In February 1848 the people of Paris rose in revolt against the constitutional monarchy of Louis-Philippe. Despite the existence of excellent narrative accounts, the February Days, as this revolt is called, have been largely ignored by social historians of the past two decades. For each of the three other major insurrections in nineteenth-century Paris—July 1830, June 1848, and May1871—there exists at least a sketch of participants' backgrounds and an analysis, more or less rigorous, of the reasons for the occurrence of the uprisings. Only in the case of the February Revolution do we lack a useful description of participants that might characterize it in the light of what social history has taught us about the process of revolutionary mobilization.
Two reasons for this relative neglect seem obvious. First, the insurrection of February has been overshadowed by that of June. The February Revolution overthrew a regime, to be sure, but met with so little resistance that it failed to generate any real sense of historical drama. Its successor, on the other hand, appeared to pit key socioeconomic groups in a life-or-death struggle and was widely seen by contemporary observers as marking a historical departure. Through their interpretations, which exert a continuing influence on our understanding of the revolutionary process, the impact of the events of June has been magnified, while, as an unintended consequence, the significance of the February insurrection has been diminished. Second, like other "successful" insurrections, the events of February failed to generate the most desirable kinds of historical records. Although the June insurrection of 1848 and the Paris Commune of 1871 would be considered watersheds of nineteenth-century French history by any standard, they also present the social historian with a signal advantage: these failed insurrections created a mass of invaluable documentation as a by-product of authorities‘ efforts to search out and punish the rebels.
Quite different is the outcome of successful insurrections like those of July 1830 and February 1848. Experiences are retold, but participants typically resume their daily routines without ever recording their activities. Those who played salient roles may become the objects of highly embellished verbal accounts or in rare cases, of celebratory articles in contemporary periodicals. And it is true that the publicly acknowledged leaders of an uprising frequently write memoirs. However, such documents are likely to be highly unreliable, unrepresentative, and unsystematically preserved, especially when compared to the detailed judicial dossiers prepared for everyone arrested following a failed insurrection. As a consequence, it may prove difficult or impossible to establish for a successful revolution a comprehensive and trustworthy picture of those who participated, or to answer even the most basic questions one might pose concerning the social origins of the insurgents.
For the following question, consider each of the choices separately and select all that apply
9. According to the passage, a useful description of participants"(lines 11-12) exists for which of the following insurrections of nineteenth-century France?
(A) The July insurrection of 1830
(B) The February Revolution of 1848
(C) The May insurrection of 1871
10. Which of the following, best describes the organization of the second paragraph?
(A) The thesis of the passage is stated and supporting evidence systematically presented.
(B) Two views regarding the thesis presented in the first paragraph are compared and contrasted
(C) Evidence refuting the thesis presented in the first paragraph is systematically presented.
(D) The thesis presented in the first paragraph is systematically supported.
(E) The thesis presented in the first paragraph is further defined and a conclusion drawn.
11. Which of the following can be inferred about the "detailed judicial dossiers" referred to in line 50?
(A) Information contained in the dossiers sheds light on the social origins of a revolution's participants.
(B) The dossiers closely resemble the narratives written by the revolution's leaders in their personal memoirs.
(C) The information that such dossiers contain is untrustworthy and unrepresentative of a revolution's participants.
(D) Social historians prefer to avoid such dossiers whenever possible because they are excessively detailed.
(E) The February Revolution of 1848 produced more of these dossiers than did the June insurrection.
12. Which of the following is the most logical objection to the claim made (lines 38-39) ?
(A) The February Revolution of 1848 is much less significant than the July insurrection of 1830.
(B) The backgrounds and motivations of participants in the July insurrection of 1830 have been identified, however cursorily.
(C) Even less is known about the July insurrection of 1830 than about the February Revolution of 1848.
(D) Historical records made during the July insurrection of 1830 are less reliable than those made during the May insurrection of 1871.
(E) The importance of the July insurrection of 1830 has been magnified at the expense of the significance of the February Revolution of 1848.
結構分析：
第一段：
In February 1848 the people of Paris rose in revolt against the constitutional monarchy of Louis-Philippe.
