[問題]GWD7-Q10~Q12

[dibert8]

想過之後,覺得題目出的蠻高竿!需要不尋常的意志力與洞察力,才能不被文章及題目而左右思緒.

Q10:
According to the passage, within the field of educational history, Thomas Woody’s 1929 work was
A. innovative because it relied on newspaper advertisements as evidence
B. exceptional in that it concentrated on the period before the American Revolution
C. unusual in that it focused on educational attitudes rather than on educational practices
D. controversial in its claims regarding educational opportunities for boys
E. atypical in that it examined the education of girls

爭議在 (B) or (E)
Prior to Kerber’s work,
educational historians barely mentioned
women and girls; Thomas Woody’s 1929
(25) work is the notable exception. Examining
newspaper advertisements for acade-
mies, Woody found that educational
opportunities increased for both girls
and boys around 1750.

說明 TW 的工作如何與眾不同: LK (1980's) 之前的研究,當然也含 TW 的時代 (1929),少有提及 women and girls, TW 很不一樣,他的研究提及 girls and boys. 想當然重點在 girls.
(B) 說 TW 不同,因為研究著重於 period before the American Revolution, 研究時點在 AR 之前的人或論文,應該不計其數吧! 顯然 TW 不會因此而不同,只是那些人的研究裡都沒有 women and girls.
所以 (E) 才搔到題目的癢處.
atypical = unusual = exceptional 有考驗意志力(不為所動)的味道喔!不然得花不少時間在斟酌這幾個字上面呢!

Q12:
The passage suggests that, with regard to the history of women’s education in the United States, Kerber’s work differs from Woody’s primarily concerning which of the following?
A. The extent to which women were interested in pursuing educational opportunities in the eighteenth century
B. The extent of the support for educational opportunities for girls prior to the American Revolution
C. The extent of public resistance to educational opportunities for women after the American Revolution
D. Whether attitudes toward women’s educational opportunities changed during the eighteenth century
E. Whether women needed to be educated in order to contribute to the success of a republican form of government

文章一直把讀者帶到 KL 研究主張 AR 是婦女教育受重視的轉折點, TW 的研究說明之前就有提倡婦女教育,因此專注 KL 的研究會被誤導.但是轉折是轉什麼? 文章裡提到兩個: opportunity vs attitude; Q12 就考分不得出來到底 TW 因為哪一個讓 KL 蒙塵.

Woody’s evidence challenges the notion
(35) that the Revolution changed attitudes
regarding female education
是 attitude! 前面的 opportunity 是attitude 的關係使然.

Historians’ reliance on Kerber’s “repub-
lican motherhood” thesis may have
(40) obscured the presence of these trends,
making it difficult to determine to what
extent the Revolution really changed
women’s lives.
這裡 trend 指的不會是 oppotunity, 因為離太遠啦 (line 28)! 所以 trend 指 attitude.
作者認為 KL 以 AR 作為此 trend 的分界 (i.e. trend 因 AR 而改觀)失之偏頗,而 TW 的研究顯示這個 trend 在 AR 之前就已形成 (i.e. trend 不因 AR 而改變). 之後的 extent 指的就是這個 trend. 這麼一來 (D) 就不需再懷疑,應該就是它了.選 (B) 的 opportunity 僅差之豪厘,因為實在太相近,太像了.
AR = eighteenth century 再考驗一次意志力,就算被察覺,也花了不少時間,元氣大傷了.

[dibert8]

Linda Kerber argued in the mid-
1980’s that after the American Revolution
(1775-1783), an ideology of “republican
motherhood” resulted in a surge of edu-
cational opportunities for women in the
United States.

LK已經說明了美國革命是導致女性教育的狂潮,顯然他是不支持在美國革命前的女性教育機會有增加的現象,相反的W則是支持美國革命前女性教育就有增加......

LK跟W著眼點雖然是在美國革命前後,可是都是在18世紀,(LK1775-1783,W1750)所以D顯然無法區別兩人觀點的不同

根據 TW 的研究,"美國革命前女性教育就有增加",之後也沒有改變. i.e. 整個 18 世紀這個趨勢都沒有改變.
KL 則主張 AR 使得女性教育趨勢改觀. i.e. 整個 18 世紀這個趨勢在 AR 之後改變了.
所以兩個人對於女性教育趨勢在 18 世紀的看法是不同的.

[Kal-El]

Q12支持D: Whether attitudes toward women’s educational opportunities changed during the eighteenth century.
由以下三句
1.Woody’s evidence challenges the notion that the Revolution changed attitudes regarding female education, ....
2.Linda Kerber argued in the mid-1980’s that after the American Revolution (1775-1783), an ideology of “republican motherhood” resulted in a surge of educational opportunities for women in the United States.
-->LK: a surge in the mid-1980's(19世紀)
3.Pointing to “An Essay on Woman” (1753) as reflecting a shift in view, Woody also claimed that practical education for females had many advocates before the Revolution.
-->TW: a shift (1753)(18世紀)

P.S.: Prior to Kerber’s work, educational historians barely mentioned women and girls; Thomas Woody’s 1929 work is the notable exception.由此據我們可以知道Kerber’s work是在1929之後