Two recent publications offer different assessments of the career of the famous British nurse Florence Nightingale. A book by Anne Summers seeks to debunk the idealizations and present a reality at odds with Nightingale's heroic reputation. According to Summers, Nightingale's importance during the Crimean War has been exaggerated: not until near the war's end did she become supervisor of the female nurses. Additionally, Summers writes that the contribution of the nurses to the relief of the wounded was at best marginal. The prevailing problems of military medicine were caused by army organizational practices, and the addition of a few nurses to the medical staff could be no more than symbolic. Nightingale's place in the national pantheon, Summers asserts, is largely due to the propagandistic efforts of contemporary newspaper reporters.
By contrast, the editors of a new volume of Nightingale's letters view Nightingale as a person who significantly influenced not only her own age but also subsequent generations. They highlight her ongoing efforts to reform sanitary conditions after the war. For example, when she learned that peacetime living conditions in British barracks were so horrible that the death rate of enlisted men far exceeded that of neighboring civilian populations, she succeeded in persuading the government to establish a Royal Commission on the Health of the Army. She used sums raised through public contributions to found a nurses' training hospital in London. Even in administrative matters, the editors assert, her practical intelligence was formidable: as recently as 1947 the British Army's medical services were still using the cost-accounting system she had devised in the 1860's.
I believe that the evidence of her letters supports continued respect for Nightingale's brilliance and creativity. When counseling a village schoolmaster to encourage children to use their faculties of observation, she sounds like a modern educator. Her insistence on classifying the problems of the needy in order to devise appropriate treatments is similar to the approach of modern social workers. In sum, although Nightingale may not have achieved all of her goals during the Crimean War, her breadth of vision and ability to realize ambitious projects have earned her an eminent place among the ranks of social pioneers.
In the last paragraph, the author is primarily concerned with
summarizing the arguments about Nightingale presented in the first two paragraphs
refuting the view of Nightingale's career presented in the preceding paragraph
analyzing the weaknesses of the evidence presented elsewhere in the passage
citing evidence to support a view of Nightingale's career
correcting a factual error occurring in one of the works under review
此讲解的内容由AI生成,还未经人工审阅,仅供参考。
答案是 D. citing evidence to support a view of Nightingale's career。因为最后一段的作者主要是举例说明弗洛伦斯·南丁格尔的职业生涯有多么出色,而不是反驳前面段落里对南丁格尔职业生涯的看法,分析前面段落中提供的证据之弱点,纠正其中一份书评中的事实错误等。
当时在A和D之间纠结,最后看到in sum就选了A!仔细想想可能D更合适,又提出了新的evidence。作者不是单纯的总结上文的arguments,而是自己还提出了观点支持N。一定不能读丢,每一句都想想和上一句的关系!!!
我觉得答案A 其实就是最后一段 in sum以后的部分,本题选D是因为前面大部分篇幅citing envidence的原因吗?
不是啊~整个最后一段其实是在提出新的证据来说明南丁格尔的career,并不是直接总结前两段的内容撒~
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
看到summarizing 不一定是最后答案!需要结合段落的意思来理解其作用。
具象化做得不够好
rc
凭印象去做题了,没有仔细验证思考,
最后一点不仅仅是in sum的总结,算是个陷阱吧,如果选a的话这道题也太简单了,一点也没绕弯,gmac不会出这么简单的题;
其实是d,提供了新的证据,证明了一种自己的观点
在P3作者新增了evidence ( modern educator, social worker..) 来support editors的观点,而不是仅仅单纯的summarize两方观点
在P3作者新增了evidence ( modern educator, social worker..) 来support editors的观点,而不是仅仅单纯的summarize两方观点
错选A。最后一段作者提出新的观点如modern educator,说明不是summarize
作者最后一段举了insistence on classifying the problems和realize ambitious projects,证明support态度。
错误选项a,错误原因,最后一段提出了前面两段没出现过的 modern educator,modern social worker,所以不是summarize,而是提出新的evidence去support,Nightingale's brilliance and creativity.
赞!!
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
作者态度很鲜明,不是客观的去reconcile两个观点的。
赞!!
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
没看到是问最后一段
作者不是站在一个客观的角度去评价主人公,而是站在support的角度,立场是很鲜明的。所以conclude 两人的观点是不对的。
最后一段点明了作者的观点,并且他也提到了证据。最后一句话只是总结作者自己的观点,并没有总结前面两个人的观点。