Passage 1对硝基甲苯反倾销调查：一场没有硝烟的贸易博弈

体裁：说明文 / 消息解读（中国时事·经济贸易·非科技）　词数：约 400　难度：★★★☆（对标 C 篇中难偏上）

原文（先做后看解析；仅真超纲词就近标注，其余请语境自猜）

BEIJING — China’s Ministry of Commerce announced on Friday that it had opened an anti-dumping（反倾销） investigation into imports of para-nitrotoluene（对硝基甲苯）, a chemical feedstock used in dyes, pigments, pesticides and medicines, that originate in the European Union. The move follows an application submitted on September 14 by two producers, Jiangsu Huaihe Chemical and Hubei Dongfang Chemical, on behalf of China’s domestic industry.

According to preliminary evidence cited by the ministry’s spokesman, the volume of European imports of the product stayed at a high level between 2022 and 2025 while prices fell by nearly 60 per cent in cumulative terms. The spokesman said such dumped imports had caused injury to domestic producers. The product under investigation is also known as 4-nitrotoluene, with the chemical formula C7H7NO2.

The announcement set two separate periods of examination, a detail that often matters more than it appears. The dumping period runs from July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026, and is used to calculate whether imported goods were sold below fair value. The injury period, covering January 1, 2022 to June 30, 2026, is a longer window chosen to show how the domestic industry has performed while the imports were arriving.

Companies and organizations with an interest in the case must register as stakeholders within twenty days of the notice, providing basic identification details along with figures on how much they export to, import from, produce or sell in relation to the product. Interested parties are entitled to make their views known, and the ministry said it would protect the rights of all parties and reach an objective and fair ruling.

The announcement arrived against a wider backdrop of friction over chemical trade. The spokesman noted that the European Union had opened 28 trade remedy cases against Chinese goods since 2025, roughly half of them involving chemicals, including three recent probes into polyvinyl chloride. He stressed that China has always held a prudent and restrained position in trade remedy matters, and that the Union should address its own economic problems through dialogue rather than pressure.

For an ordinary buyer of dyes, none of this is visible. The substance arrives as a container of pale yellow solid, is fed into a reactor and disappears into a colour no shopper will ever name. Yet the price of that invisible input, and the legal machinery now turning around it, will shape what the finished products cost. Trade disputes are often settled long before anyone notices them, and usually by people they will never meet.

题目（Q1–Q4）

1. What does the passage mainly report about the new Chinese investigation?A. That Chinese producers have agreed among themselves to raise the price of para-nitrotoluene.B. That Chinese chemical makers have complained that the new rules will hurt their own output.C. That officials have begun examining EU imports of para-nitrotoluene for dumping and injury.D. That the European Union has agreed to withdraw three investigations into Chinese chemicals.
2. Why are two different periods of examination set in the announcement?A. Each period answers a separate legal question — whether the prices were unfair, and how local producers were affected.B. One period covers the product’s chemical formula while the other covers its colour and uses.C. The shorter period decides who is allowed to register as a party to the case.D. The longer period gives companies extra time before any duties can be collected.
3. The word "stakeholder" in Paragraph 4 is closest in meaning to ______.A. a chemical plant built close to the investigation siteB. a person or group with an interest in the caseC. a government official appointed to run the enquiryD. a consumer who has recently bought the finished products
4. Why does the writer mention polyvinyl chloride in Paragraph 5?A. To explain how polyvinyl chloride is produced from the chemical in question.B. To argue that trade disputes between the two sides are better settled by pressure than by dialogue.C. To suggest that European chemical producers have stopped competing in China.D. To show that the Chinese action forms part of a wider pattern of trade remedy disputes.

逐题解析

Q1 答案：C

正确原因：细节理解题（跨段综合）。第 1 段 "opened an anti-dumping investigation into imports of para-nitrotoluene ... that originate in the European Union" 交代调查对象与来源地；第 3 段说明调查要判定 "whether imported goods were sold below fair value"（倾销）与 "how the domestic industry has performed"（产业损害）。两句合起来对应 C 的 "for dumping and injury"，属跨段推断式细节，而非单段字面检索。

干扰项：A 无中生有——文中无"中方主动涨价"之意；B 偷换概念——申请人是受到损害的国内产业，损害来自欧盟倾销进口产品，而非新规伤害己方产出；D 张冠李戴且与事实相反——第 5 段写的是欧盟对华发起 28 起调查，欧盟从未表示撤回。

