OG120 没搜到，纠结了好久，NN帮忙指点一下吧

swimswan

对于OG的解释很不理解

120. The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize,
is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however,
4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were
unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble
Mayan stone implements of a much later period,
also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements'
designs are strikingly different from the designs of
stone implements produced by other cultures known
to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times.
Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in
Colha 4,500 years ago.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens
the argument?

(A)Ceramic ware is not known to have been used
by the Mayan people to make agricultural
implements.

(B)Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicates
that agriculture began there around 4,500 years
ago.

(C)Archaeological evidence indicates that some of
the oldest stone implements found at Colha
were used to cut away vegetation after
controlled burning of trees to open areas of
swampland for cultivation.

(D)Successor cultures at a given site often adopt
the style of agricultural implements used by
earlier inhabitants of the same site.

(E)Many religious and social institutions of the
Mayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 years
ago relied on a highly developed system of
agricultural symbols.

Argument Evaluation

SituationRecently, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements have been found in Colha,a location where 3,000-year-old Mayan pottery had previously been found. Theimplements resemble other Mayan implements of a much later time that were alsofound in Colha, and they are unlike the implements used by other local cultures inprehistoric times. These recently discovered implements thus prove that Mayan culturewas established in Colha 4,500 years ago.

ReasoningWhich point weakens the argument? First, identify a crucial underlying assumption. Theargument assumes the distinctive 4,500-year-old implements must be Mayan becausethey are similar to implements the Mayans are known to have used there much later.What if there is another reason for the similarity? What if a culture that comes to analready inhabited site tends to adapt its implements to the style of the residentculture'simplements? In that case, the Mayans could have come to the alreadyestablishedcommunity of Colha at some later point, and the later Mayan agricultural tools could becopies of the earlier culture's tools.
文中的黄色字体部分不是已经否定了这种情况了吗？


AThe argument does not suggest that the Mayans used ceramics forimplements, so this point doesnot weaken the argument; it is irrelevant to it.

BSince the point of the argument is who, specifically, established a settlement in Colha 4,500 yearsago, the evidence that some unidentified people were practicing agriculture there at that timeneither strengthens nor weakens the argument.

CDiscovering how the implements were used does not explain who was using them, so thisinformation is not relevant to the conclusion.

DCorrect. This statement properly identifies the weakness in the argument that the similaritybetween the 4,500-year-old implements and the later Mayan implements may be attributed tothe Mayans' adopting the style of implements used earlier by another culture.

EThat the Mayans relied on agricultural symbols at that time is nearly irrelevant to the issue ofwhether the earlier implements belonged to their culture. To the extent that this is relevant, itvery slightly supports, rather than weakens, the argument; highly developed'suggests that Mayanshad been practicing agriculture for a long time.

jy4780163

你这个不空格我看着真恶心的~

swimswan

不好意思，不知道怎么回事，已经好了，帮忙看看吧，谢了

fuzheng602

4500年的更早,3000年的晚（玛雅人）,那么如果玛雅人在居住地方继承了先前居住在此地的人的传统、器具，那么使用的东西当人会像，但先前的人不一定是玛雅人

dengts

The stimulus only tells us that the implements designs are different from the designs of stone implements produced by other culture KNOWN to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times.Perhaps there really exsits one culture,and we don't know it.

swimswan

支持4楼的看法，但是这样解释还是有点牵强

shaonianhe

这么理解，清朝人用碗吃饭，我们现在也用碗吃饭，这有一个继承性。用碗吃饭的不一定都是清朝人，还有可能是天朝人，哈哈，楼主说呢？

swimswan

呵呵，谢谢你的回答
如果用这个例子的话，我的理解是：
the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. 实际上是在否定天朝人用过碗，不过按四楼的说的如果不知道天朝人曾inhabited the area,那么还是可以用来weaken的

mia113

The stimulus only tells us that the implements designs are different from the designs of stone implements produced by other culture KNOWN to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times.Perhaps there really exsits one culture,and we don't know it.

-- by 会员 dengts (2011/4/6 21:11:08)

up up ``不过出题人还真有点猥琐啊··

robertwu82

还是没有很懂，觉得文章黄色背景部分已经否定了D。既然other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times 做出来的工具与发现的工具不同，就说明只有Mayan做的工具相似。
不知道A为什么错了，直接说Mayan不把Ceramic ware（这个应该是pottery一样吧）用为农业工具不也是一种削弱么。