|
偶支持D.A.A.B 偶认为第一题应该选D。关于brief的上述看法偶并不认同。 文章的第一段是对这个事件的大致描述。对比文章后两段来看,它们分别是阐述了socialists和boycotters在这一事件上的不同。 首先是目的上的不同 socialists呢,是seized the opportunity and quickly organized an extensive series of cost-of-living protests designed to direct the women's movement toward Socialist goals. boycotters呢,they saw cheaper food as a valuable end in itself. 这里的design extensive series protests加上第一段上渲染的盛况空前,作者的意思绝对不会是想说明这场运动只是一场relatively short period of time的运动吧。 然后再是态度上的不同 socialists是"Underneath the socialists' brief commitment to cost-of-living organizing lay a basic indifference to the issue itself""secondary or tertiary to the real task at hand" boycotters是"out of an urgent and deeply felt commitment to the cost-of-living issue" 在这里,我们明显可以看到"brief commitment"的对立面"an urgent and deeply felt commitment",也就是说,这里的brief指的不是时间概念上的brief而是照应了indifference的态度。 最后楼上说的coincide是(of events) occur at the same time or occupy the same period of time as sth else,那么我就要提出coincide的另一个意思:be identical or very similar to sth else。因为利益上的一致性,导致了stronghold of the socialist party的结果。与seized the opportunity and quickly organized相互照应。
[此贴子已经被作者于2006-8-24 15:10:47编辑过] |