Board logo

标题: GWD 31-10 for answer [打印本页]

作者: michellemove    时间: 2005-11-25 07:37     标题: GWD 31-10 for answer

10: The Hyksos invaded the Nile Delta of Egypt and ruled it from 1650 B.C. Their origin is uncertain, but archaeologists hypothesize that they were Canaanites. In support of this hypothesis, the archaeologists point out that excavations of Avans, the Hyksos capital in Egypt, have uncovered large numbers of artifacts virtually Identical to artifacts produced in Ashkelon, and Ashkelon was a major city of Canaan at the time of the Hyksos’ invasion.

In order to evaluate the force of the archaeologists’ evidence, it would useful to determine which of the following?

A: Whether artifacts from LACE>AshkelonLACE> were widely traded to non-Canaanite cities?

B: Whether significant numbers of artifacts that do not resemble artifacts produced in LACE>AshkelonLACE> have been found at Avans?

C: Whether Avans was the nearest Hyksos city in LACE>EgyptLACE> to LACE>CanaanLACE>?

D: Whether LACE>AshkelonLACE> after 1550 B.C. continued to produce artifacts similar to those found at Avans?

E: whether any artifacts produced by the Hyksos after 1550 B.C .have been found in Egypt

My answer B, correct?


作者: oldersea    时间: 2005-11-26 06:59

理应是A

将Ayes和no,带入原文。分别削弱和支持结论,所以,A是正确的。


作者: michellemove    时间: 2005-11-27 20:09

I disagree. A means to NON-Canaanite city. If it say trade to Canaanite city, you are right. Open to discuss. Thanks.

作者: efficiency    时间: 2005-11-28 20:22

支持选A拉,如果是yes那么理论假设就是有问题滴,反之则加强了理论假设哩.




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