【OG24-542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

During the 1980s, many economic historians studying Latin America focused on the impact of the Great Depression of the 1930s. Most of these historians argued that although the Depression began earlier in Latin America than in the United States, it was less severe in Latin America and did not significantly impede industrial growth there. The historians' argument was grounded in national government records concerning tax revenues and exports and in government-sponsored industrial censuses, from which historians have drawn conclusions about total manufacturing output and profit levels across Latin America. However, economic statistics published by Latin American governments in the early twentieth century are neither reliable nor consistent; this is especially true of manufacturing data, which were gathered from factory owners for taxation purposes and which therefore may well be distorted. Moreover, one cannot assume a direct correlation between the output level and the profit level of a given industry as these variables often move in opposite directions. Finally, national and regional economies are composed of individual firms and industries, and relying on general, sweeping economic indicators may mask substantial variations among these different enterprises. For example, recent analyses of previously unexamined data on textile manufacturing in Brazil and Mexico suggest that the Great Depression had a more severe impact on this Latin American industry than scholars had recognized.

The primary purpose of the passage is to

compare the impact of the Great Depression on Latin America with its impact on the United States criticize a school of economic historians for failing to analyze the Great Depression in Latin America within a global context illustrate the risks inherent in comparing different types of economic enterprises to explain economic phenomena call into question certain scholars' views concerning the severity of the Great Depression in Latin America demonstrate that the Great Depression had a more severe impact on industry in Latin American than in certain other regions

正确答案： D

参考解析

提交我的解析

文章大意逻辑
文章主要讨论了20世纪80年代许多研究拉丁美洲的经济史学家对20世纪30年代大萧条在拉丁美洲影响的观点。这些史学家认为大萧条在拉丁美洲开始早但程度轻，未显著阻碍工业增长，其观点基于国家政府记录。然而，拉丁美洲政府在20世纪初公布的经济统计数据不可靠且不一致，制造业数据尤其可能被扭曲，同时不能假定产业产出和利润有直接关联，依赖整体经济指标可能掩盖企业间差异，例如巴西和墨西哥纺织制造业的新分析显示大萧条影响比学者认知的更严重。 文章类型及逻辑简图
文章类型为新旧观点对比。逻辑简图： Old view：Many economic historians studying Latin America in 1980s argued that the Great Depression was less severe in Latin America and didn't impede industrial growth, based on national government records. Problems with old view： Economic statistics are neither reliable nor consistent. No direct correlation between output and profit. General economic indicators may mask variations. Example：New analyses of textile manufacturing in Brazil and Mexico suggest more severe impact. 问题类型及做题方法
问题类型为主旨题。做题方法是通过梳理文章整体结构，把握作者对经济史学家观点的质疑态度来解题。 选项分析
A选项：文章重点不是比较大萧条对拉丁美洲和美国的影响，而是质疑学者对拉丁美洲大萧条严重程度的观点，A错误。 B选项：文章未提及批评经济史学家未在全球背景下分析，B错误。 C选项：文章不是阐述比较不同经济企业解释经济现象的风险，C错误。 D选项：文章通过指出数据问题等，对某些学者关于拉丁美洲大萧条严重程度的观点提出质疑，D正确。 E选项：文章意在质疑原观点，而非表明大萧条对拉丁美洲产业影响更严重，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：