ChaseDream
搜索
123下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 19556|回复: 20
打印 上一主题 下一主题

OG16 RC97题 关于女权主义和政治的

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2016-3-13 09:23:51 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
    It is an odd but indisputable fact that the seventeenth-century English women
who are generally regarded as among the forerunners of modern feminism are
almost all identified with the Royalist side in the conflict between Royalists
and Parliamentarians known as the English Civil Wars. Since Royalist
ideology is often associated with the radical patriarchalism of seventeenthcentury
political theorist Robert Filmer—a patriarchalism that equates family
and kingdom and asserts the divinely ordained absolute power of the king
and, by analogy, of the male head of the household—historians have been
understandably puzzled by the fact that Royalist women wrote the earliest
extended criticisms of the absolute subordination of women in marriage and
the earliest systematic assertions of women’s rational and moral equality with
men. Some historians have questioned the facile equation of Royalist ideology
with Filmerian patriarchalism; and indeed, there may have been no consistent
differences between Royalists and Parliamentarians on issues of family
organization and women’s political rights, but in that case one would expect
early feminists to be equally divided between the two sides.

    Catherine Gallagher argues that Royalism engendered feminism because the
ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the
absolute self. She cites the example of the notoriously eccentric author
Margaret Cavendish (1626–1673), duchess of Newcastle. Cavendish claimed to
be as ambitious as any woman could be, but knowing that as a woman she was
excluded from the pursuit of power in the real world, she resolved to be
mistress of her own world, the “immaterial world” that any person can create
within her own mind—and, as a writer, on paper. In proclaiming what she
called her “singularity,” Cavendish insisted that she was a self-sufficient being
within her mental empire, the center of her own subjective universe rather
than a satellite orbiting a dominant male planet. In justifying this absolute
singularity, Cavendish repeatedly invoked the model of the absolute monarch,
a figure that became a metaphor for the self-enclosed, autonomous nature of
the individual person. Cavendish’s successors among early feminists retained
her notion of woman’s sovereign self, but they also sought to break free from
the complete political and social isolation that her absolute singularity
entailed.

97. The passage suggests which of the following about the seventeenth-century
English women mentioned in line 2?
(A) Their status as forerunners of modern feminism is not entirely justified.
(B) They did not openly challenge the radical patriarchalism of Royalist
Filmerian ideology.
(C) Cavendish was the first among these women to criticize women’s
subordination in marriage and assert women’s equality with men.
(D) Their views on family organization and women’s political rights were
diametrically opposed to those of both Royalist and Parliamentarian
ideology.
(E) Historians would be less puzzled if more of them were identified with
the Parliamentarian side in the English Civil Wars.

OG对D E 的解释
D The passage does not indicate what the Parliamentarian view of family
organization and women’s political rights was, so there is no way to
determine whether the Royalist forerunners of modern feminism were
opposed to that view.
E Correct. The basic puzzle the passage sets out to solve is why the
forerunners of modern feminism would have been associated with the
Royalist side, which seems to have been based on radical patriarchalism.
Historians would most likely have been less surprised if these women had
been identified with the Parliamentarian side, which presumably did not
embrace radical patriarchalism.

这道题我觉得有问题啊,原文第一段最后一句说了如果两派都有差不多数量的女权主义者才是看起来比较合理的,答案却说更多的分在议会那边比较正常
而且啊,也是第一段最后一句,都说了 no consistent differences between R and P on issues of ... 既然女权主义者的观点和R的是冲突的,R和P又没有不同,当然女权主义者的观点也应该和P的冲突啊,也就是D呀,D为什么不对呢?

求助!谢谢

收藏收藏5 收藏收藏5
沙发
发表于 2016-3-15 01:02:52 | 只看该作者
我的理解是, It is an odd but indisputable fact that the seventeenth-century English women who are generally regarded as among the forerunners of modern feminism are almost all identified with the Royalist side 这是一个事实。后面你画出的重点都是用退让假设的方式来strengthen 这个 Fact.
E 选项是对上述 fact 的 rephrase


板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2016-3-15 07:31:42 | 只看该作者
emmahiggins09 发表于 2016-3-15 01:02
我的理解是, It is an odd but indisputable fact that the seventeenth-century English women who are g ...

虽然还是不太懂,但是谢谢你的回复
地板
发表于 2016-3-15 21:35:52 | 只看该作者
Ziyu_Chen 发表于 2016-3-15 07:31
虽然还是不太懂,但是谢谢你的回复

问题中指明了要回到 line 2, 所以你的重点应该在line 2. 而且你画出的粗线部分用的都动词形式都是may have been...would expect 这都是虚拟语气。虚拟语气都是和现实相反的,现实中不存在的事情,不能用直陈式的思路来做,你在体会体会 加油!
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2016-3-16 07:35:58 | 只看该作者
emmahiggins09 发表于 2016-3-15 21:35
问题中指明了要回到 line 2, 所以你的重点应该在line 2. 而且你画出的粗线部分用的都动词形式都是may hav ...

噢!明白了呢!
谢谢你!
6#
发表于 2017-3-21 17:03:54 | 只看该作者
mark 和楼主遇到一样的问题!
7#
发表于 2017-4-9 20:41:22 | 只看该作者
然而 还是没懂 求NN解答啊 还有D为啥不对啊 不是和两方观点都不同吗?!!
8#
发表于 2017-9-17 16:34:54 | 只看该作者
http://weibo.com/p/230418859f49b40102xdy7
这个解释特别号
9#
发表于 2017-9-17 16:35:37 | 只看该作者
提示: 该帖被管理员或版主屏蔽
10#
发表于 2017-11-3 12:12:15 | 只看该作者
马儿嘚嘚 发表于 2017-9-17 16:35
这篇文章理解起来难度较大,我们来梳理一下文章结构和逻辑的转换:
It isan oddbut indisputable factthat  ...

哇,太有用了,谢谢分享!
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, 2025-10-13 17:03
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