昨天的句子确实杀伤力挺大的。
有两点需要说明：（记好这两点！阅读至少提高四分！）
1.对于不完整题干一定要补全！
D选项和题干的完整表达是：
Digital divide is something considered positive today.
今天数字鸿沟被认为是积极正面的事物。
2.对于短句一定要多问一下最完整的语义是什么！
There are reasons to be optimistic.
我们有理由感到乐观。
这个句子明显语义就是不完整的。
问：对什么有理由感到乐观？
答：对于抵抗“数字鸿沟”这个危险（looming danger）感到乐观
真题链接：
请问2004年第四篇文章第三段第一句的完整语义是什么？
请问2013年第三篇文章第三段第一句的完整语义是什么？
请问2014年第二篇文章第三段第一句的完整语义是什么？
请问2014年第三篇文章第二段第一句的完整语义是什么？
（这就叫体贴！记得点赞！）
我再举一些例子说明一下昨天的句子：
例子1：
“癌症是危险的。但早就有一些治疗癌症方法了，只是你们还不知道。所以有理由乐观。”
你不能说癌症是积极正面的事吧！
例子2：
现在人们开始关注抑郁症了。我二十年前就谈到过抑郁症这个若隐若现的危险了。当时你们没有注意到这个危险。同时没有被人们注意到的是抵抗抑郁症的一些积极正面的力量。所有现在我们有理由感到乐观。
你不能说抑郁症是积极正面的事吧！
（上面就是五夜十篇报名链接！）
今天的句子：
The increase in numbers of married women employed outside the home in the twentieth century had less to do with the mechanization of house work and an increase in leisure time for these women than it did with their own economic necessity and with high marriage rates that shrank the available pool of single women workers, previously, in many cases, the only women employers would hire.
思考题：
More married women were employed due to the high marriage rates.
词汇突破：
1.have less / more to do with… 与…有关(表示原因)（2000日本人那篇文章最后一段就 用了这个表达！）
2.Economic necessity 经济需求
3.pool of single women workers 单身女工的资源
4.high marriage rates 高结婚率
切分：
在主干中出现了一个比较结构：
A had less to do with B and C than A did with D and E
A = The increase
B= mechanization
C= an increase
D= their own economic necessity
E= high marriage rates
并列中加不加with都是可以的；
(与其说A与BC 有关，还不如说与DE有关。)
其他成分: high marriage rates后出现定语从句
that shrank the available pool of single women workers, previously, in many cases, the only women employers would hire.
进一步分析：
1.the only women（whom） employers would hire.
The ONLY women = single women workers
同位语中加上一个定语从句其中whom被省略了。
2., previously, in many cases状语
参考译文： 20世纪，在家庭外被雇佣的女性人数增加了，这与其说是由于家务活的机器化和闲暇时间的增加，还不如说是由于女性自身的经济需求和由于高结婚率。正是高结婚率减少了单身女工劳动力资源的数量，而在这之前很多情况下，她们是雇主们会雇佣的唯一女性。
翻译点拨： 动态名词，独立成句，都用上了。
所以思考题：
More married women were employed due to the high marriage rates.
由于结婚率高，雇用了更多的已婚妇女。
这个说法是正确的！
明天的句子：
There is one more point I feel I ought to touch on. Recently I heard a well-known television personality declare that he was against advertising because it persuades rather than informs. He was drawing excessively fine distinctions. Of course advertising seeks to persuade.If its message were confined merely to information — and that in itself would be difficult if not impossible to achieve, for even a detail such as the choice of the colour of a shirt is subtly persuasive — advertising would be so boring that no one would pay any attention. But perhaps that is what the well-known television personality wants.
思考题：
53. The author deems that the well-known TV personality is ________.
[A] very precise in passing his judgement on advertising
[B] interested in nothing but the buyers' attention
[C] correct in telling the difference between persuasion and information
[D] obviously partial in his views on advertising
