ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3423|回复: 7
打印 上一主题 下一主题

og 12 RC 第十篇 florentine女工工资低技能低48题求教

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2011-7-9 15:07:38 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
求教各位nn:
In the seventeenth-century Florentine textile
industry, women were employed primarily in lowpaying,
low-skill jobs. To explain this segregation
of labor by gender, economists have relied on
the useful theory of human capital. According
to this theory, investment in human capital—the
acquisition of difficult job-related skills—generally
benefits individuals by making them eligible to
engage in well-paid occupations. Women’s role as
child bearers, however, results in interruptions in
their participation in the job market (as compared
with men’s) and thus reduces their opportunities
to acquire training for highly skilled work. In
addition, the human capital theory explains why
there was a high concentration of women workers
in certain low-skill jobs, such as weaving, but not
in others, such as combing or carding, by positing
that because of their primary responsibility in child
rearing women took occupations that could be
carried out in the home.
There were, however, differences in pay scales
that cannot be explained by the human capital
theory. For example, male construction workers
were paid significantly higher wages than female
taffeta weavers. The wage difference between
these two low-skill occupations stems from the
segregation of labor by gender: because a limited
number of occupations were open to women, there
was a large supply of workers in their fields, and
this “overcrowding” resulted in women receiving
lower wages and men receiving higher wages.
48. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the
explanation provided by the human capital theory for
women’s concentration in certain occupations in
seventeenth-century Florence?
(A) Women were unlikely to work outside the home
even in occupations whose hours were flexible
enough to allow women to accommodate
domestic tasks as well as paid labor.
(B) Parents were less likely to teach occupational
skills to their daughters than they were to their
sons.
(C) Women’s participation in the Florentine paid
labor force grew steadily throughout the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
(D) The vast majority of female weavers in the
Florentine wool industry had children.
(E) Few women worked as weavers in the Florentine
silk industry, which was devoted to making
cloths that required a high degree of skill to
produce.
这个题目答案为A,可以理解,可是B为什么错呢?
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2011-7-9 16:44:39 | 只看该作者
我是这样理解的,一般weaken类的题目,你要找到那个支持conclusion的理由,比如这题,是1、女工要带孩子,更少参与到job market 所以很好有机会去学习高技术的工作。2、女工主要任务是带孩子,所以她们承担的工作是可以在家里做的。 然后你要看选项里有没有否定其中的一个或更多。
A 女工不太可能出门工作,即使是一些很flexible的,能够考虑到家里情况又拿工资的工作。 这就否定了女工是因为要带孩子才在家里工作的假设。
B是说男女在小时候接受的培训不同,这个没办法推翻以上任何一个理由。
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2011-7-9 16:53:32 | 只看该作者

谢谢

地板
 楼主| 发表于 2011-7-9 16:54:10 | 只看该作者
我是这样理解的,一般weaken类的题目,你要找到那个支持conclusion的理由,比如这题,是1、女工要带孩子,更少参与到job market 所以很好有机会去学习高技术的工作。2、女工主要任务是带孩子,所以她们承担的工作是可以在家里做的。 然后你要看选项里有没有否定其中的一个或更多。
A 女工不太可能出门工作,即使是一些很flexible的,能够考虑到家里情况又拿工资的工作。 这就否定了女工是因为要带孩子才在家里工作的假设。
B是说男女在小时候接受的培训不同,这个没办法推翻以上任何一个理由。
-- by 会员 queen09 (2011/7/9 16:44:39)

那可不可以将B选项理解为:因为父母从小不教他们的女儿一些必要的劳动技能,导致他们长大了也没有好的劳动技能,以致不能获得好的就业机会?这样不就可以从另一方面weaken原文human capital原理的第一个关于他们不能获得high-skill job的论述了么?
5#
发表于 2011-7-9 17:12:53 | 只看该作者
我们来看一下第一个reason它的阐述是这样的:女工要带孩子-失去机会去就业市场-失去培训机会-没有技能-只能从事低技能工作。
如果它有weaken第一个reason的话,它要推翻“女工要带孩子”的前提。而B没有推翻这一点,而是“补充”了"没有技能"的原因,所以它更应该成为第三个reason而不是推翻第一个reason.
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-7-9 18:40:52 | 只看该作者
我们来看一下第一个reason它的阐述是这样的:女工要带孩子-失去机会去就业市场-失去培训机会-没有技能-只能从事低技能工作。
如果它有weaken第一个reason的话,它要推翻“女工要带孩子”的前提。而B没有推翻这一点,而是“补充”了"没有技能"的原因,所以它更应该成为第三个reason而不是推翻第一个reason.
-- by 会员 queen09 (2011/7/9 17:12:53)

大概明白了~那么B算是support么?还是算是独立于这human capital外的无support无weaken的观点?
7#
发表于 2011-7-9 20:08:02 | 只看该作者
独立吧!~
8#
发表于 2013-11-7 13:02:33 | 只看该作者
  嗯 受用 !
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-5-2 19:01
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部