熱血背包客莊ㄟ

Although the passenger pigeons, now extinct, were abundant in eighteenth- and nineteenth century America, archaeological studies at twelfth-century Cahokian sites in the present day United States examined household food trash and found that traces of passenger pigeon were quite rare. Given that the sites were close to a huge passenger pigeon roost documented by John James Audubon in the nineteenth century and found that Cahokians consumed almost every other animal protein source available, the archaeologists conducting the studies concluded the passenger pigeon population had once been very limited before increasing dramatically in post-Columbian America. Other archaeologists have criticized those conclusions on the grounds that passenger pigeon bones would not be likely to be preserved. But all the archaeological projects found plenty of bird bones- and even tiny bones from fish.

1. The author of the passage mentions “tiny bones from fish” primarily in order to

1. explain why traces of passenger pigeon are rare at Cahokian sites
2. support a claim about the wide variety of animal proteins in the Cahokian diet
3. provide evidence that confirms a theory about the extinction of the passenger pigeon
4. cast doubt on the conclusion reached by the archaeologists who conducted the studies discussed in the passage
5. counter an objection to an interpretation of the data obtained from Cahokian sites

2.Which of the following, if true, would most call into question the reasoning of “the archaeologists conducting the studies”?

1. Audubon was unable to correctly identify twelfth-century Cahokian sites
2. Audubon made his observations before passenger pigeon populations began to decline.
3. Passenger pigeons would have been attracted to household food trash
4. Archaeologist have found passenger pigeon remains among food waste at eighteenth century human settlements
5. Passenger pigeons tended not to roost at the same sites for very many generations

文章結構：

文章要注意到的字有Although，Given，Other archaeologists，這幾個決定邏輯的關係詞，第一句一定要先看懂，不然就沒戲唱了，所以從although開始你會發現他麼在討論一隻鳥到底存不存在的問題，although的子句所負責的是確實有PP這種鳥，而且很多，但是之後就說其實PP這隻信鴿其實很少rare，那老司機都知道其實找主幹應該是要期待待會文章要朝少的方向去發展，因為rare出現在主要字句中啊

再來是給到given這個表示因果句，前因後果，所以我們要注意的還是given後面的果就好，不要全讀，讀後面的果就好主要在還沒看到題目前還是以抓主幹為主，不要去躺滾水，中GRE的招，所以這裡的果是給了一個說法說是因為『由少變多』，往下看Other archaeologists看到這個字跟剛剛上一句看到一個說the archaeologists conducting the studies concluded所以兩這在唱反調啊，邏輯相反，一批人怎樣怎樣VS.另一批人怎樣怎樣，這是經典的對比套路，好的經過這樣的對比之後，應該是『講多』之類的概念，不管，因為最後給你一個『but』讓整體邏輯再轉回來講『由少變多』。

第一題：這題直接用托福的修辭目的題解題方式解題即可

第一：定位，But all the archaeological projects found plenty of bird bones- and even tiny bones from fish.

第二：邏輯詞：but，轉折跟它連接的上一句話立場邏輯相反，所以選項的(A),(B),(C)都可以刪掉了，因為他麼三個都表態支持

第三：找論點的主幹，Other archaeologists have criticized those conclusions on the grounds that passenger pigeon bones would not be likely to be preserved這語境上叫做這『東西有，但是沒留下』，所以觀點就是有pp的意思，然後Cahokian sites就是剛剛文章最開始第一句話講『少到多』，白話一點我要找的答案應該是反對『東西有，但是沒留下』，所以就是選（Ｅ）

ＰＳ：這個（Ｅ）玩了兩層邏輯，counter反對，objection再反對，而（Ｄ）少轉一次，他只要轉到那個考古學家是那群支持信鴿數量由少到多得那群
 

第二題：

call into question當weaken做，削弱就是找多一點因素去當分母，來稀釋原有因素的份量，中央集權變成多黨民主政治，所以對應回去就是剛剛上一題有重複讀到的『由少到多』，所以如果取弱化邏輯的話，就可以說這東西『不是由少到多』，或者第二由少到多這件事的因素跟文章內容所說到的因素呈現『否定』狀態，再簡單來說由Ａ推向Ｂ推不是唯一，可能是Ａ→Ｂ，Ｃ→Ｂ，Ｄ→Ｂ，多種原因一起到Ｂ，本題邏輯上就只會被限制在given的那句話裡面了，所以只要是超過這兩個子句範圍的基本上可以先刪掉，然後最快的方式就是weaken，將上述原因取反，分別是一：" not " roost Audubon documented。二：Cahokians " didn't " consumed almost every other animal。看到（Ｅ）就對了，數量由少到多的原因，雖然有住在Audubon研究的地方，但搬走了

ＰＳ：其他都不可能的原因是，你還要再加上很多個但書才能講選項邏輯連結到題目問的問題，所以跳邏輯的選項一律都不理會。例如：（Ａ）Audubon他不知道十二世紀Cahokian的事情，所以中間還缺了Cahokian這個民族跟Passenger pigeons之間的關係，之後才有辦法推到passenger pigeon 族群的數量上。那（Ｂ）是時間軸出了問題，Audubon的時代很多，然後選項後面說完之後感覺是要講Audubon最高，然後要往下走了，這中間不知道要走多少次邏輯才能圓回來。（Ｃ）passenger pigeon愛吃垃圾，然後中間至少還要再加上一個『ＰＰ因為吃太多垃圾拉屎拉到脫肛而亡』，或是『ＰＰ因為垃圾太有養分而他們因此飽暖思淫慾』，賈霸單修幹，大量繁殖，這樣才能連到問題問的那層邏輯。（Ｄ）也是一樣他的描述沒辦法直接引導到數量的變化上去。
 

以上個人筆記希望有幫助到大家，有誤再請指教!!