In the Late Nineteenth Century Art Critics Regarded Seventeenthcentury
In the tardily nineteenth century, fine art critics regarded seventeenth-century Dutch paintings as direct reflections of reality. The paintings were discussed as an alphabetize of the commonwealth of a society that chose to stand for its course, action, and occupations exactly as they were, wide-ranging realism was seen as the great accomplishment of Dutch art. Notwithstanding, the achievement of more than contempo study of Dutch art has been the recovery of the fact that such paintings are to be taken as symbolizing mortality, the renaissance of earthly life, and the power of God, and as bulletin that range from the mildly moralizing to the firmly didactic. How explicit and consistent the symbolizing procedure was intended to be is a much thornier affair, but anyone who has more familiarity than a passing associate with Dutch literature or with the kinds of images used in illustrated books (above all emblem books) volition know how much less pervasive was the addiction of investing ordinary objects than of investing scenes with meaning that become across their surface and outward appearance. In the mid-1960s, Eddy de Jongh published an extraordinary array of textile — especially from the emblem books and vernacular literature — that confirmed the unreliability of taking Dutch pictures at surface value solitary.
The major difficulty, however, with the findings of critics such every bit de Jongh is that it is non easy to assess the multiplicity of levels in which Dutch viewers interpreted these pictures. De Jongh's followers typically regard the pictures as purely symbolic. Not every object within Dutch paintings demand exist interpreted in terms of the gloss given to its equivalent representation in the emblem books. Non every human foot warmer is to be interpreted in terms of the foot warmer in Rowmer Visscher'southward Sinnepoppen of 1614, non every bridle is an emblem of restraint (though many were indeed just that). To maintain as Dark-brown does, that the two children in Netscher'due south painting A Lady Didactics a Child to Read represent industry and idleness is to fail to understand that the painting has a variety of possible meanings, even though the motion picture undoubtedly carriers unmistakable symbolic meanings, besides. Modern Art historians may well find the discovery of parallels between a painting and a specific emblem heady, they may, like seventeenth-century viewers, search for the double that lie behind many paintings. But seventeenth-century response tin hardly be reduced to the level of formula. To suggest otherwise is to imply a laboriousness of mental process that may well characterize modernistic interpretations of seventeenth-century Dutch Art, but that was, for the most part, not feature in the seventeenth century.
i. The passage is primarily concerned with which of the following?
A. Reconciling ii different points of view about how fine art reflects
B. Criticizing a traditional method of interpretation
C. Tracing the development of an innovative scholarly approach
D. Describing and evaluating a contempo disquisitional approach
E. Describing a long-continuing controversy and how it was resolved
2. The author of the passage mentions bridles in the highlighted portion of the passage most probable in order to
A. Suggest that restraint was only one of the many symbolic meanings fastened to bridles
B. Provide an example of an everyday, physical object that was not endowed with symbolic meaning
C. Provide an example of an object that modern critics have endowed with symbolic meaning different from the pregnant assigned it by seventeenth-century Dutch artists
D. Provide an example of an object with symbolic significant that was not ever used equally a symbol
E. Provide an case of an everyday object that appears in a meaning number of seventeenth century Dutch paintings
3. Which of the following best describes the function of the terminal paragraph of the passage?
A. Information technology provides specific applications of the critical approach introduced in the preceding paragraph
B. It present a caveat about the critical arroyo discussed in the preceding paragraph
C. Information technology presents the inquiry on which a theory presented in the preceding paragraph is based
D. It refutes a theory presented in the preceding paragraph and advocates a return to a more traditional approach
Due east. It provides further data most the unusual phenomenon described in the preceding paragraph
4. The passage suggests which of the following about emblem books in seventeenth-century Holland?
A. They confirm that seventeenth century Dutch painting depict some objects and scenes rarely institute in daily life.
B. They are more useful than vernacular literature in providing information about the symbolic content of seventeenth-century Dutch painting.
C. They have been misinterpreted by art critics, such as de Jongh, who claim seventeenth century Dutch paintings contain symbolic meaning
D. They are non useful in interpreting seventeenth-century Dutch landscape painting.
Eastward. They incorporate cloth that challenges the assumptions of the nineteenth-century critics about seventeenth-century Dutch painting.
