标题: OG120 ，纠结了好久，NN帮忙指点一下吧 [打印本页]
作者: buttonwood 时间: 2011-5-27 06:58 标题: OG120 ，纠结了好久，NN帮忙指点一下吧
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 wereunearthed at Colha. These implements resembleMayan stone implements of a much later period,also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements'designs are strikingly different from the designs ofstone implements produced by other cultures knownto have inhabited the area in prehistoric times.Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements inColha 4,500 years ago.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakensthe argument?
(A)Ceramic ware is not known to have been usedby the Mayan people to make agriculturalimplements.
(B)Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicatesthat agriculture began there around 4,500 yearsago.
(C)Archaeological evidence indicates that some ofthe oldest stone implements found at Colhawere used to cut away vegetation after
controlled burning of trees to open areas ofswampland for cultivation.
(D)Successor cultures at a given site often adoptthe style of agricultural implements used byearlier inhabitants of the same site.
(E)Many religious and social institutions of theMayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 yearsago 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.
作者: with二 时间: 2011-5-27 21:31
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
作者: huangsiyan 时间: 2011-5-30 20:30
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.
作者: imbalancey 时间: 2011-6-1 20:42
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？
作者: buttonwood 时间: 2011-6-2 06:41
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
作者: xinsiye 时间: 2011-6-15 20:43
好帖子!给力！！！路过要顶上一顶！！！！！
淘宝网女装夏装新款2011韩版 淘宝网女装秋装新款 异世邪君5200 淘宝网女装夏装 淘宝网女装新款 淘宝网十字绣 淘宝网女包 淘宝网秋装新款 淘宝网女鞋新款2011 淘宝网女装夏装2011韩版 淘宝网箱包新款 淘宝网男装夏装新款2011 淘宝网孕妇装
| 欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/forum/) |
Powered by Discuz! 7.2 |