标题: GWD3 Q36 [打印本页]

---

作者: wangliming    时间: 2010-4-30 06:56     标题: GWD3 Q36

Historians who study European  

   women of the Renaissance try to ma-

sure “independence,” “options,” and

other indicators of the degree to which

(5) the expression of women’s individuality

was either permitted or suppressed.

Influenced by Western individualism,

these historians define a peculiar form

of personhood:  an innately bounded

(10) unit, autonomous and standing apart

from both nature and society.  An

anthropologist, however, would contend

that a person can be conceived in ways

other than as an “individual.”  In many

(15)      societies a person’s identity is not

intrinsically unique and self-contained

but instead is defined within a complex

web of social relationships.

In her study of the fifteenth-century

(20)      Florentine widow Alessandra Strozzi, a

historian who specializes in European

women of the Renaissance attributes

individual intention and authorship of

      actions to her subject.  This historian

(25)      assumes that Alessandra had goals

and interests different from those of her

sons, yet much of the historian’s own

research reveals that Alessandra

acted primarily as a champion of her

(30)      sons’ interests, taking their goals as

her own.  Thus Alessandra conforms

more closely to the anthropologist’s

      notion that personal motivation is

embedded in a social context.  Indeed,

(35)      one could argue that Alessandra did

      not distinguish her personhood from

that of her sons.  In Renaissance

Europe the boundaries of the con-

ceptual self were not always firm

(40)      and closed and did not necessarily

coincide with the boundaries of

the bodily self.

GWD3-Q36:

      It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes which of the following about the study of Alessandra Strozzi done by the historian mentioned in the second paragraph?



A.Alessandra was atypical of her time and was therefore an inappropriate choice for the subject of the historian’s research.

B.In order to bolster her thesis, the historian adopted the anthropological perspective on personhood.

C.The historian argues that the boundaries of the conceptual self were not always firm and closed in Renaissance Europe.

D.In her study, the historian reverts to a traditional approach that is out of step with the work of other historians of Renaissance Europe.

E.The interpretation of Alessandra’s actions that the historian puts forward is not supported by much of the historian’s research.



能帮忙解释一下B、C两项吗？不明白。。。

多谢诸位啦！！~

---

作者: liuzhenlin    时间: 2010-4-30 22:21

讲一下对文章结构的理解：
第一段：阐述历史学家和人类学家的观点
第二段：历史学家本想用AS来证明自己的观点，没想到却证明了人类学家的观点
现在题目问你，推测出作者所认为的AS研究，也就是第二段的用意，答案E是显然的
This historian assumes that Alessandra had goals and interests different from those

of her sons, yet much of the historian’s own research reveals that Alessandra acted

primarily as a champion of her sons’ interests, taking their goals as her own.
B.In order to bolster her thesis, the historian adopted the anthropological

perspective on personhood  历史学家没有采用人类学家的观点

C.The historian argues that the boundaries of the conceptual self were not always

firm and closed in Renaissance Europe. 结尾处的细节

---

欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/)

Powered by Discuz! 7.2