Q2 答案：A ★踮脚

正确原因：推理判断题（隐含因果，跨句配对）。第 3 段分写两句：倾销调查期 "is used to calculate whether imported goods were sold below fair value"；产业损害调查期 "chosen to show how the domestic industry has performed"。两个时间窗各服务于一个法律问题，A 正是这一一对应的概括。原文没有 A 的字面表述，须自行把"两窗"与"两问题"配对，故为踮脚题。

干扰项：B 无中生有——分子式与用途见第 1、2 段，与调查期无关；C 偷换概念——20 天登记期见第 4 段，与调查期长短无关；D 过度推断——第 4 段只要求提供进出口与产销数据，未提缴税或延期。

Q3 答案：B

正确原因：词义猜测题。第 4 段 "Companies and organizations with an interest in the case must register as stakeholders"，前半句即为同句定义式复现，B 可由语境直接推出；后半句要求其提供身份信息与进出口数据，也印证其为与案件存在利害关系的主体。

干扰项：A 无中生有——未提建厂；C 偷换概念——文中只说保障各方权利，未指派官员；D 以偏概全——第 6 段虽提到染料的普通买家，但第 4 段语境限定为有案件利害关系的公司与组织，普通消费者不在此列。

Q4 答案：D ★踮脚

正确原因：细节／目的理解题。第 5 段以 "The announcement arrived against a wider backdrop of friction over chemical trade"（本案发生在更广泛的化工贸易摩擦背景下）设锚点，随后给出欧盟 28 起、约半数涉化工、含 3 起聚氯乙烯调查的数字。举聚氯乙烯并非讲化工知识（用途信息在第 1 段），而是把本案放进"贸易救济争端普遍化"的背景，故 D 正确。解题须先定位语境锚点，再判举例的归属。

干扰项：A 无中生有——第 5 段只说欧盟对聚氯乙烯发起了 3 起调查，未涉生产流程；B 偷换概念且与文中"通过对话协商解决"的表态相反（原文倾向对话而非施压）；C 无中生有——文中无欧洲厂商退出竞争市场的信息。

语篇分析

体裁：说明文 / 消息解读（消息段 ×2 — 程序段 — 背景段 — 评论段）。
结构骨架：新闻事实（立案 + 申请方）→ 立案理由（数量高位、累计跌价近 60%、致产业损害）→ 程序要点（两段调查期各管一事、20 天登记）→ 宏观背景（欧盟 28 起贸易救济调查）→ 评论升华（看不见的原料与看不见的贸易战）。第 6 段是典型的"由物及人"收尾段，主旨、态度类题常从此处生根。
难度提示：Q2 为拉分题，两个时间窗与两个法律问题的对应关系原文用两句分开写，须自行配对，属隐含因果；Q4 考"举例的目的"，须识别第 5 段的语境锚点 "a wider backdrop"。长难句如 "The injury period, covering January 1, 2022 to June 30, 2026, is a longer window chosen to show how the domestic industry has performed while the imports were arriving"，含现在分词作后置定语 + while 引导的时间状语从句。

核心词汇（10 个，含派生词构词法）

词组 / 固定搭配

open / launch an investigation into 对……发起调查on behalf of 代表fall by 下跌（by + 幅度）in cumulative terms 按累计口径register as ... 登记为……make one's views known 陈述意见against a wider backdrop 在更广泛的背景下hold a position 持某种立场

阅读知识点

① 事实类文章也考"目的"，不只考"发生了什么"：Q4 考的是"举聚氯乙烯做什么用"。解法是先找该举例所在句的语境锚点（第 5 段首句 "arrived against a wider backdrop"），锚点既然说"更广泛的贸易摩擦背景"，该例就必然服务于"说明争端普遍化"，选 D。凡新闻里的具体数字、机构名、另一类产品，都要先问一句：它在为哪句话服务？

练习建议：做 Q4 时先用笔圈出第 5 段首句，再看聚氯乙烯出现在锚点之后——出现在锚点之后即为论据，必须回扣锚点来定目的，不能就案例本身想当然。

② 猜词题优先找"同句复现"：Q3 的 stakeholder 前半句 "Companies and organizations with an interest in the case" 就是它的现成释义。若猜词目标词在同句内被定义式复现，正确项几乎锁定，无需通读全段——这是最快的一条解题捷径。

Passage 2睡眠与免疫：为什么熬一晚不算，熬一周才算

体裁：科普说明 + 研究综述（外刊·生理学·免疫学）　词数：约 440　难度：★★★★☆（对标 D 篇外刊高难）

原文（先做后看解析；仅真超纲词就近标注，其余请语境自猜）

For years, sleep researchers reported a puzzle. Laboratory volunteers who were kept awake for a single night often showed no measurable change in the blood markers of inflammation. Yet population surveys, which by their nature capture months of ordinary life rather than one enforced night, repeatedly linked poor sleep with higher levels of those same markers. If a short night of sleep did nothing, why did chronic sleep loss appear to do so much? The disagreement between clean experiments and messy real life sat unresolved until a recent meta-analysis（元分析） put the missing condition on the table: duration.

