欢迎光体育下注app官网!

【体育下注app】「GRE阅读剖析」Passage 22 美国历史题材详细剖析

发布时间:2021-10-09 人气:

本文摘要:文章很难,先试试。

体育下注app

文章很难,先试试。Until around 1930 few United States Civil War historians paid much attention to Southerners who opposed the 1861-1865 secession from the United States by a confederacy of Southern states. Southern historians clung instead to a notion of the South’s unanimity in the face of Northern aggression. Only when scholars such as Lonn decided to examine this side of the war did historian of the Confederacy begin to recognize the existence of Southerners loyal to the Union (Unionists). While these early historians of Southern dissent broke new ground, they also reproduced Confederate authoritie’s negative view of loyalists as shady characters driven by dubious motives. Even Tatum, who took a largely sympathetic attitude toward loyalists, tended to lump them into nebulous categories, offering broad generalizations that ignored the particulars of Unionists’ identities and experiences. This early-twentieth-century historiography nonetheless represented the leading research on dissent in the South until the 1960s and 1970s. Spurred by the advent of social historical methods, a new generation of historians found Unionists interesting as manifestations of the Confederacy’s internal weaknesses. Focusing on the Appalachian Mountain and upper South regions of the Confederacy, these scholars argued that there was a profound divide among Southern Whites between those who benefited economically from slave-run plantations and those who did not. One such historian was Escott, who emphasized regional and economic conflict among Southerners. Escott cast Unionists and other dissenters as antiplanter mountaineers who could not, by reason of economic and social alienation, identify with the proslavery Southern cause. This theme has heavily influenced the work of subsequent scholars, who commonly place Unionists at the extreme end of a continuum of class-based Confederate disaffection that was ultimately responsible for the South’s collapse. Because the driving force behind such inquiries into loyalist history has been a desire to explain Confederate ideology, politics, and defeat, emphasis has been placed on the ways loyalist Southerners diverged from the political and economic mainstream of Confederate nationalism. Only recently have some Civil War historians begun to make Unionists and their experiences, rather than the Confederate state, the center of inquiry. These scholars have done intensive community and local studies of dissenting groups that take into account a range of social and cultural, as well as military and political, factors at work on the Southern home front. Hoping to better understand who remained loyal to the Union during the war, these historians have sought to explain the Civil War’s underlying character, dimensions, and impact in particular counties or towns, especially in the upper South and Appalachia. This relatively new trend has stressed the particular, delved into the complexities of political allegiances on the home front, and, as Sutherland notes, highlighted “the gritty experience of real people”. 1. The primary purpose of the passage is to A. summarize a particular debate among historiansB. trace the evolution of a particular area of historical studyC. challenge a common misconception about a particular historical periodD. identify flaws in a particular approach to the study of a historical subjectE. explain why a particular historical question has received little scholarly attention谜底:B 2. The passage suggests that “some Civil War historians”(Paragraph 3) would probably agree with which of the following statements about Southern Unionists? A. Their economic circumstances were more significant than their social and cultural identities in determining their dissent from the Confederate cause.B. Their significant to historians lies mainly in what their actions reveal about the mainstream of Confederate nationalism from which they departedC. Their political allegiance must be understood in relation to specific local factors that affected their lives during the Civil War periodD. They were more likely to be from areas outside the upper South and Appalachia than were supporter of the Confederate causeE. They were more likely to be from economically privileged groups than were supporters of the Confederate cause.谜底:C 3. The passage suggests which of the following about histories of the Civil War written before 1930? A. Some took a fairly sympathetic view of Southern Unionists.B. Interest in these histories has been revived by the work of recent historiansC. Most offered little analysis of the lives and motives of Southern Unionists.D. Many tended to group Southern Unionists into broad categories that obscured their differences.E. Few accepted the idea that the South was politically unified during the Civil War.谜底:C 4. Which of the following best describes the function of the highlighted sentence? A. It challenges a common misconception about the motives driving an influential group of Civil War historians.B. It describes a major contribution of the Civil War historians of the 1960s and 1970s that inspired the next generation of scholars.C. It calls attention to aspects of the Confederate cause that were alienating to those Southerners who remained loyal to the Union.D. It identifies a tendency in Civil War scholarship that more recent scholarship has moved away from.E. It explains how ideological and political aspects of the Confederacy loyalist Southerners to reject the Confederate cause.谜底:D剖析开始。【第一段】Until around 1930 few United States Civil War historians paid much attention to Southerners who opposed the 1861-1865 secession from the United States by a confederacy of Southern states. 第1句:直到1930年左右之前,险些没有美国南北战争的历史学家关注1861 - 1865年间那些阻挡南部邦联脱离美国的南方人。这里有两个语法点要注意:1、few/little单独使用,无修饰时,表否认寄义,明白为险些没有。

2、【直到1930年左右之前,险些没有美国南北战争的历史学家关注……】表现1930是个分水岭,之前历史学家中没人关注这些人的存在,也就是历史学家们没意识到居然还存在这么一帮人;之后才有历史学家意识到这些人的存在,才开始关注他们,研究他们。注意United States是【联邦】的意思,指的是美国的所有州组成的合众国。南北战争时期,南部的一些州想脱离这个联邦重新努力别辟门户,它们组成了confederacy,这个词中文约定俗成翻译为“邦联”,“南部邦联”。

注意“邦联”和“联邦”字形很像,不要混淆了。1861 - 1865年间,应该也就是南北战争期间,南方其实有些人是阻挡南部自己组成邦联,重新努力别辟门户,脱离联邦的。可是历史学家们很长时间以来,都没注意到南部另有这些【非主流】人士的存在。

也就是,南部的主流态度是要脱离。以前的历史学家只注意到了主流人群。那,为什么以前的历史学家们没注意到呢? Southern historians clung instead to a notion of the South’s unanimity in the face of Northern aggression.第2句:南方的历史学家却坚持南方全体一致面临北方侵略的看法。

固然是因为以前的历史学家们搞错了嘛,他们误以为南方人是万众一心的,所有人都支持脱离,都阻挡北方,要和北方干一架。其实并不是。

Only when scholars such as Lonn decided to examine this side of the war did historian of the Confederacy begin to recognize the existence of Southerners loyal to the Union (Unionists). 第3句:只有当Lonn这样的学者决议研究战争的这一边时,研究(南部)邦联的历史学家才开始认识到忠于联邦(联邦主义者)的南方人的存在。Lonn这样的学者应该就是1930之后泛起的了,到了那时候,才有一些像Lonn这样的学者开始研究战争的另外一边——换句话说,以前的研究重心可能都放在了研究北方上,厥后才有人研究另外一边——南方;当开始仔细研究南方的时候,研究者才发现了这些【非主流】南方人的存在。他们身为南方人,但并不支持南部邦联,而是支持原先的整个联邦(Union),所以他们被叫做联邦主义者Unionist。While these early historians of Southern dissent broke new ground, they also reproduced Confederate authoritie’s negative view of loyalists as shady characters driven by dubious motives. 第4句:只管这些(研究)南方异议者的早期历史学家开创了新局势,但他们也复制了(南部)邦联政府对忠诚主义者的负面看法,将这些人视为由可疑念头驱动的阴暗角色。

这句话提到了几个新的观点:Southern dissent南方异议者——南方的异议者,也就是虽然是南方人可是差别意南方的主流看法。南方的主流看法是脱离联邦、建立邦联,所以这些人就是阻挡脱离,忠于原来的联邦的南方人;loyalist忠诚主义者——仍然是指忠于原来的联邦的人。真相明白,这些观点和上文的观点说的都是同一群人,就是非主流南方人。以前历史学家都没意识到这些人的存在,厥后意识到了,也就多了一个新的研究工具,多了一整个研究领域,这就是为历史研究【开创了新局势】。

可是,历史学家这时候对这些非主流南方人的看法和南方政府的态度是一样的,都以为这些人不是好工具,念头可疑,是坏人。Even Tatum, who took a largely sympathetic attitude toward loyalists, tended to lump them into nebulous categories, offering broad generalizations that ignored the particulars of Unionists’ identities and experiences.第5句:纵然塔图姆看待忠诚主义者接纳了很大水平上同情的态度,也倾向于把他们归于模糊的领域,提出了一些笼统的归纳综合,忽视了联邦主义者身份和履历的详情。

