ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Ecologist: The Scottish Highlands were once the site of extensive forests, but these forests have mostly disappeared and been replaced by peat bogs. The common view is that the Highlands' deforestation was caused by human activity, especially agriculture. However, agriculture began in the Highlands less than 2,000 years ago. Peat bogs, which consist of compressed decayed vegetable matter, build up by only about one foot per 1,000 years and, throughout the Highlands, remains of trees in peat bogs are almost all at depths great than four feet. Since climate changes that occurred between 7,000 and 4,000 years ago favored the development of peat bogs rather than the survival of forests, the deforestation was more likely the result of natural processes than of human activity.

In the ecologist's argument the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

正确答案: B

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 1790|回复: 6
打印 上一主题 下一主题

天山9-32 一直没有人问

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2005-11-6 20:20:00 | 只看该作者

天山9-32 一直没有人问

Q32:
Ecologist: The Scottish Highlands were once the site of extensive forests, but these
forests have mostly disappeared and been replaced by peat bogs. The common view is
that the Highlands’ deforestation was caused by human activity, especially agriculture.
However, agriculture began in the Highlands less than 2,000 years ago. Peat bogs,
which consist of compressed decayed vegetable matter, build up by only about one foot
per 1,000 years and, throughout the Highlands, remains of trees in peat bogs are
almost all at depths great than four feet
. Since climate changes that occurred between
7,000 and 4,000 years ago favored the development of peat bogs rather than the survival
of forests, the deforestation was more likely the result of natural processes than of human
activity.
In the ecologist’s argument the two portions in boldface play which of the following
roles?
A. The first is evidence that has been used in support of a position that the ecologist
rejects; the second is a finding that the ecologist uses to counter that evidence.
B. The first is evidence that, in light of the evidence provided in the second, serves
as grounds for the ecologist’s rejection of a certain position.
C. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second is evidence that has
been used in support of that position.
D. The first is a position that the ecologist rejects; the second provides evidence in
support of that rejection.
E. The first is a position for which the ecologist argues; the second provides
evidence to support that position.


answer:b


mine:a


我觉得b不对啊


[此贴子已经被作者于2005-11-9 7:07:07编辑过]
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2005-11-7 09:16:00 | 只看该作者

可是b我觉得也不对啊


b说 第一个黑脸,根据(in light of)第二个黑脸,作为作者反对一个 position的基础


我对这个in light of 感觉不爽


any further help please

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2005-11-8 07:59:00 | 只看该作者
ding
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2005-11-8 08:12:00 | 只看该作者
ding
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2005-11-9 07:13:00 | 只看该作者

a的错误是第二个黑脸不是finding还是说他不是用来反对第一个的那?

6#
 楼主| 发表于 2005-11-9 10:56:00 | 只看该作者

恩,明白了,谢谢


7#
发表于 2007-2-9 15:00:00 | 只看该作者

这题我也不知道选哪个,如果非要选,只能选B了。

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, 2024-11-6 11:09
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部