We understand that the segregation of our consciousness into present, past, and future is both a fiction and an oddly self-referential framework; your present was part of your mother’s future, and your children’s past will be in part your present. Nothing is generally wrong with structuring our consciousness of time in this conventional manner, and it often works well enough. (a)In the case of climate change, however, the sharp division of time into past, present, and future has been desperately misleading and has, most importantly, hidden from view the extent of the responsibility of those of us alive now. The narrowing of our consciousness of time smooths the way to divorcing ourselves from responsibility for developments in the past and the future with which our lives are (b)in fact deeply intertwined. In the climate case, it is not that ( ). It is that the realities are obscured from view by the partitioning of time, and so questions of responsibility toward the past and future do not arise naturally.[3점]

*segregation: 분리 ** intertwine: 뒤얽히게 하다 *** obscure: 흐릿하게 하다

① all our efforts prove to be effective and are thus encouraged

② sufficient scientific evidence has been provided to us

③ future concerns are more urgent than present needs

④ our ancestors maintained a different frame of time

⑤ we face the facts but then deny our responsibility

이 문제의 포인트는,

1. (a) 부분을 읽고, “기후” = segregation(X)

2. (b)를 읽고 선지 5번의 “the facts” = segregation(X)(=“얽혀 있다(intertwined)”와 같은 말 다른 표현)

3. 녹색 부분이 정확히 같은 표현이므로 앞에 부정어 not이 있기에 빈칸의 답은 segregation(O)

4. 선지 5번을 보고 “the facts = segregation(X)”인데 앞의 “사실들”에 대한 “책임”을 “거부 한다”는 방향성을 반대로 만드는 코드가 나왔으므로 결국 segregation(O)

의 과정을 거쳐서 문제를 풀었는지가 굉장히 중요합니다. 만약 이 과정을 보셨는데도 이해가 되지 않는다면 유기적인 독해가 되지 않을 수도 있는 가능성이 있으니 고려해 보셔야 합니다.

2023학년도 대수능 37번 순서 문제(정답률 32%)

The most commonly known form of results-based pricing is a practice called contingency pricing, used by lawyers.

(A) Therefore, only an outcome in the client’s favor is compensated. From the client’s point of view, the pricing makes sense in part because most clients in these cases are unfamiliar with and possibly intimidated by law firms. Their biggest fears are high fees for a case that may take years to settle.

(B) By using contingency pricing, clients are ensured that they pay no fees until they receive a settlement. In these and other instances of contingency pricing, the economic value of the service is hard to determine before the service, and providers develop a price that allows them to share the risks and rewards of delivering value to the buyer.

(C) Contingency pricing is the major way that personal injury and certain consumer cases are billed. In this approach, lawyers do not receive fees or payment until the case is settled, when they are paid a percentage of the money that the client receives.[3점]

* intimidate: 위협하다

① (A) － (C) － (B)

② (B) － (A) － (C)

③ (B) － (C) － (A)

④ (C) － (A) － (B)

⑤ (C) － (B) － (A)

이 문제는 딱 한 가지만 말씀드리겠습니다. 많은 분이 실제 시험장에서 5번인 (C)-(B)-(A)를 답으로 해서 틀리셨는데(무려 43%) (B)-(A)로 연결할 경우 (B)의 마지막 문장에서는 구매자인 client가 공급자인 lawyers와 risks를 share하는 문장이 나옵니다. 즉, 대상인 client에 대한 동사의 방향성을 살펴보면,

(B) client = 위험을 나눠가짐(불리함 존재(O))

(A) client = 유리한 것만(only) 변호사에게 지불됨(불리함 존재(X))

대상에 대한 동사 관계가 의미적으로 “반대”인데 역접이나 대체가 아닌 Therefore가 있으므로 논리적인 비약이 생겨 (B)-(A)는 될 수가 없다는 사실이 중요합니다.

이번 수능이 여러분에게 영어 공부를 할 때 어디에 주의를 해야 하는지에 대한 분기점 역할을 하기를 바라며, 문제의 해결 방법에 대해 더 궁금하신 분들은 첨부 파일을 읽어보시면 많은 도움이 되실 거라 생각합니다. 오늘도 좋은 하루 되십시오.^^