside. 农村出现了前所未有的繁荣。（which/that在句中作宾语） &&&&&&&&&&& The package(which/that) you are carrying is about to come unwrapped.你拿的包快散了。(which/that在句中作宾语）
关系副词引导的定语从句：关系副词可代替的先行词是时间、地点或理由的名词，在从句中作状语。 1）when, where, why 关系副词when, where, why的含义相当于“介词+which”结构，因此常常和“介词+which”结构交替使用。例如：There are occasions when(on which) one must yield.任何人都有不得不屈服的时候。 &&&&&&&&&&& Beijing is the place where(inwhich) I was born. 北京是我的出生地。 &&&&&&&&&&& Is this the reason why(for which) he refused our offer? 这就是他拒绝我们帮助他的理由吗？ 2）that代替关系副词 that可以用于表示时间、地点、方式、理由的名词后取代when, where, why和“介词+which”引导的定语从句，在口语中that常被省略，例如：His father died the year(that/when/in which) he was born. 他父亲在他出生那年逝世了。 &&&&&&&&&&& He is unlikely to find the place(that/where/in which) he lived forty years ago. 他不大可能找到他四十年前居住过的地方。 限定性定语与非限定性定语的区别：
1、形式不同：限定性定语从句主句和从句之间不用逗号隔开，口语中使用时也不停顿；而非限定性定语从句与主句之间通常有逗号隔开，口语中使用时有停顿。 2、功能不同：&限定性定语从句用于对先行词的意义进行修饰、限制和识别，如果去掉，就会造成句意不完整或概念不清；而非限定性定语从句用于对先行词起补充说明作用，如果省略，句意仍然清楚、完整： 如：People who take physical exercise live longer. 进行体育锻炼的人活得长些。(若把从句去掉句子就失去意义) &&&&&&& His daughter, who is in Boston now, is coming home next week. 他女儿现在在波士顿，下星期回来。(若把从句去句子意义仍然完整) 3、翻译不同：在翻译定语从句时，一般把限定性定语从句翻译在它所修饰的先行词之前，而把非限定性定语从句与主句分开： 如：He is the man whose car was stolen. 他就是汽车被窃的那个人。 &&&&&&& I've invited Jim, who lives in the next flat. 我邀请了吉姆，他就住在隔壁。 4、含义不同： 如：I have a sister who is a doctor. 我有一个医生的姐姐。(姐姐不止一个) &&&&&&& I have a sister, who is a doctor. 我有一个姐姐，她是当医生的。(只有一个姐姐) 5、先行词不同限定性定语从句的先行词只能是名词或代词，而非限定性定语从句的先行词则可以是名词或代词，也可以是短语或句子；另外，当先行词为专有名词或其他具有独一无二性的普通名词时，通常要用非限制性定语从句，而不用限制性定语从句： 如：Peter drove too fast, which was dangerous. 彼得开车很快，这是很危险的。(which指drive too fast) &&&&&&& He changed his mind, which made me very angry. 他改变了主意，这使我很生气。(which指整个主句) &&&&&&& Mr.Smith, who is our boss, will leave for Japan next week. 我们的老板史密斯先生下周要去日本。(先行词为专有名词，要用非限制性定语从句修饰)&& &&&&&&& Her father, who has a lot of money, wishes her to study abroad. 她父亲很有钱，希望她出国学习。(先行词为表独一无二意义的普通名词，要用非限制性定语从句修饰) 6、关系词不同：关系词that和why可用于限制性定语从句中，通常不用于非限制性定语从句；另外，在限制性定语从句中，关系词有时可以省略，而在非限制性定语从句中关系词一律不省略。 判断关系代词与关系副词方法：
一：用关系代词，还是关系副词完全取决于从句中的谓语动词。及物动词后面无宾语，就必须要求用关系代词；而不及物动词则要求用关系副词。例如：This is the mountain village where I stayed last year. &&&&&&&&&&& I'll never forget the days when I worked together with you. 判断改错（错）This is the mountain village where I visited last year. （错）I will never forget the days when I spent in the countryside. （对）This is the mountain village(which) I visited last year. （对）I'll never forget the days(which) I spent in the countryside. 注：习惯上总把表地点或时间的名词与关系副词where, when联系在一起。此两题错在关系词的误用上。二：准确判断先行词在定语从句中的成分(主、谓、宾、定、状)，也能正确选择出关系代词/关系副词。例1. Is this museum ___ you visited a few days age? &&&&&&& A. where&&&&&&&& B. that &&&&&& &C. on which &&&&&&& D. the one 例2. Is this the museum ____ the exhibition was held.&&&&&&&&& A. where&&&&&&&&&B. that &&&&&&& C.on which &&&&&&& D. the one 答案：例1：D，例2：A 例1变为肯定句：This museum is___ you visited a few days ago. 例2变为肯定句：This is the museum ___ the exhibition was held. 注：在句1中，所缺部分为宾语，而where, that, on which都不能起到宾语的作用，只有the one既做了主句的表语，又可做从句的宾语，可以省略关系代词，所以应选D。而句2中,主、谓、宾俱全，从句部分为句子的状语表地点，既可用副词where，又因in the museum词组，可用介词in+which引导地点状语。而此题中，介词on用的不对，所以选A。关系词的选择依据在从句中所做的成分，先行词在从句中作主、定、宾语时，选择关系代词(who,whom,that,which,whose)；先行词在从句中做状语时，应选择关系副词(where地点状语，when时间状语，why原因状语)。 定语从句知识体系：
