69. Excavation of the ancient city of Kourion on the island of Cyprus revealed a pattern of debris and collapsed buildings typical of towns devastated by earthquakes. Archaeologists have hypothesized that the destruction was due to a major earthquake known to have occurred near the island in AD 365. -
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the archaeologists' hypothesis?
(A) Bronze ceremonial drinking vessels that are often found in graves dating from years preceding and following AD 365 were also found in several graves near Kourion.
(B) No coins minted after AD 365 were found in Kourion, but coins minted before that year were found in abundance.
(C) Most modern histories of Cyprus mention that an earthquake occurred near the island in AD 365.
(D) Several small statues carved in styles current in Cyprus in the century Mn
beeeAD 300 and 400 were found in Kourion.
(E) Stone inscriptions in a form of the Greek alphabet that was definitely used in Cyprus after AD 365 were found in Kourion.
答案是B，主要是不明白原来那个argument里面hypothesized 的到底是the destruction，还是the destruction 的原因是earthquake? 我做题的时候以为是后者，然后想coins那么小的东西发掘出来不一定能说明毁灭就是地震造成的呀，只有雕像这种比较大型的东西才能说明the destruction 确实是地震的结果。但看OG的意思好像只是假设了毁灭，但看原文又觉得hypothesized 的是the destruction was due to a major earthquake，我是越来越糊涂了。。。
请大家帮忙
文章说：hypothesized that the destruction was due to a major earthquake known to have occurred near the island in AD 365.
问的是支持，这样的破坏是由AD365的地政造成的。
选B的原因是： 只要证明这样的一场AD365确实有一场这样的浩劫发生了就行了。B说AD365之前coin很多，之后的就没有了，可以说明在AD365确实发生了些什么。
其实这道题的关键是要理解AD365。
给出AD365 主要是为了强调这次毁灭（由地震造成的）确实是发生在AD365。
明白了，关键还是要证明毁灭是AD365的地震造成的。
还有个问题，为什么C不对呢？OG的解释是The occurrence of the earthquake is not in question; this statement simply confirms a fact already assumed in the argument. 我觉得有点迷惑，原文说known to have occurred near the island in AD 365不是假设里面的吗？历史学家提到的话不正证实了地震的存在吗？
不明白的说~
客观事实证明比主观论说证明更具有说服性。而且感觉简单重复原文内容的选项来支持原文，一般不会是答案。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |