GWD5-Q5-7

[oneseven]

Historians who study European
women of the Renaissance try to mea-
sure “independence,” “options,” and
Line other indicators of the degree to which
(5) the expression of women’s individuality
was either permitted or suppressed.
Influenced by Western individualism,
these historians define a peculiar form
of personhood: an innately bounded
(10) unit, autonomous and standing apart
from both nature and society. An
anthropologist, however, would contend
that a person can be conceived in ways
other than as an “individual.” In many
(15) societies a person’s identity is not
intrinsically unique and self-contained
but instead is defined within a complex
web of social relationships.
In her study of the fifteenth-century
(20) Florentine widow Alessandra Strozzi, a
historian who specializes in European
women of the Renaissance attributes
individual intention and authorship of
actions to her subject. This historian
(25) assumes that Alessandra had goals
and interests different from those of her
sons, yet much of the historian’s own
research reveals that Alessandra
acted primarily as a champion of her
(30) sons’ interests, taking their goals as
her own. Thus Alessandra conforms
more closely to the anthropologist’s
notion that personal motivation is
embedded in a social context. Indeed,
(35) one could argue that Alessandra did
not distinguish her personhood from
that of her sons. In Renaissance
Europe the boundaries of the con-
ceptual self were not always firm
(40) and closed and did not necessarily
coincide with the boundaries of
the bodily self.

Qx：
It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes which of the following about the study of Alessandra Strozzi done by the historian mentioned in the second paragraph (lines 19-42)?

A. Alessandra was atypical of her time and was therefore an inappropriate choice for the subject of the historian's research.
B. In order to bolster her thesis, the historian adopted the anthropological perspetive on personhood.
C. The historian argues that the boundaries of the conceptual self were not always firm and closed in Renaissance Europe.
D. In her study, the historian reverts to a traditional approach that is out of step with the work of other historians of Renaissance Europe.
E. The interpretation of Alessandra's actions that the historian puts forward is not suported by much of the historian's research.

Answer: E

我亂選選C
請問該如何定位答案呢??

[小花]

Historians who study European
women of the Renaissance try to mea-
sure “independence,” “options,” and
Line other indicators of the degree to which
(5) the expression of women’s individuality
was either permitted or suppressed.
Influenced by Western individualism,
these historians define a peculiar form
of personhood: an innately bounded
(10) unit, autonomous and standing apart
from both nature and society. An
anthropologist, however, would contend
that a person can be conceived in ways
other than as an “individual.” In many
(15) societies a person’s identity is not
intrinsically unique and self-contained
but instead is defined within a complex
web of social relationships.
In her study of the fifteenth-century
(20) Florentine widow Alessandra Strozzi, a
historian who specializes in European
women of the Renaissance attributes
individual intention and authorship of
actions to her subject. This historian
(25) assumes that Alessandra had goals
and interests different from those of her
sons, yet much of the historian’s own
research reveals that Alessandra
acted primarily as a champion of her
(30) sons’ interests, taking their goals as
her own. Thus Alessandra conforms
more closely to the anthropologist’s
notion that personal motivation is
embedded in a social context. Indeed,
(35) one could argue that Alessandra did
not distinguish her personhood from
that of her sons. In Renaissance
Europe the boundaries of the con-
ceptual self were not always firm
(40) and closed and did not necessarily
coincide with the boundaries of
the bodily self.

Qx：
It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes which of the following about the study of Alessandra Strozzi done by the historian mentioned in the second paragraph (lines 19-42)?

A. Alessandra was atypical of her time and was therefore an inappropriate choice for the subject of the historian's research.
B. In order to bolster her thesis, the historian adopted the anthropological perspetive on personhood.
C. The historian argues that the boundaries of the conceptual self were not always firm and closed in Renaissance Europe.
D. In her study, the historian reverts to a traditional approach that is out of step with the work of other historians of Renaissance Europe.
E. The interpretation of Alessandra's actions that the historian puts forward is not suported by much of the historian's research.

Answer: E

我亂選選C
請問該如何定位答案呢??

這題屬細節中的細節
第二段看不出兩派學者的立場很難回答出此問題

定位24行
This historian
(25) assumes that Alessandra had goals
and interests different from those of her
sons, yet much of the historian’s own
research reveals that Alessandra
acted primarily as a champion of her
(30) sons’ interests, taking their goals as
her own.


頂置的討論總會也有此篇的討論
可以參考看看