ChaseDream

标题: gwd-23-32 [打印本页]

作者: cournot 时间: 2006-7-4 11:42
标题: gwd-23-32

Q32:Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species: a hare, a partridge, and various Mediterranean fish. Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created. Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in other Roman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in the Sepphoris area.
There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native.
No motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.
All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosaics are readily identifiable as representations of known species.
There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman Empire were familiar.

这个题谁帮我分解一下？

作者: 1766good 时间: 2006-7-16 08:06

来帮个忙啊，我也不会。

谢谢啦。

作者: mbz 时间: 2006-7-16 08:36

E is correct.

since the argument says that the city did not have the animals, there are two possible reasons for the pictures to appear in this area:

1)the local artists drew them

2)the traveling artisans did that

b/c the conclusion says reason 2, then reason number 1 must be assumed as did not exist.

作者: carolinelmf 时间: 2007-10-22 17:25

清清楚楚答得好！

作者: gg137 时间: 2008-9-14 18:16

ding

作者: gg137 时间: 2008-9-14 18:16

ding

作者: xiaoniuren 时间: 2009-7-19 09:44
DD

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)