请教GWD-5-16,Bold题,我的大敌~~

第一次发贴,请前辈们指教! (我看很多CDer的GWD题号跟我的好像都不太一样,不知道是不是有N多版本??)

Q16:

Historian:  Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus.  Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques.  It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent.  Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz’ that discuss one of Newton’s books on mathematics.  Several scholars have argued that since the book includes a presentation of Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques, and since the notes were written before Leibniz’ own development of calculus concepts and techniques, it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false.  A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however.  Leibniz’ notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented.

In the historian’s reasoning, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

1. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position.
2. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is that position.
3. The first provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that is drawn to provide support for the overall position that the historian defends; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.
4. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is evidence offered in support of the historian’s own position.
5. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is further information that substantiates that evidence.

答案竟然是D,我百思不得其解! 首先,第一部分我觉得不是支持作者批评的观点的;第二部分,就根本不太明白它在原文中想说什么!

请高人指点!

前提：Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques.  It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent.

前提：Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz’ that discuss one of Newton’s books on mathematics.

前提：Several scholars have argued that since the book includes a presentation of Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques, and since the notes were written before Leibniz’ own development of calculus concepts and techniques

中间性结论（就是C选项说的 intermediate conclusion ）

注意这个词however. 显然作者要反对这个中间结论

反对上面这个观点的evidence: Leibniz’ notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented.

最后的总结论：Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. 

注意哦，第一句不一定都是前提哦，要分析句子结构。

这样的话就可以看到作者先说了一个要驳斥的结论，然后用了一个很强的转折词however，再引出自己的前提，最后这个前提就支持文章第一句话（总结论）。

D就是这样的描述

哦!我明白了!也就是说,第一部分是支持it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false. 这个中间结论的;但是实际上historian并不赞成这个结论,而第二部分支持了historian真正的结论,对吗?

谢谢stevegt大侠~但我还想知道historian自己到底支持一个什么结论呢?

传统观点-->传统观点错-->中间结论仍需考量-->历史学家自己的观点???

题干的最后一句：

“A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however.  Leibniz’ notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented.”

到底是什么意思？是说作者支持一种相对谨慎的观点？如果是这样，那这到底算是支持还是反对前面提到的 researcher 的观点？

谁能给个最后一句的中文翻译啊

call for:  Require, demand, as in This job calls for a lot of patience.

那现在再来看这句话是不是好理解了一点呢。A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however 。= however, a more cautious conclusion than this is required.

this 是指 it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false 这个conclusion.

所以这句话的意思就是： 但是我们需要一个更比 it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false 这个conclusion更 cautions 的 conclusion。

然后后面的bf 就在支持historian's own position.

不知道我说清楚没有，我也是一开始对call for 的意思有点模糊。不过我还是猜对了，所以上来试着解释再顺便臭美一下。