最开始研究的那一拨人爽性认为非主流南方人不是好人;对他们态度相对最好的研究者塔图姆,虽然整体上同情他们,可是也没研究清楚人家的详细情况,忽视了这些人的身份认同、生活履历的特殊性,而只是把这些“非主流南方人”看成差不多的一群人,笼统归纳综合了一下他们。(问题是——活生生的一群人,真的可以笼统归纳综合吗?) 【第二段】This early-twentieth-century historiography nonetheless represented the leading research on dissent in the South until the 1960s and 1970s.第1句:只管如此,一直连续到20世纪60年月和70年月,20世纪初期的史学仍然代表了对南方异见者的最重要的研究。联合上文,最开始研究【非主流南方人】的那一拨历史学家是20世纪初期的,他们的研究职位很高,代表了对南方异见者的最重要的研究,一直代表到20世纪60年月和70年月。换句话说,20世纪60年月和70年月后,有更好的研究泛起了。

Spurred by the advent of social historical methods, a new generation of historians found Unionists interesting as manifestations of the Confederacy’s internal weaknesses. 第2句:在社会历史方法的泛起的推动下,新一代历史学家因认为联邦主义者是(南部)邦联内在弱点的体现而(对这些人)感兴趣。注意语法点:find somebody interesting不是发现某人很有趣的意思,而是认为某人很有趣,这里的“有趣”是补语。不明白补语是啥意思的需要补习一下语法。

20世纪60年月和70年月以前,没有社会历史方法,之后有了。因为有了这种方法,泛起了新一代的历史学家,有了新的研究【非主流南方人】的研究视角。新一代的历史学家认为【非主流南方人】是很有趣的研究工具,为啥?因为【非主流南方人】的存在,体现出了(南部)邦联的内在弱点。

Focusing on the Appalachian Mountain and upper South regions of the Confederacy, these scholars argued that there was a profound divide among Southern Whites between those who benefited economically from slave-run plantations and those who did not. 第3句:这些学者关注阿巴拉契亚山脉和邦联的上南方地域,这些学者认为在南方白人中,经济上从仆从种植园中受益的人和没有受益的人之间存在深刻的分歧。阿巴拉契亚山脉和邦联的上南方地域都属于南方,可是应该位于南北接壤带。显然这些地方不止是有平原(阿巴拉契亚山脉可是群山啊)。而南方使用仆从的种植园一般是在平原上的。

所以这些地方的白人,有的有种植园,【经济上从仆从种植园中受益】;有的没有种植园,没有仆从,就不会从仆从经济中收益。南部钻营独立,不惜搞南北战争,是因为南方的仆从主想要维持仆从制度。问题是南方有些人原来就没有仆从,仆从制度对他们没利益,那他们凭什么支持战争,凭什么冒生命危险接触?因此,这些南方白人和那些有仆从,从仆从制得了利益的南方白人之间,显然存在分歧。新一代的(20世纪60年月和70年月以后的)学者们认识到了这种分歧。

One such historian was Escott, who emphasized regional and economic conflict among Southerners.第4句:一位这样的历史学家是埃斯科特,强调南方人之间的地域和经济冲突。正如第2句所说,阿巴拉契亚山脉和邦联的上南方地域虽属于南方,可是并不都是平原,也就不是所有(白)人都有仆从。尤其是阿巴拉契亚山脉,如果读过些美国文学(好比福克纳)的同学就会知道,阿巴拉契亚山脉属于南方,可是山上有许多山民,自由白人,没仆从,靠狩猎之类的活计为生,比力贫穷。

南方其他地方就多平原,多种植园,那里富有的白人拥有黑奴,是仆从主。因此,南方人之间存在地域冲突——山民vs平原人;另有经济冲突——仆从制对他们没利益的山民 vs 仆从制对他们利益大大的平原人。新一代的(20世纪60年月和70年月以后的)学者的一个例子就是埃斯科特,他强调南方内部存在分歧。

(在这里跑题安利一下:福克纳太牛逼了!他是我心中最伟大的作家!福克纳!) Escott cast Unionists and other dissenters as antiplanter mountaineers who could not, by reason of economic and social alienation, identify with the proslavery Southern cause. 第5句:Escott埃斯科特将联邦主义者和其他异见者称为反种植园的山区人,由于经济和社会异化,他们无法认同拥奴制的南方的理由。经济和社会异化——自力重生,靠自己劳动营生的山民是很穷的,穷人固然被主流社会排挤——经济能力上被排挤,社会职位上同样也被排挤。这就叫异化。

