[求助]prep1 essay#12

ilovecushi

Essay #12.  270        (23076-!-item-!-188;#058&00270-00)

 

The professionalization of the study of history in the second half of the nineteenth century, including history's transformation from a literary genre to a scientific discipline, had important consequences not only for historians' perceptions of women but also for women as historians.  The disappearance of women as objects of historical studies during this period has elements of irony to it.  On the one hand, in writing about women, earlier historians had relied not on firsthand sources but rather on secondary sources; the shift to more rigorous research methods required that secondary sources be disregarded.  On the other hand, the development of archival research and the critical editing of collections of documents began to reveal significant new historical evidence concerning women,
            yet this evidence was perceived as substantially irrelevant:  historians saw political history as the general framework for historical writing.  Because women were seen as belonging to the private rather than to the public sphere, the discovery of documents about them, or by them, did not, by itself, produce history acknowledging the contributions of women. In addition, genres such as biography and memoir, those forms of "particular history" that women had traditionally authored, fell into disrepute.  The dividing line between "particular history" and general history was redefined in stronger terms, widening the gulf between amateur and professional practices of historical research.

 

Question #40.  270-01       (23122-!-item-!-188;#058&000270-01)

 

The passage is primarily concerned with

 

(A) describing some effects of the professionalization of the study of history on the writing of women's history

(B) explaining some reasons for the professionalization of the writing of history

(C) discussing the kinds of historical writing traditionally practiced by women

(D) contrasting the approach to the writing of history taken by women with the approach taken by men

(E) criticizing certain changes that occurred in the writing of history during the second half of the nineteenth century

 

Question #41.  270-02       (23168-!-item-!-188;#058&000270-02)

 

Which of the following best describes one of the "elements of irony" referred to in the highlighted text?

 

(A) Although the more scientific-minded historians of the second half of the nineteenth century considered women appropriate subjects for historical writing, earlier historians did not.

(B) Although archival research uncovered documentary evidence of women's role in history, historians continued to rely on secondary sources for information about women.

(C) Although historians were primarily concerned with writing about the public sphere, they generally relegated women to the private sphere.

(D) The scientific approach to history revealed more information about women, but that information was ignored.

(E) The professionalization of history, while marginalizing much of women's writing about history, enhanced the importance of women as historical subjects.

elements of irony"  想請問這詞該怎麼翻譯呀? 原文定位在哪呢?

 答案分別為A 和 D

請大家一起來討論喔~

ilovecushi

somebody there~~~  please~~

Jocelynsu

elements of irony就是具有讽刺意味的成分

on one hand...on the other hand...讲了两个elements，答案给的是第二个

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-11-21 19:50:57编辑过]

jeansummer

这个主题题我也没见过，看结构像是结论解释，但是开头的“结论”和后面讨论的内容完全没有关系。所以这个中心思想要自己总结的……

后文举了三个"irony"的例子，都是围绕"writings of women"展开的。

graceguo98

Question #42.  270-05    (23214-!-item-!-188;#058&000270-05)

According to the passage, the development of archival research and the critical editing of collections of documents had which of the following effects?

(A) Historians increasingly acknowledged women's contributions to history（与原文相反--错）.
(B) Historians began to debate whether secondary sources could provide reliable information（无）.
(C) Historians began to apply less rigorous scientific research criteria to the study of women's history（这个不是这一段的内容-错）.
(D) More evidence concerning women became available to historical researchers.
（为什么正确？原文说new evidence comcerning was perceived as substantially irrelevant, 既然是不相关的，为什么还是有用的呢？而且后面也说new discovery ...did not produce history acknowledging the contributions of women, 实在不能理解，为什么D正确）
(E) Women began to study history as professional historians. （无）


请NN帮忙解释。。
谢谢

darkbaby0117

42 只是问archival research and the critical editing of collections of documents 的作用，那么这个作用就是给提供些新证据，也就是有更多证据了，而irrelevant是后面的讽刺，就是说前面的作用并没起什么作用，但这个我们就不用管了