這句主題句，實在沒啥屁小，因為她只是說二月革命，就是有人暴動，那這是歷史時代的背景交代並沒有議論，那怎麼判斷他是不是主題句呢，可以從描述的具體度，跟主，客觀性出發，主題就是作者想開講的要點，必然含有某種程度的主觀意識，哪怕是scientist says這種不明顯的借刀殺人來引入作者個人觀點，也算是主觀，另一方面就是看是不是有形容詞，很多美食節目的主持人會說這東西超好吃，阿我又沒有吃過怎麼會覺得好吃，所以這個『好』字蘊含著主持人的主觀意識，那拉回來這裡開頭，第一提到時間，這不就是事實描述，往後他用people並沒有說某某人如何如何，表示他在做廣泛的定義，既然是廣泛，大眾都認為如此，表示廣泛被接受，表客觀存在，再往後對抗某某人，該人是歷史上的人物，所以一路客觀具體到底，所以認定他只是背景，不是主題句，喵就好，快速往下。
Despite the existence of excellent narrative accounts, the February Days, as this revolt is called, have been largely ignored by social historians of the past two decades.
這才是主題句，因為他把二月革命開始主觀分類到草率紀錄派，此句看一半即可，因為有句內轉折Despite，說到the existence 是被完美陳述的，後面主詞二月革命就接不被完美陳述，如果要驗算的話從ignored也看得出端倪，這裡the existence是被代名詞帶掉了，但他不是要望前找，反而是後面，因為後面有個介系詞開頭的介系詞片語of excellent narrative accounts當作修飾詞（做形容詞用），兩者互補，他並沒有要代替前方句子裡面的某個名詞，所以有時候the＋名詞出現不一定是前方某物的代理人，考慮到這個the existence後方如果有出現修飾詞，那就是在限定我所修飾的東西。
For each of the three other major insurrections in nineteenth-century Paris—July 1830, June 1848, and May1871—there exists at least a sketch of participants' backgrounds and an analysis, more or less rigorous, of the reasons for the occurrence of the uprisings.
像這句的開頭出現定冠詞the three other major insurrections，這也是代替指出後方的那三組，July 1830, June 1848, and May1871，當我看完之後，總算稍微撥雲見日了，因為加上剛剛的二月革命，現在有另外三種了，所以總共有四種，進而我現在腦子裡面的預想是，可能會做『捉對評比』，因為剛剛我們也讀到了excellent narrative accounts，第二句裡頭可是有句內轉折啊，兄弟！第二句講的是二月革命是草率紀錄，並然存在對立面細膩寫實派，所以該句另外介紹的三位主角，必然會納入評比，我先不管誰跟誰有共同特色（誰細膩誰草率先不管），但一定會有一個根據記錄的細膩度來做評比項目，不然那個句內轉折會轉得很多餘。
Only in the case of the February Revolution do we lack a useful description of participants that might characterize it in the light of what social history has taught us about the process of revolutionary mobilization.
這裡評比出來了，只有二月革命是草率的，但是親愛的，我基本上是不太想看這句話，因為開頭給個only他是強調句訊號字啊，而在看看內容應該可以認同我的觀點，他只是在強調說二月革命有多遭，這種程度『無人能及』，這樣而已，但如果要再細分也可以抓出另一個重點，他在說只有二月是草率派，其他三個是細膩派，不過都已經是細節的東西了，我們還是專注於主幹上，所以不用看，總結整個第一段，其實真正有價值的在第二句而已，第三句看個人，其他都是補充敘述，好了，往下進入第二段
第二段：
Two reasons for this relative neglect seem obvious. First, the insurrection of February has been overshadowed by that of June. The February Revolution overthrew a regime, to be sure, but met with so little resistance that it failed to generate any real sense of historical drama. Its successor, on the other hand, appeared to pit key socioeconomic groups in a life-or-death struggle and was widely seen by contemporary observers as marking a historical departure. Through their interpretations, which exert a continuing influence on our understanding of the revolutionary process, the impact of the events of June has been magnified, while, as an unintended consequence, the significance of the February insurrection has been diminished. Second, like other "successful" insurrections, the events of February failed to generate the most desirable kinds of historical records. Although the June insurrection of 1848 and the Paris Commune of 1871 would be considered watersheds of nineteenth-century French history by any standard, they also present the social historian with a signal advantage: these failed insurrections created a mass of invaluable documentation as a by-product of authorities‘ efforts to search out and punish the rebels.