那么,在南方,谁有钱,谁有社会职位?固然是拥有成百上千仆从的大种植园主啦。他们能过得好,全靠聚敛仆从的劳动,固然要拥护仆从制了,而且要找N种理由拥护仆从制!可是山民过得又贫穷,又被看不起,而且之所以贫穷和被看不起都是和种植园主对比出来的——南方社会里,不靠自己的劳动营生,而是靠聚敛成百上千的仆从,才气锦衣玉食、才气成为社会的头面人物。这样的制度,自力重生的山民固然不会去捍卫,也不行能被这些仆从主捍卫仆从制度的理由感动。

This theme has heavily influenced the work of subsequent scholars, who commonly place Unionists at the extreme end of a continuum of class-based Confederate disaffection that was ultimately responsible for the South’s collapse.第6句:这个主题严重影响了厥后的学者的作品,他们通常把联邦主义者置于基于社会阶级的对南部邦联的不满的一连体的一个极端,这种不满对南方的解体要负最终责任。埃斯科特的这种看法对后世的学者影响很大。后世的学者基本上是在埃斯科特的基础上生长了理论。

后世学者认为,存在一个对南部邦联的不满的一连体——也就是我们可以把所有对南部邦联不满的人按不满水平排成一条线。而【不满的水平】是按什么决议的?class-based,阶级决议。也就是,阶级越低越不满,因为在仆从制度里,靠自己双手劳动、不聚敛仆从的(白)人挣的钱很少,阶级低。

越是聚敛仆从,挣钱越多,阶级越高。那么,南方的联邦主义者,也就是阻挡脱离联邦的南方人,就是最阻挡南部邦联的,在这个一连体的最极端位置上。这些学者还认为,南方为啥会解体?因为这些不满削弱了南方。Because the driving force behind such inquiries into loyalist history has been a desire to explain Confederate ideology, politics, and defeat, emphasis has been placed on the ways loyalist Southerners diverged from the political and economic mainstream of Confederate nationalism.第7句:由于这种对反独立者历史的追问背后的动力是出于解释(南部)邦联的意识形态、政治和失败的愿望,所以重点被放在反独立者南方人偏离(南部)邦联国家主义的政治和经济主流的方式上。

我们会发现,这时候的学者研究这些阻挡脱离的联邦主义南方人,不是因为对这些人自己感兴趣,而是想要研究南部邦联,想搞清楚邦联为何失败。因为他们认为是非主流南方人的存在,因为这些人的不满导致了邦联的失败,所以他们才要研究这些非主流南方人。所以,研究重点不在这些南方人自己,而在他们是如何偏离主流的——也就是他们到底和主流有什么纷歧样。【第三段】Only recently have some Civil War historians begun to make Unionists and their experiences, rather than the Confederate state, the center of inquiry. 第1句:直到最近才有一些内战历史学家开始把联邦主义者和他们的履历,而不是(南部)邦联,放在疑问的中心。

最近之前的学者感兴趣的都是邦联而不是非主流南方人;直到最近,才有学者开始体贴非主流南方人自己。These scholars have done intensive community and local studies of dissenting groups that take into account a range of social and cultural, as well as military and political, factors at work on the Southern home front. 第2句:这些学者对异见者群体举行了深入的社区和本土研究,思量到了南方战争后方的一系列起作用的社会和文化因素,以及军事和政治因素。最近的学者体贴的是非主流南方人自己,所以开始研究他们。

为了更好地研究这些人和这些人所在的社区,也要思量对人/社区有影响的各方面因素。Hoping to better understand who remained loyal to the Union during the war, these historians have sought to explain the Civil War’s underlying character, dimensions, and impact in particular counties or towns, especially in the upper South and Appalachia. 第3句:为了更好地相识在战争期间谁仍忠于联邦,这些历史学家试图解释南北战争的内在特征,规模和对特定郡、镇的影响,特别是在上南方和阿巴拉契亚。人的态度往往是受情况、境遇的影响。