結構分析：
老樣子先從第一句看起，大致上就是在講1800年代的人認為1600年代的荷蘭畫作很真，簡短一點就是『17'Ｄ＝真』，接著看到The paintings 就別看了，因為這裡the表示代名詞，那既然他代替前面講過的東西，表示這一句話就是繼需補充延伸而已，在邏輯上沒有轉變，都屬支持上一句，接著跳過這句之後往下一句看，太爽了我看到however, 這個比Ｃ羅開賽四分鐘就進球還爽，這說明了symbolizing mortality, the renaissance of earthly life, and the ability of God, and as bulletin that range from the mildly moralizing to the firmly didactic.是不真實的層面，所以文章的邏輯也大致上就定案了，後面也沒出現轉折詞，所以往下一段看。
下一段來者不善The major difficulty, however, with the findings of critics such equally de Jongh is that it is non easy to assess the multiplicity of levels in which Dutch viewers interpreted these pictures.首先他出現however了表示又要跟上面轉折，可是這個『好耶額』就好像楚河漢界一樣，他之前的東西是一回事，然後他之後的東西又是另一回事，兩者呈對立轉折關係，但我們剛剛在第一段的已經攔截到一個however了，可是這裡又出現一個，表示這個跟上面一整個段落轉折，那至於轉折內容是啥，not like shooting fish in a barrel to appraise，這就是主角了，很難去評估，所以相對來說第一段就有很好評估的含義，其實也沒錯，因為critics把17'Dutch的畫作分成是真實派，跟抽象派去討論，所以文章段轉折就是說，哪有那麼好分門別類啊，進入結構圖。
不過我喵了一下文章最後一句話，感覺又來緩頰文章對立了，他說到感覺像是旁觀者清當局者迷。
第一題：
文章在做轉折過後，主軸會轉成轉折詞過後的東西，前面的東西會被『轉折詞』後面的東西堆翻，所以這片文章的主軸有個大however，所以就可以判定文章本來分的寫實派跟抽像派，是一坨大便不值得討論，進而呈現 不清楚的境界。那既然有推翻，所以選項中只剩下（Ｂ）Criticizing，跟（Ｅ） controversy可以考慮，但是（Ｅ）講的是之前有一個很久的矛盾，這跟結構完全不同，結構是要找前觀點被後觀點推翻才對，或是很賭爛前觀點，所以是（Ｂ）。那這樣就上當了，當初我就是選（Ｂ）。所以應該進一步的檢視這個轉折的用意
從頭來過吧！！！
我可以知道是有被推翻某件事情，但是單從語氣來看文章中"not like shooting fish in a barrel" 並沒有存粹表示贊成或是反對的態度，反倒是持保留狀態，所以我當初不應該就直接認定他是批評負面字Criticizing，既然如此（Ａ）Reconciling具有正面含義自然不能選。所以繼續剩下（C） Tracing 這個也不行，他有遞進的含義，就是文章一路大順子，沒有轉折，並且還會有類似步驟一，步驟二.....commencement, second.....的字眼，所以也不對。（Ｄ）就是對的了，等等再看，現把（Ｅ）處理掉，"not easy" 就表示還沒處理完"was resolved"，當然不能選，答案就是（Ｄ）
D. Describing的這個動詞，其實就是關鍵，他表示文章內容會有所謂的『細節』，這個細節其實我一開始也不太知道怎麼劃分，後來才知道這所謂的細節是我們看到文章的時候，是否有類似連鎖的結構，簡單來講就是，母雞帶小雞，所以通常會看到，在topic sentence結束之後，接下來的句子，會出現『代名詞』去引導一個句子，可以是當主詞或是受詞，像這宜題就是
In the belatedly nineteenth century, fine art critics regarded seventeenth-century Dutch paintings every bit direct reflections of reality. The paintings were discussed every bit an index of the democracy of a club that chose to represent its class, activity, and occupations exactly as they were, wide-ranging realism was seen equally the dandy accomplishment of Dutch art. Even so, the achievement of more than recent study of Dutch art has been the recovery of the fact that such paintings are to be taken as symbolizing bloodshed, the renaissance of earthly life, and the ability of God, and as message that range from the mildly moralizing to the firmly didactic. How explicit and consistent the symbolizing process was intended to exist is a much thornier thing, but anyone who has more familiarity than a passing acquaintance with Dutch literature or with the kinds of images used in illustrated books (above all keepsake books) will know how much less pervasive was the habit of investing ordinary objects than of investing scenes with meaning that go beyond their surface and outward advent. In the mid-1960s, Eddy de Jongh published an extraordinary array of material — especially from the emblem books and vernacular literature — that confirmed the unreliability of taking Dutch pictures at surface value alone.