當我看到Two reasons，我這裡只有找三個東西，first, second, however，然後瞄一下，沒有轉折，但是有第一點，第二點，好拉～確認之後就趕快跳過了看下一段囉，太快了嘛？再來體會一下，剛剛第一段的重點就是二月革命的紀錄很糟，往下這一段再接上Two reasons for this relative neglect，這剛好就是這段在補充『理由』是啥，後面obvious表示肯定，所以呢邏輯順向繼續承接上段，感覺上會是：『沒錯！我同意！二月革命的紀錄就是糟，以下兩點聽我講』，這樣的一個模式，接著往下也看到條列式的First，Second，中間都沒轉折，我說的是句間轉折，句內轉折只是小劇場而已，不影響主要文章邏輯，因此基本上整段當作不存在，略。
第三段：
Quite different is the outcome of successful insurrections like those of July 1830 and February 1848.
喔喔～～怎麼出現六月革命在跟二月革命做對比，他想幹嘛，現在來個不同，整理一下剛剛評比項目是草率派VS.細膩派。統合起來我知道二月是草率，六月是細膩。但是這裡有個統合名詞the outcome of successful insurrections，所以可以知道兩個革命都是成功的，但是他們不同結果，往下可能要解釋為何結果不同，沒關係往下繼續跳，因為我知道他們關係，不需要知道理由，有考在看
Experiences are retold, but participants typically resume their daily routines without ever recording their activities.
Those who played salient roles may become the objects of highly embellished verbal accounts or in rare cases, of celebratory articles in contemporary periodicals.
And it is true that the publicly acknowledged leaders of an uprising frequently write memoirs.
這三句我都先跳過，因為裏頭喵了一下他們內容已經脫離二月革命，那表示在陳述為何different，屬於細節上的展開，先跳過，有需要再說
However, such documents are likely to be highly unreliable, unrepresentative, and unsystematically preserved, especially when compared to the detailed judicial dossiers prepared for everyone arrested following a failed insurrection.
好了往下跳到這句話However，我們必須要來注意一下轉折是否是要反駁二月革命紀錄不清晰的觀點，或是他純粹只是細節上的對象轉折而已，當我看到such documents，看到such又是來個名詞，逼得我們必須往前看他代替誰，是代替哪一種的documents，上一句話看一看也只有memoirs是紙本紀錄的東西，那個年代應該沒有部落客或是youtuber，因此假定都是手寫的紀錄檔，說到領導會寫自傳，接該句的轉折之後，內容寫出unreliable, unrepresentative, and unsystematically，我知道了！！他只是細節上的轉折詞而已，說到雖然『有紀錄，但都是隨便寫寫』，貼個幾張照片看圖說故事而已，總結為止，他還是在維持評比就是：二月『草率』
As a consequence, it may prove difficult or impossible to establish for a successful revolution a comprehensive and trustworthy picture of those who participated, or to answer even the most basic questions one might pose concerning the social origins of the insurgents.
來到了結論句，來關心一下吧，不過基本上沒時間跳過不看也可以，結論表因果的果，他們之間邏輯關係是同向的，所以理當維持『二月革命的紀錄很糟』的這件事，看到difficult在看到comprehensive and trustworthy，沒錯我猜得對，就是草率。做題囉！！！
For the following question, consider each of the choices separately and select all that apply
9. According to the passage, a useful description of participants"(lines 11-12) exists for which of the following insurrections of nineteenth-century France?
(A) The July insurrection of 1830
(B) The February Revolution of 1848
(C) The May insurrection of 1871
出題老師好心的幫你找關鍵句，(lines 11-12)就是這裡：
Only in the case of the February Revolution do we lack a useful description of participants that might characterize it in the light of what social history has taught us about the process of revolutionary mobilization.
所以只要不是二月革命的，都，可，以，選（Ａ）（Ｃ）
10. Which of the following, best describes the organization of the second paragraph?
(A) The thesis of the passage is stated and supporting evidence systematically presented.
(B) Two views regarding the thesis presented in the first paragraph are compared and contrasted
(C) Evidence refuting the thesis presented in the first paragraph is systematically presented.
(D) The thesis presented in the first paragraph is systematically supported.
(E) The thesis presented in the first paragraph is further defined and a conclusion drawn.
