prep 1-41

charlie6989 · 发表于 2008-11-1 01:06:00

The professionalization of the study of history in the second half of the nineteenth century, including history's transformation from a literary genre to a scientific discipline, had important consequences not only for historians' perceptions of women but also for women as historians. The disappearance of women as objects of historical studies during this period has elements of irony to it. On the one hand, in writing about women, earlier historians had relied not on firsthand sources but rather on secondary sources; the shift to more rigorous research methods required that secondary sources be disregarded. On the other hand, the development of archival research and the critical editing of collections of documents began to reveal significant new historical evidence concerning women, yet this evidence was perceived as substantially irrelevant: historians saw political history as the general framework for historical writing. Because women were seen as belonging to the private rather than to the public sphere, the discovery of documents about them, or by them, did not, by itself, produce history acknowledging the contributions of women. In addition, genres such as biography and memoir, those forms of "particular history" that women had traditionally authored, fell into disrepute. The dividing line between "particular history" and general history was redefined in stronger terms, widening the gulf between amateur and professional practices of historical research.

Question #41. 270-02 (23168-!-item-!-188;#058&000270-02)

Which of the following best describes one of the "elements of irony" referred to in the highlighted text?

(A) Although the more scientific-minded historians of the second half of the nineteenth century considered women appropriate subjects for historical writing, earlier historians did not.
(B) Although archival research uncovered documentary evidence of women's role in history, historians continued to rely on secondary sources for information about women.
(C) Although historians were primarily concerned with writing about the public sphere, they generally relegated women to the private sphere.
(D) The scientific approach to history revealed more information about women, but that information was ignored.
(E) The professionalization of history, while marginalizing much of women's writing about history, enhanced the importance of women as historical subjects.

请问这题如何得到答案
还有各选项为何错误
thx

charlie6989 · 发表于 2008-11-1 11:55:00

ding

isMindy · 发表于 2008-11-1 15:58:00

解此题主要是对文章整体的理解。

逻辑简图：

综述：历史研究方法的职业化（从literacy genre 到scientific discipline ）影响了历史学家和女历史学家对女性的视角。但是女性作为历史研究主体的消失对此却是一个大大的讽刺。

接下来，依次列举scientific discipline对研究的正面影响（on the one hand..on the other hand..in addition），但是始终被忽略。

这道题问的是：以下哪个选项表达了elements of irony？

(D) The scientific approach to history revealed more information about women, but that information was ignored.科学的历史研究方法解释了更多的女性研究的相关信息，但是这些信息都被忽略了。刚好是文章所要表达的。

这道题目我开始误选了B。

但是分析发现：

B错，在on the one hand 里，作者说earlier historians had relied not on firsthand sources but rather on secondary sources

在on the other hand里，作者说, the development of archival research and the critical editing of collections of documents began to reveal significant new historical evidence concerning women，yet this evidence was perceived as substantially irrelevant

B把这两者分段截开强硬地连到一起了。

其他几个选项都是很好排除的。

Hope it helps!

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-11-1 16:02:14编辑过]

shelleyxu · 发表于 2013-4-15 15:28:51

isMindy 发表于 2008-11-1 15:58
解此题主要是对文章整体的理解。逻辑简图：综述：历史研究方法的职业化（从literacy genre 到scientific di ...

虽然很多年以前的帖。。。THx 思路有帮助

dorissze · 发表于 2013-6-5 10:29:39

E为什么错啊？？？

prep 1-41

prep 1-41

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块