ChaseDream
搜索
1234下一页
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Archaeologists in Michigan have excavated a Native American camp near Dumaw Creek. Radiocarbon dating of animal bones found at the site indicates that the camp dates from some time between 1605 and 1755. However, the camp probably dates to no later than 1630, since no European trade goods were found at the site, and European traders were active in the region from the 1620's onward.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

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: 23051|回复: 38
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求助!!prep1-46

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2007-8-15 18:23:00 | 只看该作者

求助!!prep1-46

46.   (33987-!-item-!-188;#058&007200)

 

Archaeologists in Michigan have excavated a Native American camp near Dumaw Creek.  Radiocarbon dating of animal bones found at the site indicates that the camp dates from some time between 1605 and 1755.  However, the camp probably dates to no later than 1630, since no European trade goods were found at the site, and European traders were active in the region from the 1620's onward.

 

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

 

(A) Due to trade among Native Americans, some European trade goods would have reached the area before the European traders themselves did.

(B) At all camps in the region that have been reliably dated to the late 1620's, remains of European trade goods have been found.

(C) The first European trade goods to reach the area would have been considered especially valuable and preserved as much as possible from loss or destruction.

(D) The first European traders in the area followed soon after the first European explorers.

(E) The site is that of a temporary camp that would have been used seasonally for a few years and then abandoned.

 这题做对了~~~但是刚才翻了一下以前的旧帖~~发现有人认为C选项也可以加强~~~我当时首先把C就排除了~~现在看看怎么觉得也有道理~~

请NN帮助解答呀!!!

 

还有,个人认为A貌似也有点道理~~由于一些trade goods早于traders到达,所以trade goods的到达日期肯定早于1620`s,因此可以根据camps没有发现trade goods,而推断camps不晚于1630~~~是不是由于A中的some削弱了加强作用呢?

 

疑惑多多!!盼望解答!

沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2007-8-17 11:14:00 | 只看该作者
盼望解答啊~~~
板凳
发表于 2007-8-18 17:44:00 | 只看该作者

A不能加强吧,它是对提及的时间再进一步往前推,这个对于文章结论没有什么意义了。就是说文章已经说在这个地区,1620's时,欧洲人的贸易很活跃,A项不过是把这个时间又给提前了,但论据仍旧没有变化,理由还是这个理由。如果要support的话,应该是从另一方面给出支持的理由。

C为什么可以加强?货物值钱并被保管得很仔细,和文章的结论没有关系吧?


[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-18 17:45:06编辑过]
地板
发表于 2007-9-19 00:17:00 | 只看该作者

顶一下,我也不太明白这道题,有没人在给出更详细的解答呀?

B为什么对A为什么错呀~~~~

5#
发表于 2007-9-19 05:27:00 | 只看该作者
不知道对不对,大家看看:

(A)
Due to trade among Native Americans, some European trade goods would
have reached the area before the European traders themselves did.

A的意思是由于土著之间的贸易,一些欧洲货物在欧洲商人贸易之前本来可以到达这个地区的,would have reached的真正意思是本可以到达,但是没有到达,就是说1620‘s前还是没有欧洲货,所以不对了。


6#
发表于 2007-9-19 09:07:00 | 只看该作者

A选项的问题如sophia_cc所说。

C的话由于带了一个as much as possible,因此事实也有可能这个军营是1930年后的遗址、也有E Goods;但是没有保存下来。

因此如果是要“most strengthen”,C没有B好。

7#
发表于 2007-11-22 16:34:00 | 只看该作者

没有找到 European trade goods, 很有可能是已经木有了(from loss or destruction)。C在这点上加强了。

所以不理解为何不可选C

8#
发表于 2007-11-29 23:06:00 | 只看该作者

(C) The first European trade goods to reach the area would have been
            considered especially valuable and preserved as much as possible from loss or destruction.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     代代表"在過去"被認為很有價值而且被好好保存, 但不代表後來沒有被破壞. 所以有可能在考古學家發現時, 這些trades goods 早已 under loss or destruction .     (小弟個人看法,有錯請大家幫忙指正 ^^)

9#
发表于 2008-3-14 09:28:00 | 只看该作者

我认为题目要找支持交易是在1620~1630之间活跃,只有B项提到时间1620's--准确,其他项都有时间上的漏洞,可以推前或推后。

10#
发表于 2008-3-14 10:13:00 | 只看该作者

A 削弱

B 由结论句得到,是直接加强

C 觉得上无关选项啊


[此贴子已经被作者于2008-3-14 10:19:24编辑过]
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, 2024-11-14 18:53
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