問第二段，是做啥用的，解釋為什麼『二月革命的紀錄很糟』，而這個結論也是第一段的主題，兩段之間沒有轉折，（Ｂ）contrasted，（Ｃ）refuting，這兩個先刪掉。再來（Ｅ） further defined and a conclusion drawn.這裡錯了，沒有進一步，因為我沒看到新觀點，再來這裡開頭就講說這是Two reasons，所以他不可能是conclusion，兩個因果倒置，好拉，剩下（Ａ）supporting，（Ｄ）supported，先保留，但是我看到（Ａ）The thesis of the passage is stated，他說the passage這是第一段的工作啊，不是第二段的，再仔細看一下第二段開頭Two reasons for this relative neglect seem obvious，此時的 this relative neglect這確實是在講『二月革命的紀錄很糟』可是他被當作修飾詞了喔！！主詞是reasons，所以該段主角都是reasons才行，然後reasons為何等於supported，因為理由是文章架構的非結論部分，不是接結論的東西在論文的角色就是當前提，而前提的定義是『某陳述用來支持作者認為對的事情』其中結論的定義就是：某陳述是作者認為對的事情，選（Ｄ）
11. Which of the following can be inferred about the "detailed judicial dossiers" referred to in line 50?
(A) Information contained in the dossiers sheds light on the social origins of a revolution's participants.
(B) The dossiers closely resemble the narratives written by the revolution's leaders in their personal memoirs.
(C) The information that such dossiers contain is untrustworthy and unrepresentative of a revolution's participants.
(D) Social historians prefer to avoid such dossiers whenever possible because they are excessively detailed.
(E) The February Revolution of 1848 produced more of these dossiers than did the June insurrection.
這個定位也被找好了，考推理題，所以現任清楚題目他的對比像是誰，回看目標句找到：
However, such documents are likely to be highly unreliable, unrepresentative, and unsystematically preserved, especially when compared to the 『detailed judicial dossiers』 prepared for everyone arrested following a failed insurrection.
他是啥東西我們藉由compared to，可以往前找到主詞是such documents，所以就變成了documents VS. detailed judicial dossiers，接下來文章中對比對象的細節是highly unreliable, unrepresentative, and unsystematically preserved，我們藉由compared跟highly這個兩詞知道兩個比較對象邏輯相反，既然文章unreliable，那我題目的主角就是很可靠了對比到（Ａ） the social origins原汁原味，選（Ａ）
12. Which of the following is the most logical objection to the claim made (lines 38-39) ?
(A) The February Revolution of 1848 is much less significant than the July insurrection of 1830.
(B) The backgrounds and motivations of participants in the July insurrection of 1830 have been identified, however cursorily.
(C) Even less is known about the July insurrection of 1830 than about the February Revolution of 1848.
(D) Historical records made during the July insurrection of 1830 are less reliable than those made during the May insurrection of 1871.
(E) The importance of the July insurrection of 1830 has been magnified at the expense of the significance of the February Revolution of 1848.
這篇好佛心啊都幫忙標目標句(lines 38-39)：
Quite different is the outcome of successful insurrections like those of July 1830 and February 1848.
most logical objection，這應該是何者描述為假，objection表反對啊，反觀目標句，由這句話來只能知道『二月』跟『六月』革命成功了，但是其中二月革命相關的紀錄不靠譜，六月的紀錄靠不靠譜，從剛剛的第一題已經明確說明他是靠譜的，然後其他訊息是二月的結果跟六月結果不一樣，這是我所知道的三個點，對應到（Ｂ）identified，然後這個however cursorily.副詞用來修飾動作的，很草率地確認，六月是很細膩的被記錄，邏輯反了，因此還是只有考主題句給的那幾個字『the February Days have been largely ignored』，選（Ｂ）
補充：
該句話是第三段的開頭，開頭點出different，所以第三段以下內容勢必對他的不同去做文章，問題是我們下面的文章該怎麼看，這就要仔細捉磨different到底含義是啥了，既然有不同就會有兩個東西出現，而剛剛在結構分析的時候我們已經知道，第五句的However轉折是在做細節上兩物件的對比（memoirs VS. detailed judical dossiers）那這個different的差異就出現了，所以我覺得它跟上一提的考點應該是出一樣的概念，不同陳述。
再補充：
剛剛文章的最後一句話：
As a consequence, it may prove difficult or impossible to establish for a successful revolution a comprehensive and trustworthy picture of those who participated, or to answer even the most basic questions one might pose concerning the social origins of the insurgents.
因為他的角色扮演對本齣戲劇沒啥太大的用處，所以我忽略了，不過裡頭有個倒裝句，倒是可以討論討論，我懶得再打一次了，有興趣點擊：【GRE,GMAT,SAT經典長難句】As a consequence, it may prove difficult or impossible to establish for a successful revolution a comprehensive(37/50)
以上筆記供大夥參考若有錯誤再煩請指教
托福TOEFL ibt (4)