为了更好地相识谁选择了非主流的态度,谁选择了主流态度,这些历史学家就去研究南北战争对特定社区的影响,而且实验解释这些影响如何塑造了人们的价值选择。This relatively new trend has stressed the particular, delved into the complexities of political allegiances on the home front, and, as Sutherland notes, highlighted “the gritty experience of real people”.第4句:这种相对较新的趋势强调细节,深入到了战争后方的政治忠诚的庞大性,并正如萨瑟兰所指出的那样,强调了“真实的人的坚韧的履历”。政治忠诚没那么简朴,不是因为一小我私家住在南方,是南方人,就会不假思索地支持南方的主流态度。一个详细的人,之所以选择某种价值、某种态度,肯定是受到了多方因素的影响,思量到了多个方面。

因此,要明白这小我私家为什么会这么选择,就要研究发生在他身上、对他有影响的细节。因此,新的历史研究趋势强调细节,强调去研究真实的人,去搞清楚他们的生活履历,才气搞清楚他们的选择。

1. The primary purpose of the passage is to 这篇文章的主要目的是为了显然,作者给我们先容了针对同一个研究工具【非主流南方人】,从很早以前到现在,学者们的看法和研究方法是如何变化的。所以选B。

B. trace the evolution of a particular area of historical study B.追溯历史研究特定领域的演变 看错误选项。A. summarize a particular debate among historians A.总结历史学家之间的一场特定辩说只有同时代人之间,你说一句我说一句,都以为自己有原理、想说服对方,才气叫辩说。

文章先容的是新看法不停替代老看法,老看法不停被淘汰的历程,不存在辩说。C. challenge a common misconception about a particular historical period C.挑战关于特定历史时期的一个常见误解文章不是为了讲特定的某一个误解,而是先容研究史,把研究历史上所有的老看法都批了一通。D. identify flaws in a particular approach to the study of a historical subjectD.找出历史主题的研究中一个特定方法的缺陷和C一样,文章不是为了讲特定的某一个缺陷,而是先容研究史,把研究历史上所有的老看法(和它们研究方法上可能的缺陷)都批了一通。

E. explain why a particular historical question has received little scholarly E.解释为什么一个特定的历史问题得不到什么学术的关注谁说这个问题没获得关注?这么多人前仆后继地研究它啊! 2. The passage suggests that “some Civil War historians”(Paragraph 3) would probably agree with which of the following statements about Southern Unionists? 本文讲明“一些内战史家”(第3段)可能会同意下列关于南方联邦主义者的哪一种说法? 本题问的是第三段的历史学家,这些学者的态度就是要研究非主流南方人自己。为了研究清楚人自己为什么会做出非主流的价值选择,就要研究清楚影响了他们的选择的各方面详细因素。

所以,选C。C. Their political allegiance must be understood in relation to specific local factors that affected their lives during the Civil War periodC.他们的政治忠诚必须通过内战期间影响他们生活的详细地方因素来明白这句话和第3段第4句是一个意思:【第4句:这种相对较新的趋势强调细节,深入到了战争后方的政治忠诚的庞大性,并正如萨瑟兰所指出的那样,强调了“真实的人的坚韧的履历”。政治忠诚没那么简朴,不是因为一小我私家住在南方,是南方人,就会不假思索地支持南方的主流态度。一个详细的人,之所以选择某种价值、某种态度,肯定是受到了多方因素的影响,思量到了多个方面。

因此,要明白这小我私家为什么会这么选择,就要研究发生在他身上、对他有影响的细节。因此,新的历史研究趋势强调细节,强调去研究真实的人,去搞清楚他们的生活履历,才气搞清楚他们的选择。

】 看错误选项。A. Their economic circumstances were more significant than their social and cultural identities in determining their dissent from the Confederate cause.A.他们的经济情况比他们的社会和文化身份在决议他们对邦联主义的异议方面更为重要。

文章没说哪个因素比其他因素更重要。B. Their significant to historians lies mainly in what their actions reveal about the mainstream of Confederate nationalism from which they departed B.他们对历史学家的重要性主要在于他们的行为展现了他们所脱离的邦联国家主义的主流这是老一派的学者们的看法。

不是新一代的。D. They were more likely to be from areas outside the upper South and Appalachia than were supporter of the Confederate cause D.他们相比邦联主义的支持者来说,更可能来自上南方和南部阿巴拉契亚以外的地域乱说,明显是更可能来自这些地方,而不是来自于这些地方以外。

