会计人·2012会计基础考点精讲及机考归类题库-湖北会计从业资格考试 赠考系统+180元卡 下载 pdf 电子版 epub 免费 txt 2025

　　精准：名师讲解重点难点

全面：题库真题分类编排

实战：机考系统智能测评

超值：尊享名师串讲视频

章 总论

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 会计概述

考点1 会计的概念

考点2 会计的基本职能

考点3 会计对象

考点4 会计核算的具体内容

第二节 会计基本假设和会计记账基础

考点5 会计基本假设

考点6 会计记账基础

第三节 会计信息的质量要求

考点7 会计信息的质量要求

本章归类题库

节 会计概述（考点1-4）

第二节 会计基本假设和会计记账基础（考点5-6）

第三节 会计信息的质量要求（考点7）

参考答案及解析（考点1-7）

第二章 会计要素与会计科目

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 会计要素

考点1 会计要素的定义、内容和分类

考点2 反映财务状况的会计要素

考点3 反映经营成果的会计要素

考点4 会计要素的计量

第二节 会计科目

考点5 会计科目的概念

考点6 会计科目的分类

考点7 会计科目的设置原则

第三节 账户

考点8 账户的概念

考点9 账户的分类

考点10 账户的基本结构

考点11 账户与会计科目的联系和区别

本章归类题库

节 会计要素（考点1-4）

第二节 会计科目（考点5-7）

第三节 账户（考点8-11）

参考答案及解析（考点1-11）

第三章 会计等式与复式记账

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 会计等式

考点1 会计等式

第二节 复式记账

考点2 复式记账法

考点3 借贷记账法的概念

考点4 借贷记账法的记账符号

考点5 借贷记账法下的账户结构

考点6 借贷记账法的记账规则：有借必有贷，借贷必相等

考点7 借贷记账法的试算平衡

考点8 会计分录的概念

考点9 会计分录的分类

考点10 会计分录的编制步骤

考点11 借贷记账法下的会计分录

考点12 总分类账户与明细分类账户的含义和关系

考点13 总分类账户与明细分类账户的平行登记

本章归类题库

节 会计等式（考点1）

第二节 复式记账（考点2-13）

参考答案及解析（考点1-13）

第四章 会计凭证

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 会计凭证概述

考点1 会计凭证的概念、作用和种类

第二节 原始凭证

考点2 原始凭证的种类

考点3 原始凭证的基本内容

考点4 原始凭证的填制要求

考点5 原始凭证的审核

第三节 记账凭证

考点6 记账凭证的种类

考点7 记账凭证的基本内容

考点8 记账凭证的编制要求

考点9 记账凭证的审核内容

第四节 会计凭证的传递和保管

考点10 会计凭证的传递

考点11 会计凭证的保管

本章归类题库

节 会计凭证概述（考点1）

第二节 原始凭证（考点2-5）

第三节 记账凭证（考点6-9）

第四节 会计凭证的传递和保管（考点10-11）

参考答案及解析（考点1-11）

第五章 会计账簿

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 会计账簿概述

考点1 会计账簿的概念

考点2 会计账簿的分类

考点3 会计账簿与账户的关系

第二节 会计账簿的内容、启用与登记规则

考点4 会计账簿的基本内容

考点5 会计账簿的启用

考点6 会计账簿的记账规则

第三节 会计账簿的格式和登记方法

考点7 会计账簿的格式和登记方法

第四节 对账

考点8 对账的含义和内容

第五节 错账更正方法

考点9 错账更正方法

第六节 结账

考点10 结账的程序

考点11 结账的种类和方法

第七节 会计账簿的更换与保管

考点12 会计账簿的更换

考点13 会计账簿的保管

本章归类题库

节 会计账簿概述（考点1-3）

第二节 会计账簿的内容、启用与登记规则（考点4-6）

第三节 会计账簿的格式和登记方法（考点7）

第四节 对账（考点8）

第五节 错账更正方法（考点9）

第六节 结账（考点10-11）

第七节 会计账簿的更换与保管（考点12-13）

参考答案及解析（考点1-13）

第六章 账务处理程序

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 账务处理程序概述

考点1 账务处理程序的概念

考点2 账务处理程序的种类

考点3 账务处理程序的内容

考点4 合理选择账务处理程序的意义

第二节 记账凭证账务处理程序

考点5 记账凭证账务处理程序

第三节 汇总记账凭证账务处理程序

考点6 汇总记账凭证账务处理程序

第四节 科目汇总表账务处理程序

考点7 科目汇总表账务处理程序

本章归类题库

节 账户处理程序概述（考点1-4）

第二节 记账凭证账务处理程序（考点5）

第三节 汇总记账凭证账务处理程序（考点6）

第四节 科目汇总表账务处理程序（考点7）

参考答案及解析（考点1-7）

第七章 财产清查

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 财产清查概述

考点1 财产清查的概念和意义

考点2 财产清查的种类

考点3 财产清查的一般程序

第二节 财产清查的方法

考点4 财产清查的基本方法

第三节 财产清查结果的处理

考点5 财产清查结果的处理要求

考点6 财产清查结果的处理步骤

本章归类题库

节 财产清查概述（考点1-3）

第二节 财产清查的方法（考点4）

第三节 财产清查结果的处理（考点5-6）

参考答案及解析（考点1-6）

第八章 财务会计报告

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 财务会计报告概述

考点1 财务会计报告的概念

考点2 财务会计报告的构成

考点3 财务会计报告的编制要求

第二节 资产负债表

考点4 资产负债表

第三节 利润表

考点5 利润表

本章归类题库

节 财务会计报告概述（考点1-3）

第二节 资产负债表（考点4）

第三节 利润表（考点5）

