Passage 40

   Joseph Glarthaar’s Forged in Battle is not the first excel-

  lent study of Black soldiers and their White officers in the

  Civil War, but it uses more soldiers’ letters and diaries—

  including rare material from Black soldiers—and concen-

(5) rates more intensely on Black-White relations in Black

  regiments than do any of its predecessors. Glathaar’s title

  expresses his thesis: loyalty, friendship, and respect among

  White officers and Black soldiers were fostered by the

  mutual dangers they faced in combat.

(10 )
                    Glarthaar accurately describes the government’s discrim-

  inatory treatment of Black soldiers in pay, promotion, medi

  cal care, and job assignments, appropriately emphasizing

  the campaign by Black soldiers and their officers to get the

   opportunity to fight. That chance remained limited through

(15) out the war by army policies that kept most Black units

   serving in rear-echelon assignments and working in labor

   battalions. Thus, while their combat death rate was only

   one-third that of White units, their mortality rate from

   disease, a major killer in his war, was twice as great.

(20)
                    Despite these obstacles, the courage and effectiveness of

   several Black units in combat won increasing respect from

   initially skeptical or hostile White soldiers. As one White

   officer put it, “they have fought their way into the respect

of all the army.”

(25) In trying to demonstrate the magnitude of this attitudi-

  nal change, however, Glarthaar seems to exaggerate the

  prewar racism of the White men who became officers in

  Black regiments. “Prior to the war,” he writes of these

 men, “virtually all of them held powerful racial prejudices.”

(30)
                    While perhaps true of those officers who joined Black

  units for promotion or other self-serving motives, this state-

    ment misrepresents the attitudes of the many abolitionists

    who became officers in Black regiments. Having spent

    years fighting against the race prejudice endemic in Ameri-

(35)  can society; they participated eagerly in this military exper-

    iment, which they hoped would help African Americans

       achieve freedom and postwar civil equality. By current

standards of racial egalitarianism, these men’s paternalism

toward African Americans was racist. But to call their

(40)  feelings “powerful racial prejudices” is to indulge in

generational chauvinism—to judge past eras by present

standards.

7. Which of the following best describes the kind of error

  attributed to Glarthaar in lines 25-28?

  (A) Insisting on an unwarranted distinction between two 

     groups of individuals in order to render an argument

     concerning them internally consistent

  (B) Supporting an argument in favor of a given interpretation

     of a situation with evidence that is not particularly

     relevant to the situation

  (C) Presenting a distorted view of the motives of certain

     individuals in order to provide grounds for a negative

     evaluation of their actions

  (D) Describing the conditions prevailing before a given

     event in such a way that the contrast with those

     prevailing after the event appears more striking than it

     actually is(D)

  (E) Asserting that a given event is caused by another event

     merely because the other event occurred before the given

     event occurred

感觉文章不难理解,但是这道题的选项都好模糊啊,看不太懂,我选的是C.我对文章的理解是:Glarthaar的错误一是只采用了个别人的态度来说明整体的态度,二是用现在的标准来衡量以前,这道题应该是针对第一条的吧,就AC中强调了个人.怎么看也不明白为什么是D.请NN指点啊~~~

7. Which of the following best describes the kind of error

  attributed to Glarthaar in lines 25-28?

  (A) Insisting on an unwarranted distinction between two 

     groups of individuals in order to render an argument

     concerning them internally consistent

  (B) Supporting an argument in favor of a given interpretation

     of a situation with evidence that is not particularly

     relevant to the situation

  (C) Presenting a distorted view of the motives of certain

     individuals in order to provide grounds for a negative

     evaluation of their actions

  (D) Describing the conditions prevailing before a given

     event in such a way that the contrast with those

     prevailing after the event appears more striking than it

     actually is(D)

  (E) Asserting that a given event is caused by another event

     merely because the other event occurred before the given

     event occurred

感觉文章不难理解,但是这道题的选项都好模糊啊,看不太懂,我选的是C.我对文章的理解是:Glarthaar的错误一是只采用了个别人的态度来说明整体的态度,二是用现在的标准来衡量以前,这道题应该是针对第一条的吧,就AC中强调了个人.怎么看也不明白为什么是D.请NN指点啊~~~