What kinds of property rights apply to Algonquian family hunting territories, and how did they come to be? The dominant view in recent decades has been that family hunting territories, like other forms of private landownership, were not found among Algonquians (a group of North American Indian tribes) before contact with Europeans but are the result of changes in Algonquian society brought about by the European-Algonquian fur trade, in combination with other factors such as ecological changes and consequent shifts in wildlife harvesting patterns. Another view claims that Algonquian family hunting territories predate contact with Europeans and are forms of private landownership by individuals and families. More recent fieldwork, however, has shown that individual and family rights to hunting territories form part of a larger land-use system of multifamilial hunting groups, that rights to hunting territories at this larger community level take precedence over those at the individual or family level, and that this system reflects a concept of spiritual and social reciprocity that conflicts with European concepts of private property. In short, there are now strong reasons to think that it was erroneous to claim that Algonquian family hunting territories ever were, or were becoming, a kind of private property system.
According to the passage, proponents of the view mentioned in the first highlighted portion of text and proponents of the view mentioned in the second highlighted portion of text both believe which of the following about Algonquian family hunting territories?
They are a form of private landownership.
They are a form of community, rather than individual, landownership.
They were a form of private landownership prior to contact with Europeans.
They became a form of private landownership due to contact with Europeans.
They have replaced reciprocal practices relating to land use in Algonquian society.
题目分析:
题目释义:
细节题目
考点:
支持主题(Supporting ideas)
旨在考察我们对文章细节的认知
这个题目在于找出两个高亮“view”的共同点。容易发现的,两个观点都提到了“landownership”,即这两个观点争论的地方不是“landownership”本身,而是这样的“landownership”到底是因何而形成。所以他们的共同点就是都承认“landownership”。
选项分析:
A选项:Correct. 他们都是一种私有土地所有制的形式。在考点中已经分析明确,这里不再赘述。
B选项:他们是一种社区,而不是个人的土地所有制。这个选项是作者的观点,不是两个高亮“view”的观点
C选项:他们是在和欧洲人交流以前形成的私人土地所有制。这个选项是第二个高亮“view”。不是两者的共同观点。
D选项:他们是一个由于和欧洲人交流而形成的私人土地所有制。这个选项是第一个高亮“view” 不是两者的共同观点。
E选项:他们替代了和“A”社会的土地应用所相关的实际回馈机制。这个选项的内容也是在作者观点中讲到的。不是前两个“view”。
In short, there are now strong reasons to think that it was erroneous to claim that Algonquian family hunting territories ever were, or were becoming, a kind of private property system.
A说.. B说... HOWEVER C说...,说明C的内容与之前的截然相反,而AB所拥有的共同点一定和C的特点相反! C是community property,集体财产对应的就是个人财产了~
区别哪些是观点1,哪些是观点2,哪些是作者观点。不要囫囵吞枣一呼通读下来,要适当做笔记!
谨慎谨慎再谨慎。。。
一定要回看原文,不能自己靠回忆脑补。。。
哎,就怕回看原文会超时...
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
like other forms of private landownership
are forms of private landownership
本题的根本在于抓住文章的focus,再加上对内容的适度把握
我觉得两个highlight部分应该是the dominant view和another view那里。
本文的结构是:
View 1:family hunting territories, like other forms of private landownership
View 2:family hunting territories are forms of private landownership by individuals and families
因此这两个观点的共同点是说FHT是individual的,或者是family-based的
然而,View 3提出了不同的观点:即,这是一个相对collective的组织,因此和上面构成了鲜明的对比。
因此,在本题问高亮部分的时候,考虑前两个View之间的共同点,当然就是individual这个问题了。
只有一个Highlight....
嗯……自行脑补了另一个,应该是脑补错了……
对。。。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论