小站备考
托福
托福阅读
extra3阅读

EXTRA3 Why does the author include the information that Moscow has been described as the first stopping and setting point in the northeast?

展开
The Rise of Moscow
Tip:单击查看句义;划选/双击查生词
The rise of Moscow during medieval times was a fundamental development in Russian history. Moscow began with very little and for a long time could not be compared to such flourishing principalities as Novgorod or Galicia. Even in its own area, the northeast, it was junior to old centers like Rostov and Suzdal. In accounting for Moscow's rise, historians have emphasized several factors or rather groups of factors.

First, attention may be given to the doctrine of geographic causation. It stresses the decisive importance of the location on Moscow for the later expansion of the Muscovite state (the medieval state centered in Moscow) and includes several lines of argument. Moscow lay as a crossing of three roads. The most important was the way from the historically crucial city of Kiev and the declining south to the growing northeast. In fact Moscow has been described as the first stopping and setting point in the northeast . But it also profited from moments in other directions, including the reverse. Thus it seems immigrants came to Moscow after the Mongol devastation of the lands further to the northeast. Moscow was also situated on a bend of the Moscow River that flows from the northwest to the southeast into the Oka, the largest western tributary of the Volga River. To speak more broadly of water communications which span and unite European Russia, Moscow has the rare fortune of being located near the headwaters of four major rivers: the Oka, the Volga, the Don, and the Dnieper. This offered marvelous opportunities for expansion across the flowing plain, especially as there were no mountains or other natural obstacles to hem in the young principality.

In another sense too, Moscow benefited from a central position. It stood in the midst of lands inhabited by the Russian people which, so the argument runs, provided a proper setting for a natural growth in all directions. In fact some specialists have tried to estimate precisely how close to the geographic center of the Russian people Moscow was situated, noting also such circumstances as proximity to the land dividing the two main dialects of the Great Russian language. Central location within Russia, to make an additional point, cushioned Moscow from outside invaders. Thus, for example, it was the city of Novgorod, not Moscow, that continuously had to meet enemies from the northwest, while in the southeast Ryazan absorbed the first blows from the direction. All in all, the considerable significance of the location on Moscow cannot be denied although this geographic factor has generally been assigned less relative weight by recent scholars.

The economic argument is linked in part to the geographic. The Moscow River served as an important trade artery, and as the Muscovite principality expanded around its waterways, it profited by and in turn helped to promote increasing economic intercourse. One school of thought has treated the expansion of Moscow largely in terms of the growth of a common market. Another economic approach emphasizes the success of the Muscovite princes in developing agriculture in their domains and supporting colonization. These princes clearly outdistance their rivals in obtaining peasants to settle on their lands. As a further advantage, they managed to maintain in their realm a relative peace and security highly beneficial to economic life.

The last view introduces another key factor in explaining the Muscovite rise: the role of the rulers of Moscow. Moscow has generally been considered fortunate in its princes. Sheer luck constituted an important part of the picture. For several generations, the princes of Moscow had the advantage of male succession without interruption or conflict. In particular, for a long time the sons of the princes of Moscow were lucky not to have uncles competing for the Muscovite seat. When the classic power struggle between royal uncles and nephews finally erupted under Basil II(reigned 1425-1462), direct succession from father to son possessed sufficient standing and support in the principality of Moscow to overcome the challenge. The principality has also been considered fortunate because its early rulers, descending from the youngest son of Alexander Nevskii (1220?-1263) and thus representing a junior princely branch, found it expedient to devote themselves to their small holdings instead of neglecting them for more ambitious undertakings elsewhere.

3.Why does the author include the information that Moscow has been described as the first stopping and setting point in the northeast?

你的答案:
正确答案:C
题目解析:
 后才能查看题目解析,还没有账号? 马上注册
本题为功能目的题。功能目的题中,作者提到的具体信息一般是为了证明或反驳某个观点。我们首先在文中找到句子的出处。“In fact Moscow has been described as the first stopping and setting point in the northeast. But it also profited。from moments in other directions……”这句话中,“in fact”说明阴影句是对上文内容的补充说明,而“but”带有转折关系,说明下文会展开新的层次,所以答案一定不在后文中,而是在“in fact”之前。于是我们段首开始看,“First, attention may be given to the doctrine of geographic causation……and includes several lines of argument.”这句话是本段的主旨句,强调地理因素对莫斯科崛起的重要性。而“Moscow lay as a crossing of three roads……as the first stopping and setting point in the northeast.”含阴影句在内的这一段内容,都是为了说明主旨而阐述的细节性信息。那么我们可以很明显地抓住阴影句和主旨句之间的关系,即阴影句是为了证明和强调主旨。选项A说阴影句为解释为什么莫斯科周围的地区衰落,而文章中只提到“The most important was the way from the historically crucial city of Kiev and the declining south to the growing northeast.”说明莫斯科连接了衰落的西部和发展中的东北部,同样也是在强调莫斯科地理位置的优越性,与阴影句不存在因果关系,故排除。 B选项和D选项定位到文章中看,都是“but……”之后的内容,与阴影句几乎没有关联,可以直接排除。 C选项说阴影句是为了强调莫斯科优越的地理位置对其发展的重要性,很明显抓住了与主旨之间的关系,故为正确答案。

学习页面

Medi

terr

anean

加强 + 政府 + 名词后缀

加强的政府——管理

原文例句

加入生词

本文生词 0

色块区域是你收藏过的生词;

查询次数越多,颜色越深哦~

显示文中生词

登录后才能收藏生词哦,现在登录注册>

本文重点词 45

文中加粗单词为本文重点词;

根据词频与核心词范围精心挑选,托福考试必掌握词汇。

显示文中重点词
学习本文词汇

文中划选/双击的生词、加粗重点词已收纳至词盒

可随时点击词盒查看哦~

只有在词句精学模式下才能开启词盒功能哦~

我知道了

词盒
收藏
笔记
我的笔记
5000
保存
反馈