参考答案及解析（考点1-5）

第九章 会计档案

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 会计档案概述

考点1 会计档案的概念和内容

第二节 会计档案保管

考点2 会计档案的保管

本章归类题库

节 会计档案概述（考点1）

第二节 会计档案保管（考点2）

参考答案及解析（考点1-2）

第十章 主要经济业务事项账务处理

本章考情分析

本章考点精讲

节 款项和有价证券的收付

考点1 现金和银行存款的账务处理

考点2 交易性金融资产的账务处理

第二节 财产物资的收发、增减和使用

考点3 原材料的账务处理

考点4 库存商品的账务处理

考点5 固定资产的账务处理

第三节 债权、债务的发生和结算

考点6 应收及预付款项的账务处理

考点7 应付账款的账务处理

考点8 应付职工薪酬的账务处理

考点9 应交税费的账务处理

考点10 借款的账务处理

第四节 资本的增减

考点11 接受投资的账务处理

考点12 实收资本减少的账务处理

第五节 收入、成本和费用

考点13 收入的账务处理

考点14 成本的账务处理

考点15 费用的账务处理

考点16 营业外收支的账务处理

第六节 财务成果的计算

考点17 利润的账务处理

考点18 所得税的账务处理

考点19 利润分配的账务处理

本章归类题库

节 款项和有价证券的收付（考点1-2）

第二节 财产物资的收发、增减和使用（考点3-5）

第三节 债权、债务的发生和结算（考点6-10）

第四节 资本的增减（考点11-12）

第五节 收入、成本和费用（考点13-16）

第六节 财务成果的计算（考点17-19）

参考答案及解析（考点1-19）

中公教育·全国分校一览表

附赠无纸化模考系统光盘，含：

2011会计基础真题试卷

2010会计基础真题试卷

2009会计基础真题试卷

会计基础模拟试卷一

会计基础模拟试卷二

暂无相关内容，正在全力查找中

暂无出版社相关信息，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关书籍摘录，正在全力查找中！

在线阅读地址：会计人·2012会计基础考点精讲及机考归类题库-湖北会计从业资格考试 赠考系统+180元卡在线阅读

在线听书地址：会计人·2012会计基础考点精讲及机考归类题库-湖北会计从业资格考试 赠考系统+180元卡在线收听

在线购买地址：会计人·2012会计基础考点精讲及机考归类题库-湖北会计从业资格考试 赠考系统+180元卡在线购买

暂无原文赏析，正在全力查找中！

编辑推荐

div>

• 作者：赫拉克利喵 发布时间：2021-02-06 10:42:11

  天下难事，必作于易。天下大事，必作于细。追求财富自由，是为了释放时间和精力去做真正渴望的事情。let's try

• 作者：单宁 发布时间：2016-02-14 09:32:24

  实操是关键，书不重要。

• 作者：旺崽 发布时间：2017-01-17 21:07:12

  对我来讲这书里的问题都不是问题，对心智不成熟的学生比较适用，另一方面，有一两个问题本来值得探讨又写得太轻淡了，失去力度。

• 作者：AJ投资 发布时间：2021-12-12 15:25:51

  A 211212 介绍挺全面，而且部分超出了营销范畴，但是只能作为了解

• 作者：cloudy 发布时间：2012-12-20 15:46:59

  历史烽烟与爱情故事

• 作者：Dynamo 发布时间：2020-10-18 15:33:57

  非常不错，延续了这个系列通俗易懂的语言风格，这本有案例在前，有助于加深对于萨提亚模式的理解。萨提亚模式确实是高度结构化的，但前提建立在治疗师对于萨提亚的世界观以及各类概念、技术（譬如…无处不在的角色扮演。一般人真掌控不来）的极熟练掌握之上，同时，治疗师本身也应该是一个充满人文关怀、保持表里如一的人，这就太难了，或许也是因此该模式才无法得到普遍实施。但是，如果好好去理解萨提亚的思想，对于家庭和谐以及自己的身心应该都会有收获吧。真想成为像萨提亚一样强大的人。

• 好书，但比较难读

  作者：风景 发布时间：2010-03-12 17:53:14

• Review of Jian Xu, A Material Culture Study of Bronze Weapons before the Eastern Zhou Dynasty

  作者：鵬鵬 James 发布时间：2016-10-01 05:20:44

  Published in Frontiers of History in China, vol. 11, no. 3 (September, 2016)

  http://journal.hep.com.cn/fhc/EN/10.3868/s020-005-016-0027-3#1

        Like elsewhere in the world, weaponry in China has long been regarded as the symbol of warfare and violence. Hitherto much scholarly attention has been given to the Shang (ca. 1,600-1,046 BCE) and Zhou bronze eating and drinking vessels, as well as to musical instruments, without an equivalent understanding the significance of the contemporary bronze weapons, which are extent in a surprising quantity. To fill the gap, in this groundbreaking book revised from chapters of his Ph. D. dissertation at Peking University, Jian Xu brings together the much-overlooked ritual implication embedded in the bronze weapons of early China, covering the span from the Erlitou culture (ca. 1,800-1,500 BCE) to the Western Zhou period (1,046-771 BCE).