The updated review pooled data from 35 studies involving 887 participants, sorting laboratory sleep loss into two categories that earlier work had tended to blur together. A single night of total or partial deprivation, it turns out, was not associated with significant shifts in C-reactive protein or interleukin-6. By contrast, protocols that restricted sleep across several nights — on average about eight nights at roughly four and a half hours — produced a marked rise in both markers. The inflammatory response, in other words, appears to require repetition before it becomes visible.

One marker remained stubbornly uninformative. Tumour necrosis factor alpha showed no consistent relationship with either sleep disturbance or sleep duration, in this review and in earlier ones. Immunologists have a ready explanation: cytokines are not interchangeable, and the inflammatory system that defends the body against infection is not the same system that generates the chronic low-grade inflammation behind heart disease. A marker that tracks one may have little reason to track the other.

That distinction matters for how such findings reach public advice. A meta-analysis published in Current Biology in 2023 examined antibody responses to influenza and hepatitis vaccines, and found that objectively measured short sleep was linked to a substantial reduction in the seroprotection（血清保护水平） that vaccination is supposed to deliver. The self-reported studies in the same review told a weaker story, a difference researchers attribute to participants tending to overestimate how long they had slept. Sleep guidelines arrived at similar figures from a different direction: seven to nine hours for adults, a floor rather than a target.

What none of this research produces is a licence for guilt. Nobody concludes from these papers that a single late night causes lasting harm, and the distinction is not academic, because the population data on which public-health advice rests are, by definition, built from sustained restriction rather than isolated lapses. The practical upshot is blunter than the science: consistency of sleep over a stretch of weeks appears to matter more than the quality of any single night, and the body appears to keep a running account of the debt.

题目（Q5–Q8）

1. What did earlier laboratory experiments find about one night of lost sleep?A. They produced clear rises in the blood markers of inflammation.B. They found that the effects appeared two months after the experiment ended.C. They produced no measurable change in those blood markers.D. They could not be compared with population surveys because the markers differed.
2. What made the updated meta-analysis different from the earlier work it reviewed?A. It followed the same participants across a longer period of time.B. It separated single-night sleep loss from repeated sleep restriction.C. It reported the results as proportions of the general population rather than laboratory averages.D. It relied on self-reported sleep rather than laboratory observation.
3. What does the passage imply by saying the body "keeps a running account of the debt"?A. That the effects of short sleep build up gradually rather than appearing at once.B. That the body records the total hours of sleep lost over a lifetime.C. That people who lose sleep in this way recover fully within a few nights.D. That people who sleep less than seven hours require additional medical treatment.
4. What is the main idea of the passage?A. Sleep research on immunity has produced findings that cannot be reconciled.B. Public health guidelines for adults should be rewritten around seven rather than nine hours.C. The immune response to lost sleep depends on how long the loss lasts, so consistency matters more than an occasional bad night.D. Vaccination becomes noticeably less effective after a short period of poor sleep.

逐题解析

Q5 答案：C

正确原因：细节理解题（跨段综合）。第 1 段 "Laboratory volunteers who were kept awake for a single night often showed no measurable change in the blood markers of inflammation"，第 2 段再次确认 "A single night of total or partial deprivation ... was not associated with significant shifts"，两处同义复现锁定 C。

干扰项：A 与 "no measurable change" 相反，属张冠李戴（显著升高出现在多晚限制性睡眠的条件里）；B 无中生有——"two months" 是疫苗抗体衰减类比，见第 4 段，与单夜实验无关；D 过度推断——文中未说实验与调査的标记物不同，反而是同一批标记物（CRP、IL-6）造成对照。

Q6 答案：B

正确原因：推理判断题（一步推断）。第 2 段 "sorting laboratory sleep loss into two categories that earlier work had tended to blur together"，随后即"单夜"与"多晚限制"两类分别得出不同结果，可推知新版元分析的差异之处正在于把两类情形分开处理，故 B。

干扰项：A 无中生有——文中未提及长期跟踪同一批受试者；C 无中生有——文中并未涉及把实验结果折算为人群比例；D 张冠李戴——该元分析恰恰依赖实验室客观测量，2023 年疫苗综述才区分"自报"与"客观"两组数据，且指出自报组结论更弱，与本段无关。

