咦?醋醋mm,我本来觉得明白A不对了,但是现在我又不明白B和C的区别了,c是答案。可是B也符合相同性质的GROUP进行比较 这一句我已经快能背下来了,为什么b又不对了 Nakane’s case study (case study: n.个案研究) of one rural Japanese American community provides valuable information about the lives and experiences of the Issei. It is, however, too particularistic (particularism: a tendency to explain complex social phenomena in terms of a single causative factor). This limitation derives from Nakane’s methodology—that of oral history—which cannot substitute for a broader theoretical or comparative perspective. Future research might well consider two issues raised by her study: were the Issei of the Pajaro Valley similar to or different from Issei in urban settings, and what variations existed between rural Japanese American communities?6
原句:1、pvIssei 人和urban Issei人的区别, 2、乡村日裔美国人communities的variations 6. The author of the passage would most likely agree that which of the following, if it had been included in Nakane’s study, would best remedy the particularistic nature of that study? (A) A statistical table comparing per capita income of Issei wage laborers and sharecroppers in the Pajaro Valley (B) A statistical table showing per capita income of Issei in the Pajaro Valley from 1890 to 1940 (C) A statistical table showing rates of farm ownership by Japanese Americans in four central California counties from 1890 to 1940 我重新在这里贴了次,你能对B、C解释的详细点吗?我现在感觉问题归根在原文的communities理解上 |