再问2772-63-42

michelle84

Historians sometimes forget that history is continually being made and experienced before it is studied, interpreted, and read. These latter activities have their own history, of course, which may impinge in unexpected ways on public events. It is difficult to predict when “new pasts” will overturn established historical interpretations and change the course of history.

In the fall of 1954, for example, C. Vann Woodward delivered a lecture series at the University of Virginia which challenged the prevailing dogma concerning the history, continuity, and uniformity of racial segregation in the South. He argued that the Jim Crow (Jim Crow: n. 〈贬〉黑人) laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries not only codified traditional practice but also were a determined effort to erase the considerable progress made by Black people during and after Reconstruction in the 1870’s. This revisionist view of Jim Crow legislation grew in part from the research that Woodward had done for the NAACP legal campaign during its preparation for Brown v. Board of Education. The Supreme Court had issued its ruling in this epochal desegregation case a few months before Woodward’s lectures.

The lectures were soon published as a book, The Strange Career of Jim Crow. Ten years later, in a preface to the second revised edition, Woodward confessed with ironic modesty that the first edition “had begun to suffer under some of the handicaps that might be expected in a history of the American Revolution published in 1776.” That was a bit like hearing Thomas Paine apologize for the timing of his pamphlet Common Sense, which had a comparable impact. Although Common Sense also had a mass readership, Paine had intended to reach and inspire: he was not a historian, and thus not concerned with accuracy or the dangers of historical anachronism. Yet, like Paine, Woodward had an unerring sense of the revolutionary moment, and of how historical evidence could undermine the mythological tradition that was crushing the dreams of new social possibilities. Martin Luther King, Jr., testified to the profound effect of The Strange Career of Jim Crow on the civil rights movement by praising the book and quoting it frequently.

2.     It can be inferred from the passage that the “prevailing dogma” (line 10) held that

(A) Jim Crow laws were passed to give legal status to well-established discriminatory practices in the South

(B) Jim Crow laws were passed to establish order and uniformity in the discriminatory practices of different southern states

(C) Jim Crow laws were passed to erase the social gains that Black people had achieved since Reconstruction

(D) the continuity of racial segregation in the South was disrupted by passage of Jim Crow laws（D）

(E) the Jim Crow laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were passed to reverse the effect of earlier Jim Crow laws

5.     The attitude of the author of the passage toward the work of C. Vann Woodward is best described as one of

(A) respectful regard

(B) qualified approbation (approbation: n.官方批准, 认可, 嘉许)

(C) implied skepticism

(D) pointed criticism（B）

(E) fervent advocacy

3.     Which of the following is the best example of writing that is likely to be subject to the kinds of “handicaps” referred to in line 27?

(A) A history of an auto manufacturing plant written by an employee during an auto-buying boom

(B) A critique of a statewide school-desegregation plan written by an elementary school teacher in that state

(C) A newspaper article assessing the historical importance of a United States President written shortly after the President has taken office

(D) A scientific paper describing the benefits of a certain surgical technique written by the surgeon who developed the technique（C）

(E) Diary entries narrating the events of a battle written by a soldier who participated in the battle

斑竹请不要打我，根据你们的指导我重新看了文章，我认为一段最后一句是结论，2，3段根据结论分解举例，但我实在不理解具体内容与结论的对应关系，上面几道题我都作的不太明白，作者好像是负评价，但结尾有正评价，他的态度我还是不太清楚，麻烦斑竹们在位我 解答一下，万分感谢！！！！！

weiyu

以下是引用pumpkin在2004-4-14 21:37:00的发言：

Passage 42 (42/63)

Historians sometimes forget that history is continually being made and experienced before it is studied, interpreted, and read. These latter activities have their own history, of course, which may impinge in unexpected ways on public events. It is difficult to predict when “new pasts” will overturn established historical interpretations and change the course of history.

In the fall of 1954, for example, C. Vann Woodward delivered a lecture series at the University of Virginia which challenged the prevailing dogma concerning the history, continuity, and uniformity of racial segregation in the South. He argued that the Jim Crow (Jim Crow: n. 〈贬〉黑人) laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries not only codified traditional practice but also were a determined effort to erase the considerable progress made by Black people during and after Reconstruction in the 1870’s. 关键就是这句话: He argue = he challenge, 所以argue        后面和challenge后面的内容应该是相关的东东. 他是challenge the prevailing dogma, 就是他不同意这个prevailing dogma. 他argue that JM law……就是他认为这个JIM CROW Law的弊端在于: 此法律不仅仅使得旧的传统势力合法, 即, 使得歧视黑人的行为合法化, 而且还把从前的运动的成果给取消了.        那么就是说这个prevailing dogma 认为JIM CROW LAW : (C) Jim Crow laws were passed to erase the social gains that Black people had achieved since Reconstruction

原文和PumpkinMM的理解稍有出入：　In the fall of 1954, for example, C. Vann Woodward delivered a lecture series at the University of Virginia which challenged the prevailing dogma concerning the history, continuity, and uniformity of racial segregation in the South. He argued that the Jim Crow (Jim Crow: n. 〈贬〉黑人) laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries not only codified traditional practice but also were a determined effort to erase the considerable progress made by Black people during and after Reconstruction in the 1870’s. 　意思是说CVW的理论挑战了传统观点就南部种族歧视的历史，延续性和一致性。他认为(argue)JC的法案不仅合法化了传统行为（种族歧视）而且抹杀了在19世纪70年代及其之后重建时期黑人的作用。所以传统观点认为的是JC法案将终止种族歧视（D)

This revisionist view of Jim Crow legislation grew in part from the research that Woodward had done for the NAACP legal campaign during its preparation for Brown v. Board of Education. The Supreme Court had issued its ruling in this epochal desegregation case a few months before Woodward’s lectures. 这里完全是正面态度, 作者支持同意 CBW的观点啊, 用的词都是好词: revisionist, challenge the prevailing dogma, 作者反对那个prevailing dogma

The lectures were soon published as a book, The Strange Career of Jim Crow. Ten years later, in a preface to the second revised edition, Woodward confessed with ironic modesty that the first edition “had begun to suffer under some of the handicaps that might be expected in a history of the American Revolution published in 1776.”

