今天一同来看一下GRE阅读题:旅鸽灭绝

　　Although the passenger pigeons, now extinct, were abundant in eighteenth- and nineteenth century America, archaeological studies at twelfth-century Cahokian sites in the present day United States examined household food trash and found that traces of passenger pigeon were quite rare. Given that the sites were close to a huge passenger pigeon roost documented by John James Audubon in the nineteenth century and that Cahokians consumed almost every other animal protein source available, the archaeologists conducting the studies concluded the passenger pigeon population had once been very limited before increasing dramatically in post-Columbian America. Other archaeologists have criticized those conclusions on the grounds that passenger pigeon bones would not be likely to be preserved. But all the archaeological projects found plenty of bird bones- and even tiny bones from fish.

　　1. The author of the passage mentions “tiny bones from fish” primarily in order to

　　A. explain why traces of passenger pigeon are rare at Cahokian sites

　　B. support a claim about the wide variety of animal proteins in the Cahokian diet

　　C. provide evidence that confirms a theory about the extinction of the passenger pigeon

　　D. cast doubt on the conclusion reached by the archaeologists who conducted the studies discussed in the passage

　　E. counter an objection to an interpretation of the data obtained from Cahokian sites

　　2. Which of the following, if true, would most call into question the reasoning of “the archaeologists conducting the studies”?

　　A. Audubon was unable to correctly identify twelfth-century Cahokian sites

　　B. Audubon made his observations before passenger pigeon populations began to decline.

　　C. Passenger pigeons would have been attracted to household food trash

　　D. Archaeologist have found passenger pigeon remains among food waste at eighteenth century human settlements

　　E. Passenger pigeons tended not to roost at the same sites for very many generations

　　1

　　Although the passenger pigeons, now extinct, were abundant in eighteenth- and nineteenth century America, archaeological studies at twelfth-century Cahokian sites in the present day United States examined household food trash and found that traces of passenger pigeon were quite rare.

　　尽管现在已经绝迹的旅鸽，在十八和十九世纪的美洲曾相当繁盛，但现在美国进行的关于十二世纪 C 遗址的研究，检查了家庭食物残渣，发现旅鸽的痕迹相当罕见。

　　(

　　旅鸽 [passenger pigeon]

　　鸠鸽科鸽亚科已灭绝的鸽，学名Ectopistes migratorius。体长约32厘米，尾长而尖，雄鸟体呈淡粉红色，头蓝灰色。19世纪初有数十亿只旅鸽栖息于北美东部，迁徙鸟可遮天蔽日达数天之久。猎人开始大量屠杀旅鸽，还用火车把它们运到城市里的肉品市场销售。最后一只叫“马莎”的旅鸽在1914年死于辛辛那提动物园。旅鸽的灭绝是猎禽销售终止的主要原因，成为保护运动的主要推动力。

　　(大英袖珍百科)

　　PS：信鸽叫 homing pigeon，而且也没灭绝

　　)

　　2

　　Given that the sites were close to a huge passenger pigeon roost documented by John James Audubon in the nineteenth century and that Cahokians consumed almost every other animal protein source available, the archaeologists conducting the studies concluded the passenger pigeon population had once been very limited before increasing dramatically in post-Columbian America.

　　鉴于这些遗址，离十九世纪的 J J A 记录的一块巨大的旅鸽栖息地很近，而且 C 人吃其他能找到的几乎所有动物蛋白质，主持研究的考古学家得出结论认为，旅鸽种群数量，在后哥伦布时代的美洲爆发性增长之前，曾一度非常有限。

　　3

　　Other archaeologists have criticized those conclusions on the grounds that passenger pigeon bones would not be likely to be preserved.

　　其他考古学家不同意这些结论，根据是(他们认为)旅鸽的骨头不大可能保存下来。

　　4

　　But all the archaeological projects found plenty of bird bones- and even tiny bones from fish.

