2023届高考英语阅读技法讲义：作者态度题精讲
题型概览
关于作者态度题，可以这么说，无论是旧高考地区还是新高考地区，基本上每场考试的阅读里就会出现一道题。在难度上，虽然这类题同样没有文章大意题难，但仍然不可小觑，观点态度题是属于那种上限比较高，下限也比较低的类型，做错的同学也并不在少数。因此，这类题无论是从出题频率上还是难度上，同学们也需要着重留意。
出题形式
●The author's attitude towards standard-tters is one of______
●Regarding Gilbert's role in revitalizing the Philharmonic, the author feels
●The author suggests in the last paragraph that the effect of peer pressure is
●John Donahue’s attitude戊戌变法性质 towards the public-ctor system is one of
●The author's attitude towards what Brendon Lynch said in his blog is one of:
●桃花涧风景区According to Paragraph 1, what is the author’s attitude toward the AAAS’s report?
●Regarding the future of the EU, the author ems to feel __ __.
借条和欠条有什么区别●……
可以看到，这一类的题，都是针对某一个事物，然后相关的人，可以是作者，也可以是文章中其他的人，来根据这个事物发表观点。
解题策略
第一，要掌握单词。尤其是表示态度的单词。
这一类题的选项，没有别的花里胡哨的东西，就是表示态度的单词，如果不认识，就没法做，只能蒙。因此，认识这些表示态度的单词，是做这类题的前提。很多同学可能看到这就会觉得，看到单词两个字就很头痛，其实这是语言的共性，换个角度想，单词就好比汉字，做英文阅读理解的时候不认识单词，就像做语文的阅读理解的时候，不认识汉字一样，
不认识就是没法做题，这是一个道理。退一万步讲，选项里面的四个单词至少也要认识3个才行，这样也可以根据排除法将正确答案选出来。西班牙节日
第二，要注意英文里面一些词语的褒贬含义。
英语和汉语一样，有的词也是暗含了褒贬色彩的。中文里面脑袋瓜好使，如果表扬的话， 就是聪明，如果批评的话，就是老奸巨猾。在英文中也是同样的，因此语气强烈与否，感情褒贬与否，咱们同样要注意积累这样的词汇，看到了就要注意，比如must和have to同样表示必须，但是must的语气就十分强烈，有的时候还能表示责备的含义，再比如虚拟语气里面could have done之类的，表示“本来可以做某事”，带有一种惋惜，责怪的意思。因此背单词的时候，词义辨析也是很有必要看的。
第三，根据题干给出的线索，确定是针对什么内容的态度，然后在文章当中找到相应的位置。再别康桥赏析
在阅读文章中相应部分的时候，应当着重注意表达态度的这个人的部分，理解其思想。同时，要格外注意转折现象，一旦有转折现象，那么转折之后的部分，才是重点。然后将原文之中的观点部分，与选项进行结合得出答案。
这看起来有一点像是做细节题的步骤，都是找定位，然后对比选项，但与细节题不同的是，态度题有时候没有明说具体的态度是什么，需要一定的归纳能力，能够通过表达态度的主体的话语行为以及一些表示褒贬倾向的词和句子，来推断其态度。并且，细节题出现的地方是特定的就这一处，而态度题当中，这个对象则是有可能会贯穿全文，这种情况下，还要立足于全文来理解，标记处全文中跟这个对象有关的评论，观点等话语进行分析。
第四，根据选项来进行判断。
选项里面如果有一正一反，就是一个正面态度，一个负面态度，那么有极大的概率正确答案在这两个之中。而正面与负面态度，只要读过了相应的段落，就还是比较好判断的。如果选项中，有两个选项都是属于同一种类型的，比如同属正面态度，或者同属负面态度，那么这两个一般情况下，不会选的，因为选了一个就得选其中另一个。这是一个做题的经验，当然在实际操作中，仍然还是要把握这些单词的具体意思。另外，也可以把选项当中的内容带入到原文中，看看这个表达态度的主体用选项里面的内容，能不能符合原文，是否通顺。
第五，千万不能带入自己的视角。
要注意一定要严格按照题干要求，题干说从谁的角度来看，是谁的态度，就一定要找准这个态度的主体。
接下来还是来看两道例题，这类题在旧高考地区和新高考地区的差距并不大，可以相互借鉴一下。
例一
The author's attitude towards standard-tters is one of
[A] satisfaction.
[B] skepticism.
时间会改变一切 [C] objectiveness
[D] sympathy
爱字草书
△原文△
①Bankers have been blaming themlves for their troubles in public. Behind the scenes, they have been taking aim at someone el: the accounting standard-tters. Their rules, moan the banks, have forced them to report enormous loss, and it's just not fair. The rules say they must value some asts at the price a third party would pay, not the price managers and regulators would like them to fetch.
②Unfortunately, banks' lobbying now ems to be working. The details may be unknowable, but the independence of standard-tters, esntial to the proper functioning of capital markets, is being compromid. And, unless banks carry toxic asts at prices that attract buyers, reviving the banking system will be difficult.
春天童话③After a bruising encounter with Congress, America's Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rushed through rule changes. The gave banks more freedom to u models to value illiquid asts and more flexibility in recognizing loss on long-term asts in their income statement. Bob Herz, the FASB's chairman, cried out against tho
who "question our motives." Yet bank shares ro and the changes enhance what one lobby group politely calls "the u of judgment by management."
④European ministers instantly demanded that the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) do likewi. The IASB says it does not want to act without overall planning, but the pressure to fold when it completes it reconstruction of rules later this year is strong. Charlie McCreevy, a European commissioner, warned the IASB that it did "not live in a political vacuum" but "in the real word" and that Europe could yet develop different rules.
⑤It was banks that were on the wrong planet, with accounts that vastly overvalued asts. Today they argue that market prices overstate loss, becau they largely reflect the temporary illiquidity of markets, not the likely extent of bad debts. The truth will not be known for years. But bank's shares trade below their book value, suggesting that investors are skeptical. And dead markets partly reflect the paralysis of banks which will not ll asts for fear of booking loss, yet are reluctant to buy all tho suppod bargains.
⑥To get the system working again, loss must be recognized and dealt with. America's new plan to buy up toxic asts will not work unless banks mark asts to levels which buyers find attractive. Successful markets require independent and even combative standard-tters. 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 giving in to critics now they are inviting pressure to make more concessions.
