扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / OG2016-RC-129
Jon Clark's study of the effect of the modernization of a telephone exchange on exchange maintenance work and workers is a solid contribution to a debate that encompasses two lively issues in the history and sociology of technology: technological determinism and social constructivism.
Clark makes the point that the characteristics of a technology have a decisive influence on job skills and work organization. Put more strongly, technology can be a primary determinant of social and managerial organization. Clark believes this possibility has been obscured by the recent sociological fashion, exemplified by Braverman's analysis, that emphasizes the way machinery reflects social choices. For Braverman, the shape of a technological system is subordinate to the manager's desire to wrest control of the labor process from the workers. Technological change is construed as the outcome of negotiations among interested parties who seek to incorporate their own interests into the design and configuration of the machinery. This position represents the new mainstream called social constructivism.
The constructivists gain acceptance by misrepresenting technological determinism: technological determinists are supposed tobelieve, for example, that machinery imposes appropriate forms of order on society. The alternative to constructivism, in other words, is to view technology as existing outside society, capable of directly influencing skills and work organization.
Clark refutes the extremes of the constructivists by both theoretical and empirical arguments. Theoretically he defines "technology" in terms of relationships between social and technical variables. Attempts to reduce the meaning of technology to cold, hard metal are bound to fail, for machinery is just scrap unless it is organized functionally and supported by appropriate systems of operation and maintenance. At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers. Some changes Clark attributes to the particular way management and labor unions negotiated the introduction of the technology, whereas others are seen as arising from the capabilities and nature of the technology itself. Thus Clark helps answer the question: "When is social choice decisive and when are the concrete characteristics of technology more important?"
Which of the following statements about Clark's study of the telephone exchange can be inferred from information in the passage?
Clark's reason for undertaking the study was to undermine Braverman's analysis of the function of technology.
Clark's study suggests that the implementation of technology should be discussed in the context of conflict between labor and management.
Clark examined the impact of changes in the technology of switching at the exchange in terms of overall operations and organization.
Clark concluded that the implementation of new switching technology was equally beneficial to management and labor.
Clark's analysis of the change in switching systems applies only narrowly to the situation at the particular exchange that he studied.
此讲解的内容由AI生成，还未经人工审阅，仅供参考。
正确答案是 B。Clark 的研究表明，实施技术应当在劳动力和管理之间的冲突背景下进行讨论。选项 A 错误，因为文中没有暗示 Clark 的研究意图是为了推翻 Braverman 的技术功能分析。选项 C 正确，文中提到 Clark 将换届系统的变化从总体运营和组织的角度来考察。选项 D 错误，因为 Clark 没有得出新型换届系统的实施对管理和劳动力同样有益的结论。选项 E 错误，因为文中暗示，Clark 对换届系统的分析不仅仅适用于他所研究的特定交换站。
问的是C的study能推出啥，a说c做这个study就是为了反驳B，显然文章没这么说
定位：At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems ／altered ／work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers／.
A选项：Clark's reason for undertaking the study was to undermine 【Braverman's analysis】 of the function of technology. 原文说的是Clark refutes the 【extremes】 of the constructivists by both theoretical and empirical arguments. C只是要反对B的极端观点，而非全部分析
C选项：按OG的讲解，原文altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers可以被归纳为C选项中的impact of changes in the technology of switching at the exchange in terms of overall operations and organization。
Clark refutes the extremes of the constructivists by both theoretical and empirical arguments.C只是要反对B的极端观点，而非全部分析，所以不能选A
a为什么不对？
At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers.
因为social的观点是tech是manager用来control workers，而tech的观点是反驳social的观点，所以tech不是用来控制workers，而是对整个商业的助益。
tricky！！
JC在最后一段说的
At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers.
说了telephone exchange的改变是如何alter后面一系列关于工人们的...
按OG的讲解，原文altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers可以被归纳为C选项中的impact of changes in the technology of switching at the exchange in terms of overall operations and organization。
问题是一不完全理解C选项的翻译，in terms of是修饰什么的？
二是不明白OG提供的逻辑——题目提到的是information，为什么直接定位到empirical level了？
正确选项C有点没读懂，可以翻译一下吗？
in terms of overall operations and organization是修饰谁的？impact还是exchange？
specific; 定位At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers.
altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers.
for machinery is just scrap unless it is organized functionally and supported by appropriate systems of operation and maintenance.
这篇文章看了翻译依然很难懂，两个观点分别不是那么的大，只是在定义上有一些区别而已。。。
这篇文章完全没抓住 Clark 的重心。Clark 只反驳了一部分 SC 极端的观点。His reason for undertaking the study is not for B's idea at all.