- UID
- 830535
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-11-16
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
文章如下：
The new school of political history that emerged in the 1960’s and 1970’s sought to go beyond the
traditional focus of political historians on leaders and government institutions by examining directly the political practices of ordinary citizens. Like the old approach, however, this new approach excluded women. The very techniques these historians used to uncover mass political behavior in the nineteenth century United States—quantitative analyses of election returns, for example—were useless in analyzing the political activities of women, who were denied the vote until 1920.
By redefining “political activity,” historian Paula Baker has developed a political history that includes
women. She concludes that among ordinary citizens, political activism by women in the nineteenth century prefigured trends in twentieth century politics. Defining “politics” as “any action taken to affect the course of behavior of government or of the community,” Baker concludes that, while voting and holding office were restricted to men, women in the nineteenth century organized themselves into societies committed to social issues such as temperance and poverty. In other words, Baker contends, women activists were early practitioners of nonpartisan, issue-oriented politics and thus were more interested in enlisting lawmakers, regardless of their party affiliation, on behalf of certain issues than in ensuring that one party or another won an election. In the twentieth century, more men drew closer to women’s ideas about politics and took up modes of issue-oriented politics that Baker sees women as having pioneered.
问题是这样的：
The primary purpose of the passage is to
A. enumerate reasons why both traditional scholarly methods and newer scholarly methods have limitations
B. identify a shortcoming in a scholarly approach and describe an alternative approach
C. provide empirical data to support a long-held scholarly assumption
D. compare two scholarly publications on the basis of their authors’ backgrounds
E. attempt to provide a partial answer to a long-standing scholarly dilemma
此题按书上给的答案是B。 解释是这样的：
To find the primary purpose, look at what the author is doing in the entire passage. In the first paragraph, the author examines two approaches to political history, both of which suffer from the same flaw, the exclusion of women. In the second paragraph, the author reviews an alternative, more inclusive way to understand political history.
A. The first paragraph identifies only one reason that the two approaches are flawed; an alternative approach is discussed in the second paragraph.
B. Correct. The author points to the flaw in earlier approaches to history and shows an alternative way of thinking about political history.
C. No data are offered to support an assumption.
D. Only one historian is mentioned by name; her background is not mentioned.
E. No long-standing dilemma is discussed
按GMAC这样的解释－－ an alternative approach is discussed in the second paragraph，那B的选项里就有and describe an alternative approach，那B岂不是不对？
感觉OG17V 的这本书里，好几道verbal的题都有点小问题哎。
我哪儿理解错了吗？
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2017-1-29 11:19:46
收藏
收藏
