In the early 1950's, historians who studied preindustrial Europe (which we may define here as Europe in the period from roughly 1300 to 1800) began, for the first time in large numbers, to investigate more of the preindustrial European population than the 2 or 3 percent who comprised the political and social elite: the kings, generals, judges, nobles, bishops, and local magnates who had hitherto usually filled history books. One difficulty, however, was that few of the remaining 97 percent recorded their thoughts or had them chronicled by contemporaries. Faced with this situation, many historians based their investigations on the only records that seemed to exist: birth, marriage, and death records. As a result, much of the early work on the nonelite was aridly statistical in nature; reducing the vast majority of the population to a set of numbers was hardly more enlightening than ignoring them altogether. Historians still did not know what these people thought or felt.
One way out of this dilemma was to turn to the records of legal courts, for here the voices of the nonelite can most often be heard, as witnesses, plaintiffs, and defendants. These documents have acted as "a point of entry into the mental world of the poor." Historians such as Le Roy Ladurie have used the documents to extract case histories, which have illuminated the attitudes of different social groups (these attitudes include, but are not confined to, attitudes toward crime and the law) and have revealed how the authorities administered justice. It has been societies that have had a developed police system and practiced Roman law, with its written depositions, whose court records have yielded the most data to historians. In Anglo-Saxon countries hardly any of these benefits obtain, but it has still been possible to glean information from the study of legal documents.
The extraction of case histories is not, however, the only use to which court records may be put. Historians who study preindustrial Europe have used the records to establish a series of categories of crime and to quantify indictments that were issued over a given number of years. This use of the records does yield some information about the nonelite, but this information gives us little insight into the mental lives of the nonelite. We also know that the number of indictments in preindustrial Europe bears little relation to the number of actual criminal acts, and we strongly suspect that the relationship has varied widely over time. In addition, aggregate population estimates are very shaky, which makes it difficult for historians to compare rates of crime per thousand in one decade of the preindustrial period with rates in another decade. Given these inadequacies, it is clear why the case history use of court records is to be preferred.
1.The author suggests that, before the early 1950's, most historians who studied preindustrial Europe did which of the following?
6.It can be inferred from the passage that a historian who wished to compare crime rates per thousand in a European city in one decade of the fifteenth century with crime rates in another decade of that center would probably be most aided by better information about which of the following?
7.The passage would be most likely to appear as part of
結構分析:
這題題庫好長已經有點忘了前面的內容了,不過還是逃不過那幾招,知道主角,知道文體,就知道答案了,本文分三段,時間上可能比較緊縮。開工!!
In the early 1950's, historians who studied preindustrial Europe (which we may define here as Europe in the period from roughly 1300 to 1800) began, for the first time in large numbers, to investigate more of the preindustrial European population than the 2 or 3 percent who comprised the political and social elite: the kings, generals, judges, nobles, bishops, and local magnates who had hitherto usually filled history books. 幹!!開頭嚇死我,不過一樣這麼長的東西,抓住主幹即可,口訣就是關係代名詞亂我主幹者,必殺之!!所以來抓要被忽略的句的。
