【OG24-562题】With which of the following characterizations of Lebsock’s contribution to the controversy concerning women’s status in the nineteenth century United States would the author of the passage be most likely to agree? _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.

With which of the following characterizations of Lebsock’s contribution to the controversy concerning women’s status in the nineteenth century United States would the author of the passage be most likely to agree?

Lebsock has studied women from a formerly neglected region and time period. Lebsock has demonstrated the importance of frame of reference in answering questions about women’s status. Lebsock has addressed the controversy by using women’s current status as a frame of reference. Lebsock has analyzed statistics about occupations and property that were previously ignored. Lebsock has applied recent historiographical methods to the biography of a nineteenth century woman.

正确答案： B

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上方法形成对比。Buel的传记很少将人物故事放在近期女性史学背景中；而Lebsock不仅书写了南方社区女性历史，还重新引导了关于19世纪女性地位相较于18世纪是提升还是下降的史学辩论。两部作品都让读者有机会评估女性地位的争议，但只有Lebsock的作品直接处理了该争议，她通过多方面研究得出结论：女性在一些领域获得自主，在经济领域则失去权力，且辩论本身取决于参考框架。相比之下，Buel的传记提供了原始材料，但在分析争议上未给读者太多指导。 文章类型及逻辑简图
文章类型为对比型。逻辑简图： Two works in 1984: contrasting approaches to US women's history Buel: little effort to place in context Lebsock: write women's history in a southern community & redirect historiographical debate Only Lebsock deals with controversy directly Examines different aspects of women's status Concludes: gained autonomy in some areas, lost in economic sphere; debate depends on frame of reference Buel: provides raw material, little guidance in analyzing controversy 做题方法及问题类型
问题类型为推断题。做题方法是通过定位文中对Lebsock贡献的描述来推断作者对其贡献的看法。定位提示句子为“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... More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference” 。 选项分析
A选项：文中未提及Lebsock研究的是以前被忽视的地区和时期，无中生有，排除。 B选项：根据文中“she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference”可知，Lebsock展示了参考框架在回答女性地位问题上的重要性，该项正确。 C选项：文中未提及Lebsock用女性当前地位作为参考框架，排除。 D选项：文中未提到Lebsock分析了以前被忽视的职业和财产统计数据，排除。 E选项：文章没有说Lebsock将近期史学方法应用于19世纪女性传记，排除。

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：