　　但所有的考古项目都发现过大量鸟骨，以及甚至是鱼的小刺。

　　1. The author of the passage mentions “tiny bones from fish” primarily in order to

　　A. explain why traces of passenger pigeon are rare at Cahokian sites

　　B. support a claim about the wide variety of animal proteins in the Cahokian diet

　　C. provide evidence that confirms a theory about the extinction of the passenger pigeon

　　D. cast doubt on the conclusion reached by the archaeologists who conducted the studies discussed in the passage

　　E. counter an objection to an interpretation of the data obtained from Cahokian sites

　　选 E

　　做这题需要理清整个文段的逻辑。

　　美国有几个考古学家发掘研究一处十二世纪 C 人遗址，在厨余残渣中，没发现什么旅鸽骨头，这是一种十八-十九世纪非常多的鸟。

　　考古学家们说，不对呀，明明这里离十九世纪一个人 A 记录的旅鸽栖息地超近的，而且 C 人是出了名的逮啥吃啥，那么只能认为旅鸽在十二世纪非常少，所以 C 人没咋吃过，哥伦布到美洲(1492 年)以后，旅鸽才变多的。

　　另一些考古学家说，鸟骨头未必能留下吧(暗示 C 人可能也吃了很多旅鸽，只是没留下证据)。

　　作者觉得后面这波考古学家的反对，简直扯，因为其他所有考古项目都发现过鸟骨头，别说鸟骨头了，鱼刺都找得到。

　　综上，选 E，对于 另一些考古学家提出的 对 C 遗址数据解读的反对意见 提出反对。

　　挺拗口，但逻辑清晰，对反对意见提出反对。

　　没读懂几乎没可能做对，错了的同学别难过，让你蒙对这种题，ETS 也太冤了。

　　2. Which of the following, if true, would most call into question the reasoning of “the archaeologists conducting the studies”?

　　A. Audubon was unable to correctly identify twelfth-century Cahokian sites

　　B. Audubon made his observations before passenger pigeon populations began to decline.

　　C. Passenger pigeons would have been attracted to household food trash

　　D. Archaeologist have found passenger pigeon remains among food waste at eighteenth century human settlements

　　E. Passenger pigeons tended not to roost at the same sites for very many generations

　　选 E

　　问，下列哪一项，如果为真，最能挑战 “ 主持研究的考古学家 ” 的逻辑。

　　这题其实是在问 rival causes，即对于同一种现象或结果，都有可能为真的，多种不同的解释，也有老师管这个叫 “ 他因 ”，其他原因。

　　一种被用来解释某个结果的逻辑 reasoning，如果存在越多 rival causes，第一种逻辑就越弱。比如发生了一起凶案，如果死者只有一个仇家，那么此人嫌疑最大，但倘若全世界都恨死者，都有动机杀人，那么前述的那个仇家的嫌疑就相对变小了。当然，随着调查深入，可能会有证据指向真正的嫌疑人。科学研究，在很多问题上，往往多年都没有更新的 evidence 来支持某一种逻辑，那么提出种种 rival causes，就成了对现有逻辑进行质证的重要手段。

　　回到题目。

　　A

　　十九世纪的 A 没能准确辨识十二世纪 C 人的遗址。莫名其妙选项，因为 A 是记录旅鸽栖息地的那个老兄，他可能一辈子都不知道 C 人曾经存在过，他只是对旅鸽感兴趣。

　　B

　　A 观察旅鸽种群时，旅鸽尚未开始减少。A 是十九世纪的人，他观察旅鸽时，不管旅鸽有没有减少，都跟十二世纪的 C 人有没有吃旅鸽，吃了多少旅鸽没有关系。

　　C

　　旅鸽可能被食物残渣吸引。哈哈哈选项。

　　D

　　考古学家在十八世纪人类定居点的食物残渣中发现了旅鸽残骸。十八世纪的人当然吃旅鸽，不然你觉得旅鸽是怎么灭绝的，但这跟十二世纪的 C 人吃不吃，吃了多少旅鸽无关。事实符合常识，但与目标逻辑无关。

　　E

　　旅鸽不会在某地栖息太久。正确项。

　　如果此项成立，那么至少有一种解释，能够否定主持研究的考古学家提出的结论：尽管 A 十九世纪观察到一个旅鸽的大型栖息地，该栖息地与 C 人十二世纪的聚居地非常接近，但因为旅鸽不会久居某地，它们很可能是后来迁到此地，而十二世纪，附近没有旅鸽活动，所以 C 人吃不到。推翻了十二世纪旅鸽数量少的结论。

       以上就是本文的全部内容，更多精彩请随时关注新东方长春学校官网。

相关推荐

长春新东方留学直通车