         As the title reveals, Xu has sought to re-examine bronze weapons within the theoretical framework of material culture. Despite the fact that material culture as an interdisciplinary arena of inquiry has been widely acknowledged within Anglo-American academia, the introduction of this Western invention into Chinese scholarship is still in its infancy. According to Anke Hein, Chinese archeology has a strong typology-oriented tradition “that is based both on local traditions of historiography and antiquarianism and the nature of early Western archaeological endeavors in China, and has strongly political determinants as well.” [1] Following this parameter, in the Introduction, when Xu discusses the complex scholarship on bronze weapons of early China, two major approaches are apparent. The antiquarian approach embraces a tradition, tracing back to the Northern Song period (960-1,127 CE) when important scholarly writing took up found and collected objects under the rubric of “studies of metal and stone” (jinshi xue金石學), that is, more liberally, “studies of bronzes and stone inscriptions.” Celebrated by antiquarians for their textual and historiographic values, bronze objects’ archaeological information has been downplayed or edited out when being collected and catalogued. By contrast, the other approach focuses on archeological discoveries in situ, which marked the beginning of modern Chinese archaeology basically surrounding the 1928 excavation of the sites at Anyang Yinxu, Henan, which were led by Li Ji 李濟 (or Li Chi, 1896-1979) (p. 9). From Xu’s view, except for few like Max Loehr (1903-1988), most scholars who adopted either of these two approaches─which are confined to incomplete materials─have innate defects in their formalistic analyses. Divergent and even conflicting naming and classifying systems of bronzes weapons based on previous approaches also impede further understanding (p. 17). Departing from past scholarship, therefore, Xu adapts the American archeologist Lewis R. Binford’s (1931-2011) theory of three archaeological systematics─technological, social organizational, and ideological—modified by Binford based on the cultural anthropologist Leslie A. White’s (1900-1975) categorization of cultural systems.[2] Such a framework, as it is argued, focuses on investigating material objects as cultural products and “lies in the shared frame of thought that culture is defined by human behavior.” [3] With this multi-dimensional conceptual tool, as thoroughly analyzed by the following four chapters based on a comprehensive and systematic database, Xu treats bronze weapons as material agents through which a broader and more complex cultural system can be peeked into.

