【OG24-560题】The primary purpose of the passage is to_mofa留学圈mofaGRE在线题库系统_GRE在线搜题_GRE题库解析_GRE真题机经_GRE课程_GRE培训机构

最新题目

题目内容

纠错

Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writing the history of United States women.Buel and Buel’s biography of Mary Fish (1736–1818) makes little effort to place her story in the context of recent historiography on women. Lebsock, meanwhile, attempts not only to write the history of women in one southern community, but also to redirect two decades of historiographical debate as to whether women gained or lost status in the nineteenth century as compared with the eighteenth century. Although both books offer the reader the opportunity to assess this controversy regarding women’s status, only Lebsock’s deals with it directly. She examines several different aspects of women’s status, helping to refine and resolve the issues. She concludes that while women gained autonomy in some areas, especially in the private sphere, they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere. More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men. Yet women also gained power in comparison with their previous status, owning a higher proportion of real estate, for example. In contrast, Buel and Buel’s biography provides ample raw material for questioning the myth, fostered by some historians, of a colonial golden age in the eighteenth century but does not give the reader much guidance in analyzing the controversy over women’s status.

第1 题

The primary purpose of the passage is to

examine two sides of a historiographical debate call into question an author’s approach to a historiographical debate examine one author’s approach to a historiographical debate discuss two authors’ works in relationship to a historiographical debate explain the prevalent perspective on a historiographical debate

正确答案： D

参考解析

提交我的解析

文章大意逻辑
文章开篇指出1984年出版的两部作品在书写美国女性历史方面方法形成对比。Buel和Buel的传记未将人物故事置于近期女性史学背景中，而Lebsock不仅书写了一个南方社区女性历史，还试图重新审视19世纪与18世纪女性地位变化的史学争论。接着说明虽然两部作品都让读者有机会评估女性地位的争议，但只有Lebsock的作品直接处理了这个争议，她从多方面研究女性地位并得出结论。最后对比指出Buel和Buel的传记提供了质疑殖民黄金时代神话的原始材料，但在分析争议方面给读者指导较少。 文章类型及逻辑简图
文章类型：对比型逻辑简图： Two works in 1984: contrasting approaches to US women's history Buel and Buel's biography: little effort in context Lebsock's work: write women's history, redirect historiographical debate Lebsock directly deals with women's status controversy, examines aspects, concludes Contrast: Buel and Buel's provides raw material but little guidance in analysis 问题类型及做题方法
问题类型：主旨题。做题方法：通过梳理文章开头点明的两部作品对比以及后续围绕它们在处理女性地位史学争议方面的阐述来把握主旨。 选项分析
A选项：文章不是在审视史学争论的两个方面，而是对比两部作品在该争论中的处理方式，A错误。 B选项：文章没有质疑某个作者对史学争论的方法，B错误。 C选项：只提到一个作者的方法不全面，文章对比了两个作者，C错误。 D选项：文章确实讨论了两位作者的作品与史学争论的关系，符合主旨，D正确。 E选项：文章没有解释关于史学争论的普遍观点，E错误。

题目讨论 (如果对题目有任何的疑惑，欢迎在这里提出来，大家会帮你解答的哦~)

还没有人评论,赶快抢个沙发~

做题笔记

参考解析

题目讨论 (如果对题目有任何的疑惑，欢迎在这里提出来，大家会帮你解答的哦~)

请选择错误类型：

请描述一下这个错误：