Question

Nearly a quarter century after a German boy threw a message in a bottle off a ship in the Baltic Sea, he's received an answer.

A 13­year­old Russian, Daniil Korotkikh, was walking with his parents on a beach when he saw something lying in the sand.

“I saw that bottle and it looked interesting, ” Korotkikh told The Associated Press on Tuesday.“It looked like a German beer bottle and there was a message inside.”

It said, “My name is Frank, and I'm five years old.My dad and I are travelling on a ship to Denmark.If you find this letter, please write back to me, and I will write back to you.” The letter, dated 1987, included an address in the town of Coesfeld.

The boy in the letter, Frank Uesbeck, is now 29.His parents still live at the letter's address.

The Russian boy and the German man met each other earlier this month through an Internet video link.The Russian boy said he did not believe that the bottle actually spent 24 years in the sea.He believed it had been hidden under the sand where he found it for a long time.

Uesbeck was especially happy that he was able to have a positive effect on a life of a young person far away from Germany.“It's really a wonderful story, ” he said.“And who knows? Perhaps one day we will actually be able to arrange a meeting in person.”

1.What is this passage mainly about?

A．Message in a bottle.    B．A beautiful beer bottle.

C．Travelling on a ship.   D．Meeting an old friend.

2.When the German boy threw the bottle into the sea, ________．

A．he was going back home

B．he was already 29 years old

C．he was walking with his parents on a beach

D．he was travelling to Denmark by ship with his dad

3.According to the text, which of the following statements is TRUE?

A．Korotkikh's parents still live in the town of Coesfeld.

B．The German boy did not believe that the bottle actually spent 24 years in the sea.

C．Frank Uesbeck and Daniil Korotkikh have met each other in person.

D．Daniil Korotkikh and Frank Uesbeck have got in touch with each other.

4.Why was Uesbeck very happy when he got the information of the 24 years' message bottle?

A．Because he could have a new friend.

B．Because the two boys could surf the Internet together.

C．Because he finally got what he had lost.

D．Because he could have a positive influence on a life of a young person.

Answer

1.A

2.D

3.D

4.D

【解析】

试题分析：本文属于记叙文，讲述了一个德国男孩大约在25年前扔下一个漂流瓶，瓶中留下了一些个人信息，日前他收到了回应。

1.A 主旨大意题。根据文章第一段Nearly a quarter century after a German boy threw a message in a bottle off a ship in the Baltic Sea, he's received an answer.可知本文主要讲述了一个德国男孩大约在25年前扔下一个漂流瓶，瓶中留下了一些个人信息，日前他收到了回应。所以A项“瓶中信息”符合文章中心思想。故A正确。

2.D 细节理解题。根据第四段第一句It said, “My name is Frank, and I'm five years old. My dad and I are travelling on a ship to Denmark....可知这个漂流瓶是在这个男孩和父亲去丹麦旅游的时候扔下的。故D正确。

3.D 细节理解题。根据第六段第一句The Russian boy and the German man met each other earlier this month through an Internet video link.可知这两个人通过网络取得了联系。故D正确。

4.D 细节理解题。根据文章最后一段第一句Uesbeck was especially happy that he was able to have a positive effect on a life of a young person far away from Germany.可知Uesbeck高兴的原因是他能够别人的生活对来积极的影响。故D正确。

【名师点睛】

本文【小题2、3、4】都属于细节理解题，对于这种题型，出题者经常会设置一些干扰项来迷惑考生。一般说来，阅读理解中细节理解题的干扰项的设置手法体现在下列几个原则：

1．包含项原则

在答案选项分析中，假如对A选项的理解概括了对其它三项 (或其中某一项)的理、解，那么我们就说选项A与其他三项是包含或概括关系，包含项A往往就是正确答案。如在“花”与“玫瑰”两选项中，正确答案肯定是“花”，花包含了玫瑰,因为玫瑰肯定是花，但花并不一定是玫瑰。

2．正反项原则

所谓正反项，是指两选项陈述的命题完全相矛盾。根据形式逻辑排中律知识：两个相互矛盾的判断不能都是假的，其中必有一真。所以在阅读理解中，假如四选项中A、B互为正反项，那我们通常先排除C、D项，正确答案一般在A、B项当中取其一。

3．委婉项原则

所谓委婉，这里是指说话不能说死，要留有余地。阅读理解选项中语气平和、委婉的往往是正确答案。这些选项一般含有不十分肯定或试探性语气的表达，如：probably, possibly, may, usually, might, most of, more or less,relatively, be likely to, not necessary, although, yet, in addition，tend to，be liable to等等，而含有绝对语气的表达往往不是正确答案，如：must, always,

never, the most,all, every, any, merely, only, completely, none, hardly, already等等。

4．同形项原则

几个选项如存在形式与结构上的相似，那它们就互为同形项。同形项组可喻为高尔夫球场上的“果岭”，而正确答案就是果岭上的“球洞”。命题者往往先将正确答案设置在一个大命题范围，然后通过语言形式的细微变化来考察考生的理解能力与分析能力。同形项原则告诉我们：词汇与句法结构相似的选项一般存在有正确答案。

5．常识项原则

在议论文当中，那些符合一般常识，意义深刻富有哲理，符合一般规律，属于普遍现象的选项往往是正确答案。

6．因果项原则

阅读理解逻辑推理基本都是通过因果链进行的，前因后果，一步步循序渐进。然而，在推理题型的选项中，有的选项会推理不到位（止于前因），或者推理过头（止于后果），这就是所谓的干扰项。因果项原则规定：假如四个选项中有两项互为同一事物推理过程中的因果关系，那么正确答案就是这两个因果项中的其中之一。如果因项可以产生几个结果，那么答案就是因项；如果果项可以对应几个原因，那么答案就是果项。

考点：考查记叙文阅读