       

        Dealing specifically with Binford’s first dimension, Chapter One probes bronze weapons’ stylistic developments, ornaments, and metallurgic information. It begins with Xu’s methodological reflection on Gustav O. Montelius (1843-1921)’s typological paradigm, which has long remained dominant, and seems continue to be so, in the field of Chinese archaeology. Covering archaeologically excavated burials, public and private collections, the bronze weapons concerned are classified as the dagger-axe (戈 ge), spear (矛 mao), halberd (戟 ji), axe (斧鉞 fu yue), sword/dagger (短劍 duan jian), knife (刀 dao), arrowhead (矢鏃shi zu), helmet (胄 zhou), and armour (甲 jia). According to Xu’s formal analysis, stylistic changes of weapons serve to differentiate whether a specimen was intended as a utilitarian instrument, or as a “sign” which is highly decorated. Xu argues that the interaction of two elements─functional and non-functional─played a crucial role in dynamic changes of bronze weapons before the Easter Zhou. While the functional element features utilitarian designs intended for military use and killing, and the non-functional element features superfluous ornamentation such as graphic carvings and inlaid turquoise, one can find that neither of the dual natures of weapons can completely rule out the other.

        In order to reveal the role of bronze weapons in social stratification, Chapter Two reconstructs the burial contexts of excavated specimens. With emphasis on their material contents and spatial distribution, the burials include such well-known sites as the pre-Shang Yanshi Erlitou (Henan), the Shang cemeteries at Panlongcheng in Wuhan (Hubei), Xin’gan Dayangzhou in Jiangxi; also Western Zhou cemeteries at Zhangjiapo near Xi’an city (Shaanxi), Mapo and Beiyao in Luoyang, to name only a few. Although all of these burials’ occupants were aristocrats, some were even kingly elites, but the variety of combinations of bronze weapons with other excavated objects within burial space has yet to be intensely studied. Take the burials of Panlongcheng (M1, M2, M11) as an example, although scattered in separated places, bronze ritual vessels and weapons were mostly found outside the coffin on the second tier of the tombs, thus suggesting that they share the intended value for the deceased. In general, when compared with the widespread combination of dagger-axes and spears, the rare combination of axes and knives from late Shang tombs indicates the occupants’ higher ranking (p. 146). On the other hand, bronze specimens’ variations in type, quantity and combination also indicate chronological, cultural, and regional differences.

