ChaseDream
搜索
1234下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 15194|回复: 32
打印 上一主题 下一主题

gwd 8 Q27

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-9-8 02:07:00 | 只看该作者

gwd 8 Q27

Jon Clark’s study of the effect of



the modernization of a telephone



exchange on exchange maintenance



work and workers is a solid contribution



(5) to a debate that encompasses two



lively issues in the history and sociology of technology: technological



determinism and social constructivism.



Clark makes the point that the char-



(10) acteristics of a technology have a



decisive influence on job skills and



work organization. Put more strongly,



technology can be a primary determinant



of social and managerial organ-



(15) ization. Clark believes this possibility



has been obscured by the recent sociological



fashion, exemplified by



Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes



the way machinery reflects social



(20) choices. For Braverman, the shape of



a technological system is subordinate



to the manager’s desire to wrest control



of the labor process from the



workers. Technological change is



(25) construed as the outcome of negotiations



among interested parties who



seek to incorporate their own interests



into the design and configuration of the



machinery. This position represents



(30) the new mainstream called social constructivism.



The constructivists gain acceptance



by misrepresenting technological determinism:



technological determinists are



(35) supposed to believe, for example, that



machinery imposes appropriate forms



of order on society. The alternative to



constructivism, in other words, is to



view technology as existing outside



(40) society, capable of directly influencing



skills and work organization.



Clark refutes the extremes of the



constructivists by both theoretical and



empirical arguments. Theoretically he



(45) defines “technology” in terms of relationships



between social and technical



variables. Attempts to reduce the



meaning of technology to cold, hard



metal are bound to fail, for machinery



(50) is just scrap unless it is organized



functionally and supported by appropriate



systems of operation and maintenance. At the empirical level Clark



shows how a change at the telephone



(55) exchange from maintenance-intensive



electromechanical switches to semielectronic



switching systems altered



work tasks, skills, training opportunities,



administration, and organization of



(60) workers. Some changes Clark attributes



to the particular way management



and labor unions negotiated the introduction



of the technology, whereas



others are seen as arisi


Jon Clark’s study of the effect of



the modernization of a telephone



exchange on exchange maintenance



work and workers is a solid contribution



(5) to a debate that encompasses two



lively issues in the history and sociology of technology: technological



determinism and social constructivism.



Clark makes the point that the char-



(10) acteristics of a technology have a



decisive influence on job skills and



work organization. Put more strongly,



technology can be a primary determinant



of social and managerial organ-



(15) ization. Clark believes this possibility



has been obscured by the recent sociological



fashion, exemplified by



Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes



the way machinery reflects social



(20) choices. For Braverman, the shape of



a technological system is subordinate



to the manager’s desire to wrest control



of the labor process from the



workers. Technological change is



(25) construed as the outcome of negotiations



among interested parties who



seek to incorporate their own interests



into the design and configuration of the



machinery. This position represents



(30) the new mainstream called social constructivism.



The constructivists gain acceptance



by misrepresenting technological determinism:



technological determinists are



(35) supposed to believe, for example, that



machinery imposes appropriate forms



of order on society. The alternative to



constructivism, in other words, is to



view technology as existing outside



(40) society, capable of directly influencing



skills and work organization.



Clark refutes the extremes of the



constructivists by both theoretical and



empirical arguments. Theoretically he



(45) defines “technology” in terms of relationships



between social and technical



variables. Attempts to reduce the



meaning of technology to cold, hard



metal are bound to fail, for machinery



(50) is just scrap unless it is organized



functionally and supported by appropriate



systems of operation and maintenance.
At the empirical level Clark



shows how a change at the telephone



(55) exchange from maintenance-intensive



electromechanical switches to semielectronic



switching systems altered



work tasks, skills, training opportunities,



administration, and organization of



(60) workers. Some changes Clark attributes



to the particular way management



and labor unions negotiated the introduction



of the technology, whereas



others are seen as arising from the



(65) capabilities and nature of the technology



itself. Thus Clark helps answer



the question: “When is social choice



decisive and when are the concrete



characteristics of technology more



important?”



ng from the



(65) capabilities and nature of the technology



itself. Thus Clark helps answer



the question: “When is social choice



decisive and when are the concrete



characteristics of technology more



important?”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Q27:



The author of the passage uses the expression “are supposed to” in lines 34-35 primarily in order to



A. suggest that a contention made by constructivists regarding determinists is inaccurate



B. define the generally accepted position of determinists regarding the implementation of technology



C. engage in speculation about the motivations of determinists



D. lend support to a comment critical of the position of determinists



E. contrast the historical position of determinists with their position regarding the exchange modernization




Answer is B. but I choose A,
because it said that :


The constructivists gain acceptance



by misrepresenting technological determinism:



technological determinists are



(35) supposed to believe, for example, that



machinery imposes appropriate forms



of order on society.



It is constructivists suppose that determinists believe that... ,while this assumption is misrepresentative.


Who can explain why the answer is B?


[此贴子已经被作者于2004-9-15 13:38:15编辑过]
沙发
发表于 2004-9-11 22:56:00 | 只看该作者
ding
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-9-12 00:22:00 | 只看该作者

斑主不要光顶不指教呀.

地板
发表于 2004-9-12 01:13:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用LES在2004-9-11 22:56:00的发言:
ding

不行,LES, 看的偶眼发昏。 sorry,脑袋清醒的时候偶再看吧。

5#
发表于 2004-9-20 18:13:00 | 只看该作者

我觉得是否是这个原因:

be supposed to 指的是technology determinist 的看法,因为be supposed to 是be intend to 的意思

6#
发表于 2004-9-20 18:23:00 | 只看该作者

我晕掉了,答案是a,不好意思

7#
发表于 2004-9-24 01:20:00 | 只看该作者
各位NN, 这道题到底选什莫亚,GWD的答案B, 我选A. 请指教。
8#
发表于 2004-10-2 22:33:00 | 只看该作者
同意选a。这句话的上下文是:

The constructivists gain acceptance

by misrepresenting technological determinism:

technological determinists are

(35) supposed to believe, for example, that

machinery imposes appropriate forms

of order on society. The alternative to

冒号标识了上句指示的范围

9#
发表于 2004-10-9 06:04:00 | 只看该作者

A

10#
发表于 2004-11-11 14:16:00 | 只看该作者

原先选A的,仔细看看又觉得B有道理

盼NN指教啊

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-11-6 18:50
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部