7月31日一战680放少量狗

iamwilliam007

考试感觉比模拟差一些，但是很神奇地遇到了GWD的题

SC，逻辑题完全不记得了，

关于阅读：
其中一篇是seamstress还有tailor，关于guild membership的文章，很熟悉的感觉，
还有一篇是关于美国的经济模式一直依靠大量外债，有一观点认为该现象是好的，然后说明如何好，而又一观点说这个现象不好，然后说明如何不好。最后一段把两个观点都否了。

关于数学有一题印象很深：
数轴上等间距ABCDE，然后D数轴上刻有3的10次方，E数轴上刻有3的11次方，然后问：-3的11次方对应哪个字母？

晓澜静荷

多谢楼主放狗！

如果逻辑有更新，记得告诉我哦！

忧郁的废物

第一篇阅读不就是 gwd里面的吗
就是那个将 巴黎成立的 女裁缝组织和普通的裁缝协会之间的矛盾的吗？
我才做的这一篇 对这个seamstress印象超级深刻

忧郁的废物

In 1675, Louis XIV established the Parisian seamstresses' guild, the firstindependent all-female guild created in over 200 years. Guild members could make and sell women's and children's clothing, but were prohibited from producing men's clothing or dresses for court women. Tailors resented the ascension of seamstresses to guild status; seamstresses, meanwhile, were impatient with the remaining restrictions on their right to clothe women.

The conflict between the guilds was not purely economic, however. A 1675 police report indicated that since so many seamstresses were already working illegally, the tailors were unlikely to suffer additional economic damage because of the seamstresses' incorporation. Moreover, guild membership held very different meanings for tailors and seamstresses. To the tailors, their status as guild members overlapped with their role as heads of household, and entitled them to employ as seamstresses female family members who did not marry outside the trade. The seamstresses, however, viewed guild membership as a mark of independence from the patriarchal family. Their guild was composed not of family units but of individual women who enjoyed unusual legal and economic privileges. At the conflict's center was the issue of whether tailors' female relatives should be identified as family members protected by the tailors' guild or as individuals under the jurisdiction of the seam-stresses' guild.

insulator1983

楼主，

麻烦确认一下关于seamstress, tailor的文章是不是这个？？？

In 1675, Louis XIV established the Parisian seamstresses' guild, the firstindependent all-female guild created in over 200 years. Guild members could make and sell women's and children's clothing, but were prohibited from producing men's clothing or dresses for court women. Tailors resented the ascension of seamstresses to guild status; seamstresses, meanwhile, were impatient with the remaining restrictions on their right to clothe women.

The conflict between the guilds was not purely economic, however. A 1675 police report indicated that since so many seamstresses were already working illegally, the tailors were unlikely to suffer additional economic damage because of the seamstresses' incorporation. Moreover, guild membership held very different meanings for tailors and seamstresses. To the tailors, their status as guild members overlapped with their role as heads of household, and entitled them to employ as seamstresses female family members who did not marry outside the trade. The seamstresses, however, viewed guild membership as a mark of independence from the patriarchal family. Their guild was composed not of family units but of individual women who enjoyed unusual legal and economic privileges. At the conflict's center was the issue of whether tailors' female relatives should be identified as family members protected by the tailors' guild or as individuals under the jurisdiction of the seam-stresses' guild.

伊蔓达

麻烦楼主确认一下以下的考古内容是不是和考到的一样，谢谢啦~~

【V1】
法国女裁缝。
原文：
In particular, the late-seventeenth-century introduction of a new style of dress called the manteau or mantua, and its increasing popularity, offered female seamstresses a "wedge " to loosen the tailors' monopoly over the production of more formal, elite, and expensive women's fashions. This new product and more generally the exploding market for clothing, in particular women's clothing, provided seamstresses with the income and market niche from which to expand their numbers and to organize politically within the previously male-dominated trade. Furthermore, they could generally rely on the French state, with its agenda of economic development, to aid in this expansion and organization.
In contrast with much of the prevailing historiography, Crowston demonstrates that when it was in the interest of the French state, authorities were happy to work with and encourage women workers as autonomous producers and not merely as family appendages to guild patriarchs. Crowston thus reinforces Hesse's claim that market expansion brought new opportunities for some women, but she locates these expanding opportunities in the political economy of the late Ancient Regime, rather than in the Revolution's overthrow of it.
In Crowston's history, the seamstresses of Ancien Regime France emerge as relatively powerful and autonomous figures whose work, civic, and gender identities drew upon many sources, but were institutionalized in important ways because of the existence and practices of their guild. The destruction of the guild system during the Revolution thus represents a critical moment in the history of women's work and gender relations—from the perspective of women working in the garment trades, the "freeing" of the market from political constraints brought a largely negative transformation. A closer look at each of these works helps to reveal the origins of the tensions between these two interpretations.

