Archaeologists in Michigan have excavated a Native American camp near Dumaw Creek. Radiocarbon dating of animal bones found at the site indicates that the camp dates from some time between 1605 and 1755. However, the camp probably dates to no later than 1630, since no European trade goods were found at the site, and European traders were active in the region from the 1620's onward.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Due to trade among Native Americans, some European trade goods would have reached the area before the European traders themselves did.
(B) At all camps in the region that have been reliably dated to the late 1620's, remains of European trade goods have been found.
(C) The first European trade goods to reach the area would have been considered especially valuable and preserved as much as possible from loss or destruction.
(D) The first European traders in the area followed soon after the first European explorers.
(E) The site is that of a temporary camp that would have been used seasonally for a few years and then abandoned.
我就不明白 since no European trade goods were found at the site, and European traders were active in the region from the 1620's onward. 这句话为什么能推出这个camp不会晚于1630年作者: tclzcja 时间: 2012-1-7 06:35
Sinces后有两个原因：1、no European trade goods在这个camp被发现；2、European traders 从1620's 起在这些地区有很活跃。由这两个原因推出the camp probably dates to no later than 1630的过程是这样的：从1620's起，European traders在这些地方很活跃（原因2），意味着这个camp 该留有trade goods（推理过程，） 但no European trade goods在这个camp被发现（原因1），所以the camp probably dates to no later than 1630。
划线部分是正常的逻辑推理，也是需要得到证实的部分。选项B说，在1620‘s 之后的all camps ，都能发现trade goods remains.完美的在文章的原因与结果之间架桥！翻牌之~~作者: sealg 时间: 2012-1-8 21:23