&关系代词that的用法：
1）不用that的情况： a)在引导非限定性定语从句时。 如：（错）The tree, that is four hundred years old, is very famous here. b)介词后不能用： 如：We depend on the land from which we get our food. &&&&&&& We depend on the land that/which we get our food from.2)只能用that作为定语从句的关系代词的情况 a)在there be句型中，只用that，不用which。 b)在不定代词，如：anything, nothing, the one, all, much, few, any, little等作先行词时，只用that，不用which。 c)先行词有the only, the very修饰时，只用that。 d)先行词为序数词、数词、形容词最高级时，只用that。. e)先行词既有人，又有物时。例：All that is needed is a supply of oil. &所需的只是供油问题。&& &&&&&&& Finally, the thief handed everything that he had stolen to the police. 那贼最终把偷的全部东西交给了警察。 主语从句的概念：
如果一个句子在复合句中充当一个主语，那么这个句子就是主语从句。主语从句通常由从属连词that，whether，if和连接代词what，who，whichwhatever，whoever以及连接副词how，when，where，why等词引导。that在句中无词义，只起连接作用。主语从句用法：
1、主语从句的引导词：主语从句通常由连词that和whether、连接代词或连接副词以及关系代词型what引导： 如：That he is still alive is a wonder. 他还活着，真是奇迹。 &&&&&&& When we arrive doesn't matter. 什么时候到没有关系。 &&&&&&& What we need is money. 我们需要的是钱。 &&&&&&& What I want to know is this. 我想知道的就是这一点。 &&&&&&& Whether they would support us was a problem. 他们是否会支持我们还是一个问题。 2、主语从句与形式主语it：有时为了考虑句子平衡，通常在主语从句处使用形式主语it，而将真正的主语从句移至句末。这分三种情况： (1)对于以连词that引导的主语从句，通常用形式主语代主语从句： 如：It's a pity that he didn't come. 很遗憾他没来。 (2)对于以连接代词(副词)引导的主语从句，可以使用形式主语代主语从句，也可直接在句首使用主语从句： 如：Whether they would support us was a problem. 他们是否会支持我们还是一个问题。&&&&&&&&&&It was a problem whether they would support us. 他们是否会支持我们还是一个问题。 (3)对关系代词型what引导的主语从句，通常不用形式主语，总是主语从句放在句首： 如：What we need is money. 我们需要的是钱。 &&&&&&& What I want to know is this. 我想知道的就是这一点。 (4)如果句子是疑问句，则必须用带形式主语it的结构： 如：Is it true that he is the girl's father? 他是那女孩的父亲，是真的吗？ &&&&&&& How is it that you are late again? 你怎么又迟到了？3、连词that的省略问题：引导主语从句的连词that有时可省，有时不能省，其原则是：若that引导的主语从句直接位于句首，则that不能省略；若that引导的主语从句位于句末，而在句首使用了形式主语it，则that则可以省略： 如：That you didn't go to the talk was a pity. 很遗憾你没去听报告。(that不可省) &&&&&&& It was a pity(that) you didn't go to the talk. 很遗憾你没去听报告。(that可省)主语从句应注意的几个问题：
1、that引导的主语从句既可放在句首，也可放在句尾，但在下列情况下that从句不可提前。（1）在It is said/reported...that结构中： 如：It is reported that a bank was robbed yesterday. （2）在Ithappened/occurred...结构中：Ithappenedthattheteacherwasnotintheofficethatday. （3）含主语从句的复合句是疑问句时：如：Is it ture that you will give up the job? 2、下面这种情况常用it作形式主语。在It doesn't matter+what/whatever…结构中。 如：It doesn't matter what you say. 3、由what引导的主语从句谓语动词单复数问题 what引导的主语从句一般按单数对待，但是，在实际使用中究竟按单数还是按复数对取决于其成分的含义。 如：What we need is more time. &&&&&&& What were left behind were five empty bottles. 同位语从句的概念：
在复合句中充当同位语的名词性从句称为同位语从句。同位语从句是名词性从句(主语从句、表语从句、宾语从句、同位语从句)中的主要从句之一，从句作同位语表示与之同位的名词(短语)的实际内容，它的作用相当于名词，对前面的名词(短语)加以补充说明或进一步解释，相当于一个表语从句，它们之间的关系是同位关系，即主表关系。 同位语从句的用法：