我把已有jj再总结一下：
第一段大概意思，一个新式以m打头的一个单词的东西的兴起使法国女裁缝打破男裁缝（tailor）垄断的现状。什么原本是比较高级的衣服，给比较有地位的人穿。但是现在m这个单词的东西开始使 women's clothing market 变得流行。 并且行会（guild）的兴起，谋求经济和政治的影响力。

第二段，说某个人H分析了一些原因，说政治经济市场等因素促成了以上现象。  然后某人C也同意这个原因。但是他认为它的兴起是在法国大革命前出现的（有题问他们之间的分歧是什么）。因为，大革命虽然带来了一些市场机会，free了什么什么东西，但是大革命也摧毁了一些行会（guild）,而Guild对于保 护seamstresses是positive的。
以下引用考古考出来的jj原话：
另外还有推论题是比较难的，就是from the message can infer学者A would agree…这题很难，我删到剩两个选项要去比对文章用字，留意！
Question 1：主题题（请牛牛补充）
Question 2：What is the function of the new style of French women's clothes?（牛牛补充答案，题目我自己写的）
备选答案：Meatu这种服饰的引入，大大提升了女性cloth-marketing（应该对的，可以回到原文第一段定位到某句话的）
Question 3：What is / What causes the disagreement/dispararity between the two opposing views of female tailors?（牛牛提供选项和思路，我自己写的题目）
我考到了上面问题3，
另外一个问题：好像问对于m那个单词的那个东西的兴起，下面哪个正确。
我选的是使 women's clothesing market开始兴旺。
这是题里原话，定位第一段。
其他题目不记得。

【V2】
更新1：法国女裁缝的文章（感谢网友flutemama提供关键的第二段信息）
第一段，讲法国pre-Revolution时的女裁缝做出了一种新式服装，叫manteau (不知道是不是这样写的)很流行，导致女裁缝的market niche，opportunities提高，威胁了男裁缝的地位。一方观点因为一个新式女服装的兴起，给了法国女裁缝打破男裁缝垄断的现状，并且行会（guild）的兴起，谋求经济和政治的影响力。（有题，问说那个新式女士服装的例子是什么作用）
第二段，两个历史学家的观点，一个叫CC，一个叫CH。先论述其中一个的观点，然后另外一个部分同意她的观点，但更进一步的阐述了女裁缝的地位变化是有经济，政治意义的。
第二段，两个历史学家的观点，一个叫CC，一个叫CH。先论述其中一个的观点，然后另外一个部分同意她的观点，但更进一步的阐述了女裁缝的地位变化是有经济，政治意义的。
第三段，双方的观点都是一样的对于女裁缝经济的扩张，but 路人甲认为它是在法国大革命前（有题问他们之间的分歧是什么）。因为，大革命的兴起摧毁了传统的经济制度，并且是市场经济兴旺。但是。。。。（牛牛补充）。并且，行会的作用也受到的影响。逐渐削弱。
第三段，双方的观点都是一样的对于女裁缝经济的扩张，but 路人甲认为它是在法国大革命前（有题问他们之间的分歧是什么）。因为，大革命的兴起摧毁了传统的经济制度，并且是市场经济兴旺。但是。。。。（牛牛补充）。并且，行会的作用也受到的影响。逐渐削弱。
【V3】
法国女裁缝
3．服裝與法國婦女（F9）高頻考題！！！！
Version9第一段學者A提到，一種服飾的興起，有利於seamstresses們如何如何(服飾有題，the author mentioned 服飾 in order to之類的…)
第二段說學者A的觀點與學者B相同，但是有一點並不同，學者B認為法國大革命是與第一段的主張緊密相關，但學者A並不這麼認為，學者A認為主因仍與政治經濟構面相關….(有點忘了，反正A不認同是法國大革命促進了第一段的主張，這裏也有題)，學者A進一步解釋Guild因為革命被催毀，而Guild對於保護seamstresses是positive的。
另外還有推論題是比較難的，就是from the message can infer學者A would agree…這題很難，我刪到剩兩個選項要去比對文章用字，留意！
ADAM:主要關鍵在於有一題考女裁縫主要受什麼影響：法國大革命（有三個選項有提到）
記得要此細看………  推論題問下面哪一個會是A學者同意的..我選的是法國大革命給女裁縫帶來的好處小於壞處


背景信息：

In her analysis of seamstresses and their world and work, Crowston links the evolution of fashion with the skills required to make certain types of clothing and the claims of specific guilds and artisans upon the rights to make and sell articles of clothing.

In particular, the late-seventeenth-century introduction of a new style of dress called the manteau or mantua, and its increasing popularity, offered female seamstresses a "wedge " to loosen the tailors' monopoly over the production of more formal, elite, and expensive women's fashions. This new product and more generally the exploding market for clothing, in particular women's clothing, provided seamstresses with the income and market niche from which to expand their numbers and to organize politically within the previously male-dominated trade. Furthermore, they could generally rely on the French state, with its agenda of economic development, to aid in this expansion and organization.