这时“马后炮”，偶当时也错了。可能有点美国历史常识，老美大概不会错，看看多愚蠢的一句话“希望在1776年出版一部关于美国革命的历史，可是常识是美国革命1776才开始，好像是在我们中学历史里提到过”     (即一个东东刚开始就要对其总结性论述或评价）

(C) A newspaper article assessing the historical importance of a United States President written shortly after the President has taken office (一个报纸在新总统刚刚上任就要对其历史重要性作评价）

That was a bit like hearing Thomas Paine apologize for the timing of his pamphlet Common Sense, which had a comparable impact. Although Common Sense also had a mass readership, Paine had intended to reach and inspire: he was not a historian, and thus not concerned with accuracy or the dangers of historical anachronism. Yet, like Paine, Woodward had an unerring sense of the revolutionary moment, and of how historical evidence could undermine the mythological tradition that was crushing the dreams of new social possibilities. Martin Luther King, Jr., testified to the profound effect of The Strange Career of Jim Crow on the civil rights movement by praising the book and quoting it frequently.

这里态度有点变化, 特别是the handicaps, 就是说CBW的书有一点小小的毛病, 但是CBW还是谦虚认真的承认自己的毛病嘛, 那作者既然用了这个词语, 就是把态度QUALIFY了一下, 后面还有Woodward had an unerring sense of the revolutionary moment说明作者的确是混和态度, 大正小负. 所以就是qualified apporbation.

Handicaps, ==è That was a bit like hearing Thomas Paine apologize for the timing==è he was not a historian, and thus not concerned with accuracy or the dangers of historical anachronism

简单说就是外行写内行的东东, 见解是很好的, 独特的, 但是由于不是专业人事, 写的东东有小错误.

3.                 Which of the following is the best example of writing that is likely to be subject to the kinds of “handicaps” referred to in line 27?

(A) A history of an auto manufacturing plant written by an employee during an auto-buying boom

an employee is an insider, not an outsider

(B) A critique of a statewide school-desegregation plan written by an elementary school teacher in that state

老师写学校里面的东东, 当然是insider

(C) A newspaper article assessing the historical importance of a United States President written shortly after the President has taken office

(D) A scientific paper describing the benefits of a certain surgical technique written by the surgeon who developed the technique（C）

surgeon is an insider

(E) Diary entries narrating the events of a battle written by a soldier who participated in the battle

soldier 当然是insider

那么剩下的就是C. newspaper article当然不是历史雪茄也不是政治雪茄写的, 那么就是外行写的关于总统的历史重要性. 就选这个.

偶认为此文是满难的. 多谢楼主信任. 还请分析指教(这个偶严重同意）

胡说了一通，还请指正

    

michelle84

谢谢两位斑竹的解答，这次真的明白了，谢谢你们两位热心人，你们真的是很负责的斑竹！！

zcx

原文和PumpkinMM的理解稍有出入：　In the fall of 1954, for example, C. Vann Woodward delivered a lecture series at the University of Virginia which challenged the prevailing dogma concerning the history, continuity, and uniformity of racial segregation in the South. He argued that the Jim Crow (Jim Crow: n. 〈贬〉黑人) laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries not only codified traditional practice but also were a determined effort to erase the considerable progress made by Black people during and after Reconstruction in the 1870’s. 　意思是说CVW的理论挑战了传统观点就南部种族歧视的历史，延续性和一致性。他认为(argue)JC的法案不仅合法化了传统行为（种族歧视）而且抹杀了在19世纪70年代及其之后重建时期黑人的作用。所以传统观点认为的是JC法案将终止种族歧视（D)

weiyu gg,你在这篇文章的见解中，有一段与pumpkin mm不同的见解，是不是应该有个“assumption"-----prevailing dogma 和jc law是一致的，cvw这个家伙的看法与他们两个不一致

weiyu

不是的，是prevailing和CVW相反。CVW认为JC合法化了种族歧视，低估了黑人成就。所以prevailing认为JC disrupt了种族歧视

zcx

应该这么理解：unlike prevailing dogma, CVW belived that....., 题目问prevailing dagma, 那就是CVW的见解取非，也就是原文codify取非，改写为disrupt,是吧？

yyqq

谢谢楼主的分析。现在我理解第二题了。

做题时怎么都没想过来，review的时候也想不过来，现在

听听楼主的分析，明白了

icare1

I understand now

zhaozilong

For question 2, I do not agree pumpkin and weiyu,both C and D is wrong.

The answer should be A.

dancerme814

以下是引用zhaozilong在2005-12-6 6:09:00的发言：

For question 2, I do not agree pumpkin and weiyu,both C and D is wrong.

The answer should be A

A是CVW的观点