Archaeologists studying Bonito phase (ca. A.D. 900-1140) Native American ceramics from Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, observed that many pots had been altered after firing to revise their decorative designs--usually, intricate geometric patterns painted in black on white slipped surfaces. In some cases, a new design was imposed over an earlier one; less often, the original design was simply covered with white slip. Crown and Wills doubt that the alterations were made to correct design errors. Many Chaco pots with design errors were left unaltered. Furthermore, when errors were corrected, revisions were made prior to firing—either by painting directly over the error or by scraping off designs and applying new slip and paint, which is a less time-consuming method than repainting and refiring flawed pots.
1. The author of the passage mentions Crown and Wills primarily in order to
A. Distinguish among different factors that might have caused Chaco potters to alter their pots’ decorative designs.
B. Introduce new evidence related to the question of why Chaco potters altered their pots’ decorative designs.
C. Show how one potential explanation for the alteration of Chaco pots has been discounted.
D. Present a hypothesis about why Chaco pots were altered to revise their decorative designs.
E. Explain how archaeologists discerned the method by which Chaco pots were originally decorated.
答案：C
2. According to the passage, which of the following is true of Bonito phase Chaco pots?
A. Relatively few of them have original designs concealed beneath white surfaces.
B. Relatively few of them were altered after firing.
C. Many of their alterations increased the intricacy of their painted designs.
D. Many of them have some flaw in their shape or structure.
E. Many of them were altered more than once.
答案：A
解析見下。
Archaeologists studying Bonito phase (ca. A.D. 900-1140) Native American ceramics from Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, observed that many pots had been altered after firing to revise their decorative designs--usually, intricate geometric patterns painted in black on white slipped surfaces.
第1句：研究B階段的（公元900-1140年）新墨西哥州查科峽谷的美洲原住民陶瓷的考古學家觀察到，許多壺罐在燒製後被改變了裝飾設計 - （這些設計）通常是複雜的幾何圖案，用黑色畫在白色磨光表面上。
此句信息量較大。壺罐的裝飾設計是什麼？——usually, intricate geometric patterns painted in black on white slipped surfaces。要理解這句話，語法基礎和常識都要具備。
white slipped surfaces——陶罐本身的罐體顏色是白色的，並且打磨過。
intricate geometric patterns painted in black——陶罐表面畫上了複雜的幾何圖案、以黑色畫的。
綜上，壺罐的裝飾設計是就是，用黑顏色畫在罐體表面的這些幾何圖案。
那什麼叫【許多壺罐在燒製後被改變了裝飾設計】？
陶罐首先要畫好圖案，然後燒製。燒完了就算完工了。但是這些罐子在燒製完了之後，圖案又被改過了。
怎麼改的呢？未完待續。
In some cases, a new design was imposed over an earlier one; less often, the original design was simply covered with white slip.
第2句：在某些情況下，一個新的設計被加在一個較早的設計上；更少見的是，原來的設計被直接用白塗料蓋住。
這句話就在介紹，具體怎麼改的舊圖案。
有兩種情況。
情況1: In some cases在某些情況下 VS 情況2:less often更少見的是。
所以我們就明白了，情況2的“更少見”是相對情況1來說的。那就意味著，情況1是常見情況，情況2是少見情況。
情況1：一個新的設計被加在一個較早的設計上——直接在舊圖上面畫新圖案。
情況2：原來的設計被直接用白塗料蓋住——還記得上一句麼？罐體是白色的。這句話的信息表明，罐體的白色是白色塗料塗出來的。所以情況2的改圖案方法，是用白色塗料把原圖案覆蓋——相當於改後的罐子沒有圖案了。
Crown and Wills doubt that the alterations were made to correct design errors.
第3句：Crown和Wills質疑，修改是為了改正設計錯誤。
要特別注意doubt的意思——質疑——意思是不相信後面的觀點。
因此，the alterations were made to correct design errors修改是為了改正設計錯誤——是其他人的觀點。到底是誰的，文章沒說。反正不是Crown和Wills的。
有些人認為，之所以罐子上的設計出現修改的情況，是因為原圖案設計有誤。
Crown和Wills不認可這個觀點。
Many Chaco pots with design errors were left unaltered.