In contrast with much of the prevailing historiography, Crowston demonstrates that when it was in the interest of the French state, authorities were happy to work with and encourage women workers as autonomous producers and not merely as family appendages to guild patriarchs. Crowston thus reinforces Hesse's claim that market expansion brought new opportunities for some women, but she locates these expanding opportunities in the political economy of the late Ancient Regime, rather than in the Revolution's overthrow of it.

In Crowston's history, the seamstresses of Ancien Regime France emerge as relatively powerful and autonomous figures whose work, civic, and gender identities drew upon many sources, but were institutionalized in important ways because of the existence and practices of their guild. The destruction of the guild system during the Revolution thus represents a critical moment in the history of women's work and gender relations—from the perspective of women working in the garment trades, the "freeing" of the market from political constraints brought a largely negative transformation. A closer look at each of these works helps to reveal the origins of the tensions between these two interpretations.

伊蔓达

麻烦楼主确认~~~谢谢

27.        美国从债权国变为债务国
        两段 第一段 关于美国的关于利用外资的一个经济现象，有两种解释，一种说美国公司的运行的好，导致国外投资进来， 获取收益，但是作者又给否定了这个获取收益（一道细节题），第二种说美国的公司运行的不好，导致美国必须向国外借钱，引起的外资流入。 第二段说这两种解释都有一定的道理，但是又都忽略了美国公司在全球化时代所处的情况。 总之比较简单，题也不难。有道主题题
        第1段：美国之前credit大国，后来成为debit大国。可以通过投资者投资方式来判断美国经济的情况。一种是direct  investment,一种是portfolio investment，简单介绍了两种投资方式，然后说direct investment说明投资者对前景的看好。portfolio investment是投资者对前景不看好的一种表现。 740
        Q1 第一題就先來兩個highlight "direct investment" "portfolio investment"，應該是問兩者的關係吧 忘了 sorry
Q2 作者說美國現在大部分的外國公司是間接投資的目的: 我選 反駁第一個人的觀點(跨國公司在美國進行直接投資的結果)
Q3 以下何事發生會使direct investment的觀點轉換為portfolio investment的想法 (或是反過來)

伊蔓达

还是美国债权债务这个，请确认~


【V1】（JJ主人720）
美国已经是从债权国变成了大的债务国。有些经济学家说这使美国更像一个公司，不停地吸收投资。这是一个成功的sign。但是作者说，如果是个公司，你投资了（我记得有direct investment,还用黄色highlight出来了，也有道题专门出在这里），那么你或多或少的就成为这个公司的所有者。而美国是个国家，你只能投资（profolio investment),是不可能成为它的所有者的。第二段说另一些经济学家说这说明美国的竞争力越来越差，而最后作者说这两种说法都没有正确的说明美国在经济全球化中扮演的角色。

【V2】
第一篇是对美国究竟是债务国还是债权国的研究.
第一段,一种观点认为美国目前是债权国,作者说尽管这是个好的appeal,但从目前事实来讲,某具体事例(想起来,这里有个考点,具体事例是如果美国是债 权国,某个事实就应该是,但实际上事实不是这样的.问举该事例是为了说明什么?我选的是:是为了反对某个观点的提法)说明美国还没达到债权国的水平.另一种观点认为美国现在负债太多如何如何.
第二段,作者有点赞同第二种说法,但他说这两种说法都忽略了一个事实,即美国公司的globalization的重要性(该处有考点,即同义替换)

【V3】
[讲 美国从creditor变成debtor到底是好是坏。两种理论，第一种说是好，将其比喻成rising corporation，但这种没有考虑到美国的投资者都是用portfolio（有一题）。第二种说是不好，比成falling ones。第二种更有说服力。但两者都没有考虑美国的跨国公司所起到的作用（有题，意思是问两种说法的共同点）。


【V4】
说美国是世界上负债最多的国家，一个学家说1这是经济强劲的表现，说这是2跨国公司在美国进行直接投资的结果，作者说美国现在大部分的外国公司是间接投资 （出题：是in order to 的题，答案我选：反驳第一个人的观点） 另一个学家说这是美国经济萧条的表现……，最后作者说两个理论都没考虑经济全球化的因素（出题）
问题：
Q1：
第一种说是好，将其比喻成rising corporation，但这种没有考虑到美国的投资者都是用portfolio（有一题）
Q2：两种说法的共同点：两者都没有考虑美国的跨国公司(globalization)所起到的作用
Q3：in order to题：作者说美国现在大部分的外国公司是间接投资的目的：我选：反驳第一个人的观点(跨国公司在美国进行直接投资的结果)