看到紅匡的兩個就夠了，像是說the achievement後面又再加了一堆敘述最後再給Dutch art，那我們整篇文章開頭就是以荷蘭畫作起頭，那這句表達的就是這個荷蘭畫作裡頭的某某東西，阿那個某某（achievement）東西就是連鎖的下一個主詞。好拉，這些也是後來才學到的，剛好隔壁鄰居是個美國人，他的職業是雅思考官。他也建議，問到主旨題，先把每個選項的"動詞"過一遍。選（Ｄ）
好就這樣，之前給錯誤訊息，真抱歉。
第二題：
看到in order to不用客氣二話不說請忽略這一句，把它當作修辭目的題來解，文章剛定位的那句話出現了Rowmer Visscher's Sinnepoppen of 1614,表是這已經夠具體了是細節性的舉例或證明，那這種舉列天下只有兩種作用，第一：支持本段主旨，第二：支持前方的論點。然後我們目標已鎖定只能往前找，因為英文論文的寫作方式都是先論點再論據，這種語言考試更不例外，所以要找的答案應該會在De Jongh'due south followers typically regard the pictures as purely symbolic裡面，因為他的上一句Not every....，也是個例子，這是用找論點的方式去解題的，開始進入修辭目的提三步驟，剛剛已經分析完誰是論點誰是論據了，所以接下來找介面連接詞，我們看到Not every有個否定詞not，然後找論點句子裡的主幹，as purely symbolic，所以合起來便是not every bit purely symbolic，答案選（Ｄ）
方法二：直接找本段的主旨句，The major difficulty, nonetheless, with the findings of critics such as de Jongh is that it is not easy to appraise the multiplicity of levels in which Dutch viewers interpreted these pictures. 所以大致上看完再講觀眾在『看畫作的時候不好評估』，所以（Ｄ）也是比較合適，但是這樣要花一點時間去分析每個選項，所以我覺得這題用方法一處理比較恰當。而且GRE有個厲害之處，就是當你看完每個選項後會發現感覺每個選項都正確，所以能夠不用刪去法就不要用。而且也超級浪費時間，GRE有另一種題型是『多選題』他們都只有出三個選項，然後叫你判斷是非，所以一定要一個一個去驗證的，因此三個選項都會讀到然後再分析，然後多選題分數跟單選題是一樣的，所以就這個角度來看，就是說ＥＴＳ會認為考生最多最多只需要評估單選題五題當中的『三個選項』就應該要知道答案了。因此題目的設定上本來就沒有要每個選項都找並且關鍵字評估求答案
第三題：
第三題問最後一段的功能是幹嗎的，這跟第一題很類似，所以回到結構圖上面，可以得到兩種結論，第一：反對第一段觀點，第二：說明"not easy to admission "，所以找個帶『反對』詞彙的，看上去也只有（Ｂ）（Ｄ）可選擇，但是（Ｄ）多了advocates a return to a more traditional approach，打槍你了，都已經更你講回不去了，你還想回去更早之前，這就好像是第一段在講溫瑞凡跟謝安真的關係，然後第二段在講溫瑞凡跟黎維恩的關係，這樣就沒了，結果（Ｄ）選項還跑出一個溫瑞凡跟何愛玲的關係，忘了劇情就當我沒說好了，所以只有選（Ｂ）
第四題：
推理題，所以不能把它當成原句子看懂找選項的細節提來做，必須牽扯到對像以及它的附屬條件，keepsake books在文章中出現三次，分別是(above all keepsake books)，— specially from the keepsake books and vernacular literature —，還有第二段的given to its equivalent representation in the emblem books.我是看到這句來做答案的In the mid-1960s, Boil de Jongh published an extraordinary array of textile — especially from the emblem books and vernacular literature — that confirmed the unreliability of taking Dutch pictures at surface value alone.因為題目有提到seventeenth-century所以我往提到時間的句子找，因為我認為文章故意講十七世紀就是要暗示他的條件跟時間有關，接著他emblem books出現在插入語裡面，所以看一下說一個很奇特的題材（extraordinary）來自於emblem，然後後面的關係代名詞說明了unreliability of taking Dutch pictures at surface value alone事情不是眼睛所看到的那麼簡單，他換句話說就是emblem books跟抽象有關了，而且本質上就剛剛文章分析的結構圖來看，這句話出現在抽象派的區域，所以支持抽象派也理所當然了。 選（Ｅ）
推理題很乾脆，只要找到對象找到條件答案會很明顯，再加上文章結構圖有出來其實就容易了，假設不放心的話，會變成讀整篇文章，很浪費時間，但還是來點補充：（Ａ）喵到confirm，就別理答案了，人家都還在爭論畫作很難分派系，怎麼會有證實這麼明確的字眼（Ｂ）他們倆EB跟VI文章中是並列關係，所以選項改成比較關係絕對錯，（Ｃ）misinterpreted這個也是很確定的字眼，（Ｄ）邏輯串層了，landscape這個東西表示我已經承認畫作是寫實的而且是畫風景的，但是文章主旨是爭論到底可不可以分成這兩類，那這樣就錯了，（Ｅ）就很合理however=claiming，光這些分析完考試時間應該結束了
長難句補充：
How explicit and consistent the symbolizing process was intended to exist is a much thornier matter, but anyone who has more familiarity than a passing acquaintance with Dutch literature or with the kinds of images used in illustrated books (above all keepsake books) will know how much less pervasive was the habit of investing ordinary objects than of investing scenes with pregnant that get beyond their surface and outward advent.