Q7 答案：A

正确原因：推理判断题（形象化表述还原）。末段先说单晚不致长期伤害，再写 "the body appears to keep a running account of the debt"（身体像在记账、把欠的睡眠债累计起来），结合第 2 段"炎症反应需要重复才显现"，可推出代价是累积渐变而非一次成灾，选 A。原文用比喻，须还原为本义，属一步推断，未跨两步。

干扰项：B 偷换概念——"debt" 指累积的生理代价，不是记录一生总睡眠时数；C 程度范围错位——与第 5 段"持续性限制才显现代价"的结论相反，把过程说成可迅速复原；D 过度推断——文中确提疫苗效力下降，但那是第 4 段的具体研究，且 D 把"需要额外治疗"这一层凭空加上，属无中生有＋过度推断叠加。

Q8 答案：C ★踮脚

正确原因：主旨大意题（须覆盖全文结构）。全文骨架为"谜题（实验与人群数据矛盾）→ 分层解谜（元分析按持续时间分类，单夜无效、多晚升高）→ 边界（TNF-α 不响应）→ 应用（疫苗抗体与睡眠时长）→ 落点（不可苛责单晚，连续性更重要）"。C 完整覆盖"持续时间决定免疫反应、故规律作息重于偶发熬夜"这一主线，且不过度。A 与第 2 段已解决的"谜题"矛盾；C 以偏概全（文中未主张改写指南，且指南只作旁证）；D 只取第 4 段一个研究，是局部段落而非全文结构。

干扰项：A 与第 2 段"updated review... sorted into two categories"所解决的矛盾相反；B 以偏概全——第 4 段引 7–9 小时是"a floor rather than a target"的旁证，全文未提出改写指南；D 以偏概全——把第 4 段疫苗研究当作全文主旨，遗漏第 2、3、5 段。

语篇分析

体裁：科普说明 + 研究综述（提出谜题 → 给出解法 → 划定边界 → 应用外推 → 落回日常）。
结构骨架：现象冲突（干净实验 vs 杂乱现实）— 分层归因（单夜 vs 多晚）— 例外说明（TNF-α 不响应）— 领域外推（疫苗抗体）— 结论与克制（连续性 > 单次完美）。这是外刊科学报道最典型的"矛盾—解决"骨架，主旨题必须同时覆盖"持续时间"与"克制"两层，只答一层即为以偏概全。
难度提示：Q8 为拉分题，B 与 A/C/D 的差别不在某个词，而在"是否覆盖全文结构与结论的克制层"；Q7 考比喻还原，末句 "the body appears to keep a running account of the debt" 须还原为"累积效应"。长难句如 "A meta-analysis published in Current Biology in 2023 examined antibody responses to influenza and hepatitis vaccines, and found that objectively measured short sleep was linked to a substantial reduction in the seroprotection that vaccination is supposed to deliver"，主干与 that-定语从句之间插入过去分词状语；又如 "Public-health advice rests on population data that are, by definition, built from sustained restriction rather than isolated lapses"，含插入语与 rather than 对比。

核心词汇（12 个，含派生词构词法）

词组 / 固定搭配

report a puzzle 提出谜题be linked to 与……相关联sort ... into categories 将……分类blur together 混同；界限模糊by contrast 相比之下in association with 与……一同（研究中的固定表述）a floor rather than a target 是底线而非目标the practical upshot 实际结论

阅读知识点

① "矛盾—解决"骨架的主旨题解法：像 Q8 这类外刊科学说明文，先在草稿纸画出各段功能标签（第1段=谜题、第2段=解法、第3段=例外、第4段=外推、第5段=结论），再问自己"作者最后想让读者记住哪一句"。B 之所以对，是因为它同时含有"机制结论（取决于持续时间）"与"态度结论（不可苛责单晚、连续性更重要）"；D 只覆盖第 4 段，是典型的"以偏概全"。

练习建议：做完 Q8 后，用一句话在草稿纸上复述全文主旨，再逐字对照选项——凡选项字数相近却只覆盖一段的，一律先判错。

② 比喻句还原法：Q7 的 "keep a running account of the debt"（记账式的欠债）是形象化表达。还原时问两个问题：全文前面刚说了什么（多晚限制才升高炎症）？"debt" 搭配的是谁（长期睡眠债）？两个答案合起来就是"累积渐变"，选 A。凡遇 running account、double-edged sword、scaffold 这类词，一律先拆成"动作＋对象"再回扣前文。