2. 职称英语
  3. Surprisingly enough, modern historians have rarely interested themselves i

Surprisingly enough, modern historians have rarely interested themselves i

游客2024-10-26  7
问题       Surprisingly enough, modern historians have rarely interested themselves in the history of the American South in the period before the South began to become self-consciously and distinctively "Southern"—the decades after 1815. Consequently, the cultural history of Britain’s North American Empire in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries has been written almost as if the Southern colonies had never existed. The American culture that emerged during the Colonial and Revolutionary eras has been depicted as having been simply an extension of New England Puritan culture. However, Professor Davis has recently argued that the South stood apart from the rest of American society during the early period, following its own unique pattern of cultural development. The case for Southern distinctiveness rests upon two related premises: flint, that the cultural similarities among the five Southern colonies were far more impressive than the differences, and second, that what made those colonies alike also made them different from the other colonies①. The first, for which Davis offers an enormous amount of evidence, can be accepted without major reservations; the second is far more problematic.
      What makes the second premise problematic is the use of the Puritan colonies as a basis for comparison. Quite properly, Davis decries the excessive influence ascribed by historians to the Puritans in the formation of American culture. Yet Davis inadvertently adds weight to such ascriptions by using the Puritans as the standard against which to assess the achievements and contributions of Southern colonials. Throughout, Davis focuses on the important, and undeniable, differences between the Southern and Puritan colonies in motives for and patterns of early settlement, in attitudes toward nature and native Americans, and in the degree of receptivity to metropolitan cultural influences②.
      However, recent scholarship has strongly suggested that those aspects of early New England culture that seem to have been most distinctly Puritan, such as the strong religions orientation and the communal impulse, were not even typical of New England as a whole, but were largely confined to the two colonies of Massachusetts and Connecticut③. Thus, what in contrast to the Puritan colonies appears to Davis to be peculiarly Southern—acquisitiveness, a strong interest in politics and the law, and a tendency to cultivate metropolitan cultural models—was not only more typically English than the cultural patterns exhibited by Puritan Massachusetts and Connecticut, but also almost certainly characteristic of most other early modern British colonies from Barbados north to Rhode Island and New Hampshire④. Within the larger framework of American colonial life, then, not the Southern but the Puritan colonies appear to have been distinctive, and even they seem to have been rapidly assimilating to the dominant cultural patterns by the last Colonial period. [br] What can we infer from the last paragraph?
选项 A、Without the cultural diversity of the South, American colonial culture would have been homogeneous.
B、Contributions of Southern colonials were overshadowed by that of the Puritans.
C、Convergence (not divergence) seems to have featured the cultural development of the American colony in 1700s.
D、Colonial period American culture was more sensitive to outside influence than historians acknowledged.
答案 C
解析 推理判断题。根据文章最后一句，可知在更广阔的殖民地文化框架下，Davis教授所宣称的南方文化独立模式发展的说法被否决了，相反是清教徒文化与众不同(并且清教徒文化已超出了马萨诸塞州和康涅狄格州，扩展到更广阔的地方了。)，而这种清教徒文化也正在快速地被同化。所以18世纪殖民地文化合流而非分化，所以选项C 为正确答案。选项A 正是作者在最后一段要批判的，南方文化并非特立独行；选项B 表面上正确，但这里讲的是特征而不是贡献的大小；选项D 与最后一句话违背。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3817729.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)