托福词汇选择题是一个艰难的分级过程

　　阅读介绍句：在经过了前面做题的过程之后，已经把原文已经读过一遍了，但是可能因为做题而感到有点混乱，而介绍句一般是对原文的一句话总结，认真读一下介绍句就会对原文的结构有更清晰的概念，有利于下面的正确选出正确选项。

　　首先让我们来了解一下这个题型，让我们把亲爱的OG翻到50页，就会看到这道题的考点在于：“对文章的主要观点和相对重要信息的理解和辨识能力……排除文中次要信息和未提及的信息。”所以，对于这种题型的正确选项可能是以下：1.全文主旨;2.文中某一部分的主旨。而错误选项就有可能是以下：1.细节，不重要的事例;2.无中生有或扭曲了原观点。

　　如何解题呢?那么我们分两种情况~~

　　第一种情况：矮油，终于最后一题鸟~吓!怎么只剩下十秒了~~!!怎么办呢~!

　　解法：选最长的选项(←.←我是认真的!千万不要空着交~)

　　第二种情况：时间充分，淡定心情认真做~

　　解法：

　　首先，阅读介绍句：在经过了前面做题的过程之后，已经把原文已经读过一遍了，但是可能因为做题而感到有点混乱，而介绍句一般是对原文的一句话总结，认真读一下介绍句就会对原文的结构有更清晰的概念，有利于下面的正确选出正确选项。

　　第二步，把六个选项看一遍，排除明显扭曲了原文观点的选项，认出可能是重复原文中细节、例证的选项，留下不确定需要重新参考原文的选项以及确定是正确的选项。其实这是一个分级的过程，把选项从最不可能到最可能分级。

　　第三步，从留下不确定需要重新参考原文的选项句中提炼出关键词，找回原文的相关出处，对照选项和出处段落的中心是否一致来确定取舍该选项。

　　第四步，如果留下来的确定的选项不够三个，那么再回去看可能是重复原文中细节、例证的选项。有一些表述原文重要观点的选项可能是因为原文本身的主题看上比较像细节而被当成重复细节的选项，这个时候再看一遍介绍句，感受一下原文的主旨和结构，再做出选择。

　　那么哪些选项有可能是重复原文细节的选项呢?一般情况下，这些选项中可能存在以下成分：修饰成分，主语是细节或者事例，引用人物言论，数字，对比或者比较。如果选项有了这些成分，大家就可以先把它放在“待定区”再做考证。

　　Pastoralism in Ancient Inner Eurasia (TPO14)

　　Pastoralism is a lifestyle in which economic activity is based primarily on　livestock. Archaeological evidence suggests that by 3000 B.C., and perhaps even　earlier, there had emerged on the steppes of Inner Eurasia the distinctive types　of pastoralism that were to dominate the region’s history for several millennia.　Here, the horse was already becoming the animal of prestige in many regions,　though transportation and warfare that explains why Inner Eurasian pastoralism　proved the most mobile and the most militaristic of all major forms of　pastoralism. The emergence and spread of pastoralism had a profound impact on　the history of Inner Eurasia, and also, indirectly, on the parts of Asia and　Europe just outside this area. In particular, pastoralism favors a mobile　lifestyle, and this mobility helps to explain the impact of pastoralist　societies on this part of the world.　The mobility of pastoralist societies reflects their dependence on animal　based foods. While agriculturalists rely on domesticated plants, pastoralists　rely on domesticated animals. As a result, pastoralists, like carnivores in　general, occupy a higher position on the food chain. All else being equal, this　means they must food, clothing, and other necessities. So pastoralism is a more　extensive lifeway than farming is.

　　However, the larger the terrain used to　support a group, the harder principles imply a strong tendency within　pastoralist lifeways toward nomadism (a mobile lifestyle). As the archaeologist　Roger Cribb puts it, “The greater the degree of pastoralism, the stronger the　tendency toward nomadism.” A modern Turkic nomad interviewed by Cribb commented:　“The more animals you have, the farther you have to move.”　Nomadism has further consequences. It means that pastoralist societies　occupy and can influence very large territories. This is particularly true of　horse mobile of all major forms of pastoralism. So, it is no accident that with　the appearance of pastoralist societies there appear large areas that share　similar cultural, ecological, and even linguistic features. By the late fourth　millennium B.C., there is already evidence of large culture zones reaching from　Eastern Europe to the western border of Mongolia. Perhaps the most striking sign　of mobility is the fact that by the third millennium B.C., most pastoralists in　this huge region spoke related languages ancestral to the modern Indo-European　languages. The remarkable mobility and range of pastoral societies explain, in　part, why so many linguists have argued that the Indo-European languages began　their astonishing expansionist career not among farmers in Anatolia (present-day　Turkey), but among early pastoralists from Inner Eurasia. Such theories imply　that the Indo-European languages evolved not in Neolithic (10,000 to 3,000 B.C.)　Anatolia, but among the foraging communities of the cultures in the region of　the Don and Dnieper rivers which took up stock breeding and began to exploit the　neighboring steppes.

　　Nomadism also subjects pastoralist communities to strict rules of　portability. If you are constantly on the move, you cannot afford to accumulate　large material surpluses. Such rules limit variations in accumulated material　goods between pastoralist households (though they may also encourage a taste for　portable goods of high value such as silks or jewelry). So, by and large,　nomadism implies a high degree of self-sufficiency and inhibits the appearance　of an extensive division of labor. Inequalities of wealth and rank certainly　exist, and have probably existed in most pastoralist societies, but except in　periods of military conquest, they are normally too slight to generate the　stable, hereditary hierarchies that are usually implied by the use of the term　class. Inequalities of gender have also existed in pastoralist societies, but　they seem to have been softened by the absence of steep hierarchies of wealth in　most communities, and also by the requirement that women acquire most of the　skills of men, including, often, their military skills.