剛開始How explicit and consistent｜the symbolizing process was intended to be｜ is a much thornier thing，紅色部分是跟著how的關係副詞子句，所以簡化之後就是how is a much thornier matter，做法是個極為棘手的問題，因為這個做法在刻意把這類象徵化的過程搞得很明顯和一致。
第二趴：, only anyone who has more familiarity than a passing acquaintance with Dutch literature or with the kinds of images used in illustrated books (above all emblem books)先看到這裡好了，紅色字是關係代名詞修飾anyone用的，所以看不懂請跳過，他是修飾不是主幹， used in illustrated books 這個傢伙是修飾the kinds of images的，而且這只是一個主詞就是anyone而已喔！動詞跟受詞還沒出來，這樣翻譯成：但是比只懂得一點荷蘭文學或是一些繪圖冊的相片的人更加熟知的任何人來說，再換句話就是：任何一個知道荷蘭文學或是一些繪圖冊的相片的人，好了這就是主詞。
第三：will know動詞。
第四：how much less pervasive was the habit of investing ordinary objects than of investing scenes with significant that go beyond their surface and outward appearance.這一長串只是個受詞而已，中間還有倒裝句，先行還原：how much less pervasive the habit of investing ordinary objects wasthan (the addiction) of investing scenes with significant that go across their surface and outward advent,邏輯上就是the habit of investing ordinary objects比較不普遍，所以代表(the habit) of investing scenes with meaning that go beyond their surface and outward advent,比較普遍，這中間又有介系詞在那干擾with significant that get beyond their surface and outward advent，這是修飾行方的investing scenes，有著超越外表含義的寫生畫作，investing scenes，這個不是翻譯投資，我找到invest有個意思叫做『打模鑄造』的意思，所以滿像臨摹的感覺。而這裡的比較級than就是二分法你可以取ordinary objects不普遍，或是investing scenes很普遍，選其中之一即可
第五：主幹為anyone will know how pervasive the habit of investing scenes was，隨便一個人都知道畫作畫中有弦外之音。那麼一大串的句子重點也才只有11個單字
這一句也不錯：
that the 2 children in Netscher'south painting A Lady Teaching a Child to Read stand for manufacture and idleness is to fail to empathize that the painting has a variety of possible meanings, even though the film undoubtedly carriers unmistakable symbolic meanings。
關鍵在於主詞是誰，這裡主詞是That，中間那坨是名詞子句裡的容物，所以你可以想成整個that＋名詞子句，這一包是為主詞，that the 2 children in Netscher's painting A Lady Educational activity a Kid to Read stand for industry and idleness 。 翻譯上：就是那個（that）由Netscher創作的一個名叫"教導一個小孩讀書的女士"的畫作中，兩個小孩分別代表勤勞跟懶惰的這個認知上，剛這樣的認知是無法理解這幅畫其實具備多樣可能的含義，就算這話已經給予很明確的象徵性意義在內，還是無法解釋這畫含意遠大。
以上個人筆記希望有幫助到大家，有誤再請指教!!
0 Response to "In the Late Nineteenth Century Art Critics Regarded Seventeenthcentury"
Post a Comment