In the early 1950's, historians who studied preindustrial Europe(關代修飾歷史學家不理會)(which we may define here as Europe in the period from roughly 1300 to 1800)(再來一組關代去修飾那個前工業時代的歐洲是怎樣的歐洲,他都已經是括號型態出現,這本身就不是重點了)began, for the first time in large numbers, to investigate more of the preindustrial European population than the 2 or 3 percent who comprised the political and social elite: the kings, generals, judges, nobles, bishops, and local magnates who had hitherto usually filled history books.(這只是幫忙解釋何謂『射精,社會菁英』),我們在整理一次,等等主幹就清晰了。
In the early 1950's, historians began, for the first time in large numbers, to investigate more of the preindustrial European population than the 2 or 3 percent who comprised the political and social elite,歷史學家開始調查PE時代的人口,而不只僅限於社會菁英,這樣主題就出來拉,本文就是在探討PE時代大部分的人怎樣了,我們再往下看,因為我還不知道文體是啥,也不知道內容是啥。
One difficulty, however, was that few of the remaining 97 percent recorded their thoughts or had them chronicled by contemporaries. 有轉折必看,但是or後方的史逸動詞有時間再看吧,主角是difficulty,所以節後上一句話,就是要知道PE時代大部分的人怎樣,有~難~度!因為沒有recorded their thoughts
Faced with this situation,.... 看到代名詞了,請跳過,他只是在延伸說明而已,不直得你浪費時間。As a result, 這裡做總結其實也不用看拉,總結就是呼應前面,然後為了讓文章又回文的整題感,才會寫的,既然我已經知道主角跟內容了,我其實就可以不理會了,最後的一句話也是一樣出現了類似遞進的詞類,可以大膽研判是強調而已Historians still did not know what these people thought or felt. 好了,到了這裡我可以先推測文章使用的寫作文體是啥,開頭點出我要討論的目標,但要找答案有難度,因為沒資料,後面再做結論,所以算是一個提出文題,然後給方法的文章,但還不能講死,因為我只看完第一段而已,這只是暫時的總結。
One way out of this dilemma was to turn to the records of legal courts, for here the voices of the nonelite can most often be heard, as witnesses, plaintiffs, and defendants. 開頭的邏輯詞一種逃離這個困頓的方法是....也就是說作者要來介紹一些解決方案了。去對付剛剛的缺資料的事情。而這句話重點在legal courts,可以從這裡找資料,後面別理他了for開頭所帶出來的是一組副詞子句,注意,這裡的『for=because』,既然是因果解釋我自然不在在看下去了。再來往下都請忽略,因為These documents," Historians such as Le Roy Ladurie,Roman law,Anglo-Saxon 這種怪異的名詞出來就表示在做舉例了,但是我第二段只看一句話,會有點危險,因為我會不知道接下來第三段是怎們連接的,而且看到一個句內轉折,所以我在補看一小句話,, but it has still been possible to glean information from the study of legal documents. 結尾是說法律上的資料還是不錯用,喔喔那這樣就是延續第一段給的結論,好的那第二段的文題又是啥呢?這就簡單了,就是給個方法,然後給舉例支持這個方法,做後下結論乎應第一段講的是對的,P1是對的!!
接下來到了大三段,開頭給個轉折,又是第一句,必看無疑!!
The extraction of case histories is not, however, the only use to which court records may be put. 裡面提到not the only use to,所以下來可能就補充其他用途,所以這著往下看他道理還有哪些功能,Historians who study preindustrial Europe have used the records to establish a series of categories of crime and to quantify indictments that were issued over a given number of years. 看到了!!第一:可以建立分類,第二:量化數據。往下
This use of the records does yield some information about the nonelite, but this information gives us little insight into the mental lives of the nonelite. 這裡也不要去理他了,代名詞啊。
ㄅ:We also know that the number of indictments in preindustrial Europe bears little relation to the number of actual criminal acts, and we strongly suspect that the relationship has varied widely over time.
ㄆ: In addition, aggregate population estimates are very shaky, which makes it difficult for historians to compare rates of crime per thousand in one decade of the preindustrial period with rates in another decade.
這裡兩句話,這表示並列,這些內容必然呼應上面提到的東西,中間又沒轉折,所以跳過。直接看到結論
Given these inadequacies, it is clear why the case history use of court records is to be preferred.前半部說these inadequacies有缺漏這個代名詞應該是說上面的那兩句話吧,因為事複數型態,但我不管,他是也是表原因的副詞子句罷了,重點在後面it is clear why the case history use of court records is to be preferred,說明結果大家還是偏愛法律事件
我敢保正接下來的七題全都用秒殺的
第一題:
問到1950's前歷史學家都在幹嗎,開頭的主題句是給1950's他們做了什麼改變,就是這個圖解中的第一行拉,以前都關注那兩趴三趴的菁英,現在開始注意到更多人了,立馬秒殺,選(D)
比較麻煩的事四,五,六題,他們都要另外再找句子去對應,其他題都是事前準備完了就可以秒殺了,以上個人筆記希望有幫助到大家,有誤再請指教!!
留言列表