Question

I have been consistently opposed to feeding a baby regularly. As a doctor, mother and scientist in child development I believe there is nothing to recommend it, from the baby's point of view.

Mothers, doctors and nurse alike have no idea of where a baby's blood sugar level lies. All we know is that a low level is harmful to brain development and makes a baby easily annoyed. In this state, the baby is difficult to calm down and sleep is impossible. The baby asks for attention by crying and searching for food with its mouth.

It is not just unkind but also dangerous to say a four-hourly feeding schedule will make a baby satisfied. The first of the experts to advocate a strict clock-watching schedule was Dr Frederic Truby King who was against feeding in the night. I've never heard anything so ridiculous. Baby feeding shouldn't follow a timetable set by the mum. What is important is feeding a baby in the best way, though it may cause some inconvenience in the first few weeks.

Well, at last we have copper-bottomed research that supports demand feeding and points out the weaknesses of strictly timed feeding . The research finds out that babies who are fed on demand do better at school at age 5, 7 , 11 and 14, than babies fed according to the clock. By the age of 8, their IQ（智商）scores are four to five percent higher than babies fed by a rigid timetable. This research comes from Oxford and Essex University using a sample（樣本）of 10,419 children born in the early 1990s,taking account of parental education, family income, a child's sex and age, the mother's health and feeling style. These results don't surprise me. Feeling according to schedule runs the risk of harming the rapidly growing brain by taking no account of sinking blood sugar levels.

I hope this research will put an end to advocating strictly timed baby feeling practices.

1.What does the author think about Dr King?

A．He is strict

B．He is unkind

C．He has the wrong idea.

D．He sets a timetable for mothers

2.The word copper-bottomed in Paragraph 4 is closest in meaning to _________

A．basic             B．reliable           C．surprising         D．interesting

3.What does the research tell us about feeling a baby on demand?

A．The baby will sleep well.

B．The baby will have its brain harmed.

C．The baby will have a low blood sugar level.

D．The baby will grow to be wiser by the age of 8.

4.The author supports feeling the baby_______.

A．in the night

B．every four hours

C．whenever it wants food

D．according to its blood sugar level

 

Answer 1

【答案】

1.C

2.B

3.D

4.C

【解析】

試題分析：本文典型的議論文，論點是反對定期喂養嬰兒。論據：一是我們不知道嬰兒的血糖的情況。二是文中例舉了定期喂養的害處。三是實驗表明，按需喂養比定期喂養的孩子更聰明。結論:希望結束定期喂養的習慣。

1.細節理解題。根據I've never heard anything so ridiculous. wrong idea和ridiculous“荒謬的”兩者屬于同義重現，故選C。

2.詞義猜測題。basic基本的； reliable可靠的； surprising吃驚的； interesting有趣的。根據第四和第五段的實驗結果的具體描述可知，故選B。

3.細節理解題。根據The research finds out that babies who are fed on demand do better at school at age 5, 7 , 11 and 14, than babies fed according to the clock. By the age of 8, their IQ（智商）scores are four to five percent higher than babies fed by a rigid timetable. wiser更加聰明的，故選D。

4.細節理解題。根據I have been consistently opposed to feeding a baby regularly. whenever it wants food什么時候需要就喂孩子，故選C。

考點：健康保健類短文閱讀。

點評：本段主要考查細節題。細節題通常采用詞語和句型轉換的形式來取代原文中的表述，命題者在出這類題時慣用“偷梁換柱、張冠李戴”的手法來迷惑考生，所以正確理解題干和信息句的意義是關鍵。