During the 1980s, many economic historians studying Latin America focused on the impact of the Great Depression of the 1930s. Most of these historians argued that although the Depression began earlier in Latin America than in the United States, it was less severe in Latin America and did not significantly impede industrial growth there. The historians' argument was grounded in national government records concerning tax revenues and exports and in government-sponsored industrial censuses, from which historians have drawn conclusions about total manufacturing output and profit levels across Latin America. However, economic statistics published by Latin American governments in the early twentieth century are neither reliable nor consistent; this is especially true of manufacturing data, which were gathered from factory owners for taxation purposes and which therefore may well be distorted. Moreover, one cannot assume a direct correlation between the output level and the profit level of a given industry as these variables often move in opposite directions. Finally, national and regional economies are composed of individual firms and industries, and relying on general, sweeping economic indicators may mask substantial variations among these different enterprises. For example, recent analyses of previously unexamined data on textile manufacturing in Brazil and Mexico suggest that the Great Depression had a more severe impact on this Latin American industry than scholars had recognized.
Which of the following conclusions about the Great Depression is best supported by the passage?
It did not impede Latin American industrial growth as much as historians had previously thought.
It had a more severe impact on the Brazilian and the Mexican textile industries than it had on Latin America as a region.
It affected the Latin American textile industry more severely than it did any other industry in Latin America.
The overall impact on Latin American industrial growth should be reevaluated by economic historians.
Its impact on Latin America should not be compared with its impact on the United States.
题目分析:
文章推断题:文章最支持以下哪个关于GD的结论?
选项分析:
A选项:GD没有像学者以前以为的那样,阻碍拉美工业的发展:文章最后的结论是GD对拉美的影响并不像之前以为的那样,因为之前的结论是基于不可靠的证据得出的。且“没有严重阻碍拉美工业的发展”是之前的错误的结论。
B选项:GD对巴西、墨西哥的影响大于对拉美的影响:文章没有对比墨西哥&巴西和拉美。
C选项:GD对拉美的纺织业影响最大:文章最后只是提到GD对纺织业的影响比学者原以为的要大,但没有和其他行业比较。
D选项:正确。(GD)对拉美工业发展的影响应该被重新评估:证据表明,之前的那个结论所基于的证据是不可靠的,因此学者们应该重新研究。
E选项:(GD)对拉美的影响不应该和GD对美国的影响作对比:文章没有表现出这个态度。
choice C定位: recent analyses of previously unexamined data on textile manufacturing in Brazil and Mexico suggest that the Great Depression had a more severe impact on this Latin American industry than scholars had recognized.
通过对纺织生产行业数据说明了,GD对拉美纺织行业的影响比原先预计得要更加大
定位:The historians' argument was grounded in national government records...however
定位词:However
however之前是事实陈述,之后是作者的这个事实的质疑。同上题历史学家认为美国的经济萧条严重,而作者认为这些历史学家的数据是有问题的,结合下文表达了作者的立场:数据不对,应该重新评估。
抓住文章结构就不会错了:观点对比文
学者提出观点一;
作者不同意,反驳一 however;反驳二moreover;反驳三finally;