1、同位语从句的引导：词引导同位语从句的词语通常有连词that，whether，连接代词和连接副词等： 如：We heard the news that our team had won. 我们听到消息说我们队赢了。&&& &&&&&&& They were worried over the fact that you were sick. 他们为你生病发愁。&&&&&&&&&I have no idea when he will come back. 我不知道他什么时候回来。 &&&&&&& There is some doubt whether he will come. 他是否会来还不一定。&&&&&&&&&The question whether it is right or wrong depends on the result. 这个是对还是错要看结果。注：whether可引导同位语从句，但if不能引导同位语从句。 2、同位语从句与定语从句的区别： （1）意义的不同：&同位语从句是用于说明所修饰名词的具体内容的，它与被修饰词语通常可以划等号；而定语从句是限制所修饰名词的，它的作用是将所修饰的名词与其他类似的东西区别开来： 如：We are glad at the news that he will come. 听到他要来这个消息我们很高兴。(news的内容就是that he will come，故that引导的是同位语从句) &&&&&&& We are glad at the news that he told us. 听到他告诉我们的这个消息我们很高兴。(that从句是限制thenews的内容的，即我们高兴只是因为他告诉的这个news而不是其他的news，故that从句为定语从句)（2）引导词的不同：&&&&&&&&& what, how, if, whatever等可引导名词性从句，但不引导定语从句。 （3）引导词的功能上的不同：&&&&&&&&& that引导同位语从句时，它不充当句子成分，而引导定语从句时，它作为关系代词，要么充当定语从句的主语，要么充当定语从句的宾语。如上例that he told us中的that就充当told的宾语。 （4）被修饰词语的区别：&&&&&&&&& 同位语从句所修饰的名词比较有限，通常有hope, wish, idea, news, fact, promise, opinion, suggestion, truth等，而定语从句所修饰的名词则非常广泛。另外，when和where引导定语从句时，通常只修饰表示时间和地点的名词，而它们引导同位语从句时却不一定；又如why引导定语从句，它通常只修饰名词thereason，而它引导同位语从句时则不一定： 如：I have no idea when they will come. 我不知道他们什么时候来。(同位语从句) &&&&&&& I'll never forget the days when I lived there. 我永远不会忘记我住在那儿的日子。(定语从句) &&&&&&& We don't understand the problem why this is the best choice. 我们不明白这个问题，为什么这是最好的选择。(同位语从句)&&&&&& &There a son why he didn't come to the meeting is that he is ill. 他未能来开会，原因是他生病了。(定语从句)同位语从句用法解析：
一、理解同位语从句的含义，把握同位语从句的实质：　　在主从复合句中作同位语的从句称为同位语从句。同位语从句一般用that, whether, what, which, who, when, where, why, how等词引导，常放在fact, news, idea, truth, hope, problem, information, wish, promise, answer, evidence, report, explanation, suggestion, conclusion, word, possibility等抽象名词后面，说明该名词的具体内容。换言之，同位语从句和所修饰的名词在内容上为同一关系，对其内容作进一步说明。例：The news that they had won the game soon spread over the whole school. 他们比赛获胜的消息很快传遍了整个学校。析：they had won the game说明the news的全部内容，因此该句为同位语从句。二、正确运用同位语从句的引导词，准确把握同位语从句：1、如同位语从句意义完整，应用that引导同位语从句。（即that不充当任何成分，只起连接作用，不可省略）　例：The general gave the order that the soldiers should cross the river at once. 将军下达了战士们立即过河的命令。　析：the soldiers should cross the river at once是the order的全部内容，且意义完整，因此应用that引导同位语从句。 2、如同位语从句意义不完整，需增加"是否"的含义，应用whether引导同位语从句。（if不能引导同位语从句）例：We'll discuss the problem whether the sports meeting will be held on time. 我们将讨论运动会是否会如期举行的问题。析：the sports meeting will be held on time 意义不完整，应加“是否”的含义才能表达the problem的全部内容，因此应用whether引导同位语从句。 3、如同位语从句意义不完整，需增加"什么时候"、"什么地点"、"什么方式"等含义，应用when, where, how等词引导同位语从句。　例1：I have no idea when he will be back. 　析：he will be back 意义不完整，应加"什么时候"的含义才能表达idea的全部内容，因此应用when引导同位语从句。　例2：I have no impression how he went home, perhaps by bike. 析：he went home 意义不完整，应加"如何"的含义才能表达impression的全部内容，因此应用how引导同位语从句。 4、当主句的谓语较短，而同位语从句较长时，同位语从句常后置。如：The thought came to him that may be the enemy had fled the city.
发现相似题
与“In an experiment, pet owners are being encouraged to take th..”考查相似的试题有：
370168356926382767335000349705386790