        Under the influence of White’s cultural neo-evolutionism, Binford tends to view material tools’ dynamic mechanics as a focal part of humans’ technological means in his treatment of social processes. Therefore, Binford’s technological-cultural orientation, as Xu rightly puts it, fails to recognize objects’ religious/ritual expression and cultural relativism (pp. 149-150). Building on his criticism regarding Binford’s defect, Xu’s three case studies presented in Chapter Three follow the perspective of cognitive and contextual archaeology [4]─two theoretical syntheses of New Archaeology readily available to his interpretation for bridging the material and symbolic aspects of archaeological finds. (1) With the focus on willow-leaf shaped swords, he shows the ways in which the roles that bronze weapons played in different cultural zones—signifier of cultural identity, valuable items, or prestigious goods—express diverse social values. (2) Inspired by Katheryn Linduff’s studies of gender in Chinese archeology, particularly the case of Fu Hao from late Shang Anyang, Xu points out that, except for those from the tombs at Tianma-Qucun, bronze weapons were also buried with female occupants, suggesting that weapons did not necessarily express masculinity in the Shang and Zhou cultures (pp. 160-161). (3) The Chinese archaeologist Guo Baojun 郭寶鈞 (1893-1971) has keenly proposed the “beaten tomb (毆墓 ou’mu)” hypothesis, according to the Rites of the Zhou (Zhouli), to explain why many bronze dagger-axes’ and halberds’ blades were found broken during his excavation of the Western Zhou cemetery at Xincun, located in Xunxian, Henan (p. 162). Based on Guo’s widely-acknowledged interpretation, Xu further argues that, compared with the late Shang period, the deliberate destruction of dagger-axes and halberds became more evident and widespread among Western Zhou burials, and probably thereby developed into a regular worship practice.

        Made with precious material that was strictly control by the ruling elites, jade weapons in early China, given their scarcity and ritual significance in burials, are taken up in a comparative study of contemporary bronze weapons in Chapter Four. Archeological data demonstrate that several types of stone or jade weapons dating to the late Neolithic period, such as the axe, dagger-axe and knife, predate the bronze counterparts and had an impact upon their early designs. Most distinctive are jade axes featured in ritual practices of the Liangzhu culture, developed in the Lower Yangzi region around 3,400-2,300 BCE. Jade weapons, particularly the dagger-axe, had gradually declined in quantity and size by the Eastern Zhou (ca. 770-255 BCE), along with their shifting role from the ritual emblem to ornament-oriented accessory (p. 205). The stylistic and symbolic interaction between jade and bronze weapons, as Xu suggests, constitutes a parallel development to understanding the diversity of social and ritual symbolism in the Chinese Bronze Age.

        Even without a concluding chapter, Xu has convincingly shown us that bronze weapons before the Eastern Zhou as a whole deserve being equally perceived and treated as ritual artifacts in their own right. By challenging the preoccupied dichotomy between ritual artifact and utilitarian instrument, this book also offers a close study of objects driven by a shared academic agenda in fields of Early China in particular and Chinese archaeology in general. Although why the Eastern Zhou has been excluded from his discussion remains to be specified, and a critical reader may raise questions of how and why the end of the Western Zhou, alongside political turmoil and ritual reform, marks a radical impact on bronze weapons, Xu is fully aware of the potential bias brought by archaeological evidence. Theoretically and practically, this book incorporates pioneering Western conceptual tools into Chinese scholarship and its local contextual analyses, thus making a welcomed attempt in the rising Chinese New Archaeology.

  Footnotes:

  [1] Anke Hein, “The Problems of Typology in Chinese Archeology,” Early China 2015.18, 3.

  [2] Lewis R. Binford, “Archaeology as Anthropology,” American Antiquity 28.2 (Oct., 1962): 217-225. White divides culture as a whole into three categories: technology, social system, and philosophies, see Leslie A. White, The Science of Culture: A Study of Man and Society (New York: Grove Press; London: Evergreen Books Ltd, 1949): 392.

  [3] Lewis R. Binford, “Archaeological Systematic and the Study of Cultural Process,” American Antiquity 31.2 (Oct. 1965): 203.

  [4] For theoretical developments and practices of these two archaeological syntheses within the wave of New Archaeology, see Ian Hodder and Hudson Scott, Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), especially chapter 2 “Processual and system approach” and chapter 8 “Contextual archaeology”; Colin Renfrew and Chris Scarre eds., Cognition and Material Culture: The Archaeology of Symbolic Storage (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1998); Colin Renfrew, “Towards A Cognitive Archaeology: Material Engagement and the Early Development of Society,” in Ian Hodder ed., Archaeological Theory Today (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2012): 124-145; Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn, Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice (London: Thames & Hudson, 2012): 381-420.