第4句：許多設計錯誤的查科壺被保持不變。
為啥不認可？這就是理由（之一）。
如果說【修改是為了改正設計錯誤】，那也就是說，有設計錯誤的查科壺應該差不多都被改正過。但是，
有許多設計錯誤的查科壺被保持不變啊。這就矛盾了。
當然，這不是決定性的證據。我們很容易就可以想到原先的那些人可以怎樣辯駁。比如說，也許錯誤的類型不同或者嚴重程度不同，導致了有些錯誤罐子改了，有些錯誤罐子沒改。
想推翻原解釋，這個證據還不夠。
Furthermore, when errors were corrected, revisions were made prior to firing—either by painting directly over the error or by scraping off designs and applying new slip and paint, which is a less time-consuming method than repainting and refiring flawed pots.
第5句：此外，當要糾正錯誤時，是在進行燒製之前進行修改——要麼直接在錯誤上繪畫，或者通過刮掉設計並施用新的塗料和繪畫，這比重新繪製和重新燒製有缺陷的罐子花費的時間更少。
更進一步的證據來了。
如果修改真的僅僅是為了改正設計錯誤，那正常的修改流程是怎樣的？
這裡需要回顧文章開頭：罐子的製造流程是怎樣的？
1先用泥巴製造罐體，2然後塗上白色塗料，3用黑顏料畫上圖案，4最後燒製。燒完了就算完工了。
所以，腦子沒進水的人如果在畫完圖案之後發現圖案畫錯了，會在哪一步修改圖案？
當然是第三步和第四步之間。
這就是文章說的【當要糾正錯誤時，是在進行燒製之前進行修改——要麼直接在錯誤上繪畫，或者通過刮掉設計並施用新的塗料和繪畫】。
這種情況下，罐子的製造及修改流程變成了：
【正常流程】：1先用泥巴製造罐體，2然後塗上白色塗料，3用黑顏料畫上圖案，4發現圖案畫錯了，改圖案，5最後燒製。
可是實際上罐子的製造及修改流程是什麼？
【實際流程】：1先用泥巴製造罐體，2然後塗上白色塗料，3用黑顏料畫上圖案，4燒製，5改圖案，6又燒了一次。
因此，罐子不同尋常的修改流程是個更有說服力的證據，說明修改圖案不僅僅是為了改掉錯誤的圖案本身，要不然就應該採用正常流程而不是現在的實際流程。實際流程可是又費時又很可能費功夫還費燃料的。這麼搞一趟，很可能有別的原因。
因此，我們可以判斷出：Crown和Wills對原觀點的質疑是相當有道理的。
（第一題解析略。需要解析請留言）
2. According to the passage, which of the following is true of Bonito phase Chaco pots?
根據該文，關於B階段的查科壺罐，以下哪一個正確？
A. Relatively few of them have original designs concealed beneath white surfaces.
A.它們中相對較少有原始設計隱藏在白色表面之下。
第2句：在某些情況下，一個新的設計被加在一個較早的設計上；更少見的是，原來的設計被直接用白塗料蓋住。
【它們中相對較少有原始設計隱藏在白色表面之下】對應的就是第二種【更少見】的情況。A對。
B. Relatively few of them were altered after firing.
B.在燒製後它們相對較少被改變。
選項的【相對較少】和第一句矛盾：研究B階段的（公元900-1140年）新墨西哥州查科峽谷的美洲原住民陶瓷的考古學家觀察到，【許多】壺罐在燒製後被改變了裝飾設計。
C. Many of their alterations increased the intricacy of their painted designs.
C.它們的許多改變增加了他們的繪畫設計的複雜性。
文章說，改變是【一個新的設計被加在一個較早的設計上】或者【原來的設計被直接用白塗料蓋住】，並沒有說改變會【增加了他們的繪畫設計的複雜性】（也就是讓圖案更復雜）。
D. Many of them have some flaw in their shape or structure.
D.它們中的許多在形狀或結構上都有缺陷。
文章一直說的是圖案的改變，從未說過圖案以外的其他特徵。完全沒談過形狀或結構。
E. Many of them were altered more than once.
E.它們中的許多不止一次地被改變了。
文章只說改變過，完全沒談過改變的【次數】。
閱讀更多 教英語的狗狗老師 的文章
