외국어 이비에스 수특, 인수 보신분들>>>>>>>>>>>>

게시글 주소: https://orbi.kr/0002878060

혹시 작년 외국어 이비에스 책들이 단어가 엄청 어렵고 지문들도 어려웠잖아요

이번 이비에스 외국어는 단어 수준이 작년이랑 비교했을 때 어렵나요?? 아니면 비슷하나요??

아니면 외국어도 언어처럼 쉬워졌나요????

작년이랑 비교했을 때 단어수준도 궁금하고 지문 수준도 궁금합니다.

팔로우 1

[ 수학의 단권화 ]　9종 교과서 수능 전 범위를 10일 만에?

[ 규토 N제 수학 시리즈 2026 ]　빠르게 1등급 도약! 개념, 기출, 자작 올인원 교재

[ Mechanica 물리학1 시리즈 2026 ]　한 권으로 끝내는 전설의 물리학1 개념서

0 XDK (+0)

유익한 글을 읽었다면 작성자에게 XDK를 선물하세요.

단 하루만 [341763]

쪽지 보내기

최근 게시글 · 더보기
14/12/30 16:49 aab 과탐 bab과탐 요즘 추세는???
13/02/01 01:46 오르비 동영상들 말이에요
12/09/01 01:13 독동님들 도와주시면 안될까요???>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
12/06/28 22:28 한 문장만 해석 좀 부탁드려요
12/06/25 12:37 우리나라 속담 이거 뭔지 아시는 분 있나요???????????

알림
스크랩
신고

hand in hand · 370703 · 12/04/25 01:51

쉬워진듯

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
단 하루만 · 341763 · 12/04/25 01:52 · MS 2010

어휘수준이랑 지문수준 다 쉬워졌나요???

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
GeonuPark · 367317 · 12/04/25 01:53 · MS 2011

작년도 330제 말고는 어렵진 않았어요.

나머지 시리즈는 어렵다기 보다 더러운 게 몇 있었죠.

제가 풀어본 바로는 거기서 거기인 거 같아요.

지문 질이 좋아진 건 명백해요.

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
단 하루만 · 341763 · 12/04/25 01:59 · MS 2010

거기서 거기다라는 말씀은

작년도와 비슷하다는 말이신가요??

330제 난이도가 헬이었는데

330제 보다는 쉽죠??

그러니까 작년도 시리즈와 올해 시리즈와 비슷한 난이도라는 말이시죠?

대응되게??

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
GeonuPark · 367317 · 12/04/25 02:00 · MS 2011

전 그저 제 생각을 말했을 뿐이예요..

제 말이 진리는 아니니 직접 풀어보시는 수밖에 없어요.

330제 보다는 당연히 쉽죠.

EBS를 별로 안 좋아하는 사람으로서 더 해드릴 말이 없네요ㅠㅠ

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
철지배 · 398557 · 12/04/25 02:04 · MS 2011

작년 수능완성의 지문 몇개는 정말...ㅎㅣ히

트랙터는 아직도 기억나네여

암튼 EBS는 지문 짜깁기의 결정체!

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
GeonuPark · 367317 · 12/04/25 02:06 · MS 2011

영화 어쩌고 그 지문 전 어려운 지 잘 모르겠던데..

외국어 과목 특성상 독해가 어려운 게 어려운 지문이지 논리로 이해 안 되는 지문은 거의 없지 않나요?

해석만 되면 다 맞출 자신 있는데ㅠㅠ

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
철지배 · 398557 · 12/04/25 02:12 · MS 2011

So far we have considered the sense and reference only of such expres-
sions, words, or signs as we have called proper names. We now inquire
concerning the sense and reference for an entire declarative sentence.
Such a sentence contains a thought.* Is this thought, now, to be regarded
as its sense or its reference? Let us assume for the time being that the
sentence has reference. If we now replace one word of the sentence
by another having the same reference, but a different sense, this can
have no bearing upon the reference of the sentence. Yet we can see that
in such a case the thought changes; since, e.g., the thought in the sentence
`The morning star is a body illuminated by the Sun' differs from that in
the sentence `The evening star is a body illuminated by the Sun.' Any-
body who did not know that the evening star is the morning star might
hold the one thought to be true, the other false. The thought, accordingly,
cannot be the reference of the sentence, but must rather be considered
as the sense. What is the position now with regard to the reference?
Have we a right even to inquire about it? Is it possible that a sentence
as a whole has only a sense, but no reference? At any rate, one might
expect that such sentences occur, just as there are parts of sentences
having sense but no reference. And sentences which contain proper
names without reference will be of this kind. The sentence `Odysseus
was set ashore at Ithaca while sound asleep' obviously has a sense.
But since it is doubtful whether the name `Odysseus,' occurring therein,
has reference, it is also doubtful whether the whole sentence has one. Yet
it is certain, nevertheless, that anyone who seriously took the sentence to
be true or false would ascribe to the name `Odysseus' a reference, not
merely a sense; for it is of the reference of the name that the predicate is
affirmed or denied. Whoever does not admit the name has reference can
neither apply nor withhold the predicate. But in that case it would be
superfluous to advance to the reference of the name; one could be satis-
fied with the sense, if one wanted to go no further than the thought. If it
were a question only of the sense of the sentence, the thought, it would be
unnecessary to bother with the reference of a part of the sentence; only the
sense, not the reference, of the part is relevant to the sense of the whole
sentence. The thought remains the same whether `Odysseus' has refer-
ence or not. The fact that we concern ourselves at all about the reference of
a part of the sentence indicates that we generally recognize and expect a
reference for the sentence itself. The thought loses value for us as soon as
we recognize that the reference of one of its parts is missing. We are
therefore justified in not being satisfied with the sense of a sentence,
and in inquiring also as to its reference. But now why do we want every
proper name to have not only a sense, but also a reference? Why is the
thought not enough for us? Because, and to the extent that, we are
concerned with its truth value. This is not always the case. In hearing an
epic poem, for instance, apart from the euphony of the language we are
interested only in the sense of the sentences and the images and feelings
thereby aroused. The question of truth would cause us to abandon aes-
thetic delight for an attitude of scientific investigation. Hence it is a matter
of no concern to us whether the name `Odysseus,' for instance, has
reference, so long as we accept the poem as a work of art.* It is the striving
for truth that drives us always to advance from the sense to the reference.

이런거는 독해는 되도 논리로는 이해가 안될듯

한문장 한문장은 매우 쉬운데 전체적으로 무슨 말을 하는지 알기가 힘드니 논리이해가 어려운 글

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
단 하루만 · 341763 · 12/04/25 02:37 · MS 2010

대박 이걸 다 치셨어요???

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
hjlee93 · 405560 · 12/04/25 12:25

문장하나 검색하셔서 복사붙여넣기 하셨겠죠 어떻게다침 ㅋㅋ

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
UEFA · 402817 · 12/04/25 02:53 · MS 2012

굿....

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고
hjlee93 · 405560 · 12/04/25 12:25

어휘는 작년과 비슷하거나 약간 쉬워진 것 같네요

근데 330제가 어떻게나올지 문제 ㅋㅋㅋ

좋아요 0 답글 달기 신고