E. They were more likely to be from economically priviliged groups than were supporters of the Confederate cause.E.他们相比邦联主义的支持者来说,更可能来自经济上的特权团体乱说,更可能来自经济上的弱势群体好欠好。3. The passage suggests which of the following about histories of the Civil War written before 1930? 关于1930年之前所写的内战历史,本文提出了哪一项?回到文章第一段第一句——1930年月之前,学者们险些没有注意到南方联邦主义者的存在。

所以选C。C. Most offered little analysis of the lives and motives of Southern Unionists.C.大多数人对南方联邦主义者的生活和念头没有几多分析。

体育下注app

学者们都没意识到还存在这么一群非主流南方人,固然更不行能提供分析了。看错误选项。A. Some took a fairly sympathetic view of Southern Unionists. A.有些人对南方联邦主义者颇为同情。

这是1930之后,1960-1970之前的事情。1930之前不存在。B. Interest in these histories has been revived by the work of recent historiansB.对这些历史的兴趣由最近的历史学家的事情恢复了如果要说“恢复”,那么首先要衰落过才谈得上恢复。

可是文章那里看得出来,人们对内战史的兴趣衰落过…… D. Many tended to group Southern Unionists into broad categories that obscured their differences.D.许多人倾向于将南方联邦主义者分为或许的种别,这些种别掩盖了他们的分歧。这也是1930之后,1960-1970之前的事情。1930之前不存在。

E. Few accepted the idea that the South was politically unified during the Civil War.E.险些没有人接受内战期间南方在政治上统一的想法。乱说,是险些所有人都接受内战期间南方在政治上统一的想法。4. Which of the following best describes the function of the highlighted sentence? 以下哪项最能形貌高亮句子的功效?第二段最后一句话。这句话是为了承上(启下),告诉我们老一派的学者们关注的重点,引出第三段第一句——新一代学者关注重心的改变。

所以选D。D. It identifies a tendency in Civil War scholarship that more recent scholarship has moved away from. D.它指出了内战研究的一种趋势,更近期的学术研究已经远离了这种趋势。

总结老趋势,老趋势被放弃,历史学家们接纳了新的思路。看错误选项。

A. It challenges a common misconception about the motives driving an influential group of Civil War historians.A.它挑战了一个对一批有影响力的内战历史学家的念头的普遍误解。文章那里说过对【历史学家的念头】的误解? 都不存在误解,哪来的挑战? B. It describes a major contribution of the Civil War historians of the 1960s and 1970s that inspired the next generation of scholars. B.它形貌了二十世纪六七十年月内战历史学家的一项重大孝敬,激励了下一代学者。没激励,这种看法被下一代人放弃了。C. It calls attention to aspects of the Confederate cause that were alienating to those Southerners who remained loyal to the Union.C.它呼吁关注邦联主义的一些方面,这些方面疏远了那些忠于联邦的南方人。

C形貌的是老一派人的研究取向,问题是,这个句子处在段尾,起的是总结作用,它不是呼吁我们去关注老一派人的研究取向,而恰恰是要让我们看到老一派人的研究取向的落幕,利便文章作者引入第三段的新一代的研究取向。E. It explains how ideological and political aspects of the Confederacy loyalist Southerners to reject the Confederate cause.(原句有语病,似不全)E.它解释了南部邦联中反独立的南方人的思想和政治方面如何拒绝邦联主义。它只是说【有】一些方法偏离(也就是拒绝)邦联,没解释非主流南方人是【怎么】拒绝邦联的。

【总结】这篇文章的题材是美国历史。详细一点,是美国南北战争的历史。因为中国考生往往不具备美国考生对美国历史/社会/执法的相识,所以这些题材的文章对中国考生格外地难。

因此,我们越发要注意:1、通过阅读增补相关配景知识;2、提高自己的阅读能力,这样就算不幸没有相关配景知识,凭借阅读功底也能推测出作者意图。——阅读能力如果真的好,哪怕这篇GRE文章所涉及的领域你是第一次接触,也一样能看明确。


本文关键词:体育下注app,【,体育,下注,app,】,「,GRE,阅读,剖析,」,Passage

本文来源:体育下注app-www.skytextile.net.cn