现代大学英语（第三版）精读3 课件 B3U9

ContentsUnit9Lead-inWarm-upquestions:Howdoyoudefinehistory?Ishistoryascience?Whenwashistoryintroducedtoyouasasubjectatschool?Howwashistorytaughtatthattime?Whydoyouthinkweneedtostudyhistory?Doyoulikehistory?Wouldyouliketobeahistorian?Whyorwhynot?Doyoufindyourselfdisagreewithothers?Whydoyouthinkpeopledisagree?Haveyoueverbeenintroducedtodifferentviewsaboutthesamehistoricalfiguresand/orevents?Ifyes,giveanexampleandexplainwhyviewsdiffer.

Lead-inMorequestionsaboutthetext:1.Inyourexperience,whatcanhistorytellus,apartfromnames,dates,events,andstatistics?2.Doesyourownexperienceoflearninghistorysupporttheargumentthathistoriansoftendisagreesharply?Canyougiveanexample?Whatisthecommonsenseresponsetothedisagreementsabouthistoryaccordingtotheauthors?Howhaveyourespondedtosuchdisagreements?Whydohistoriansdisagree?Isitbecausetheyaretalkingaboutdifferentpeople,differentevents,differentsubjects,ordifferenttimesorplaces?Orisitbecausetheyarenotallusingreliablerecordsorfacts?3.Whatarethethreedefinitionsofhistorymentionedinthetext?Whydotheauthorsofferthreepossibledefinitions?Whichdefinitiondotheyadoptintheirwriting?Lead-inMorequestionsaboutthetext:4.Accordingtotheauthors,historians“selectonlythoserecordstheydeemmostsignificant.”Dotheyusuallyagreeonwhatrecordsaremostsignificant?Whyorwhynot?5.Willhistoriansallagreewitheachotherifthefactstheyusearethesame?Whyisitthathistorianssometimesignoresomefacts?Whatdotheydoifsomeimportantfactsaremissing?Howcantheyachieveanycredibilityinthatcase?6.Theauthorsmaintainthathistorians’disagreementsoftenstemfromdifferentpointsofview,differentperspectives,ordifferenttheoriesofhumanmotivationsandbehavior.WhatdifferentperspectivesdotheauthorsadopttoexplainAmerica’sentryintoWorldWarI?CanyougivesomeotherreasonsofAmerica’sentryintothewarfromthosedifferentperspectives?Lead-inMorequestionsaboutthetext:7.Howdoyouunderstandthestatement“Historianssometimesdisagreebecausetheyarenotreallydiscussingthesamething”inparagraph11?Canyougivesomeexamples?8.Hasthisessaygivenusasatisfactoryanswerastowhyhistoriansdisagree?Canyoulistthepossiblereasonstheauthorsgive?Doyouhaveanythingtoadd?9.Whatshouldwedowhenhistoriansdisagree?Cantheirdifferencesbeeliminated?Shouldtheybe?Howdoweevaluatetheworkofhistorians?10.Ishistoryascience?Canwetakeitasakindofliterature,withalotofhistoricalanecdotestoteachususefulmorallessons?Lookupinadictionarythedefinitionofhistoryandcompareitwiththedefinitionsgivenbytheauthors,andgiveyourcomments?TextWhyHistoriansDisagreeAllenF.DavisandHaroldD.Woodman1.Abouttheauthor2.Background

3.Structure4.GotothetextText1.AbouttheauthorThetextisbasedontheintroductiontoabookentitledConflictandConsensusinModernAmericanHistoryeditedbyAllenF.DavisandHaroldD.Woodman,professorsatTempleUniversityandPurdueUniversityrespectively;thetwoprofessorsco-authoredtheintroduction.2.Background

ThisisamuchcondensedandadaptedversionoftheprefacetothebookConflictandConsensusinModernAmericanHistorycompiledbytwoAmericanhistoryprofessors.Inthispreface,thetwoauthorsdiscussthedefinitionofhistory,theroleofthehistorianandthereasonswhyhistoriansdisagree.TextTheypointoutthecommonmisunderstandingthathistoryisjustnames,datesandstatisticsofthepast,andthatthehistorian’sjobistofindandrememberasmanyofthemaspossible.Theytellusthathistoriansdonotjustcollectfacts.Theygivemeaningtothefacts.Andbecausetheyhavedifferentinterestsanddifferentunderstandingofhumanmotivationandhumanbehaviorwhichinturnisduetotheirdifferentbackgroundinage,sex,race,class,education,religion,politics,etc.,theytendnotonlytobeinterestedindifferentfactsbutalsotointerpretthesamefactsdifferently.Thetwohistoriansthereforeemphasizetheimportanceofunderstandingthehistorians’approach,perspectiveandphilosophyratherthanthefactstheyhaveusedorleftout.TextHistoryisaveryimportantpartofoureducation.Itisnowknowntoallthathowmuchweknowandunderstandthepastlargelydetermineshowmuchandhowwellweknowthepresentandhowfarandhowclearlywecanseeahead.Wemightevensaythatnoonecanbeconsideredproperlyeducatedatallifheorsheknowsnohistory.Chinahasaboutthreethousandyears’uninterruptedrecordedhistoryofwhichweareallproud,andtraditionallyourpeoplehavealwaysattachedgreatimportancetothestudyofhistory.However,formanyreasons,historicaltruthsstillremainundiscovered.Infact,manyhistoricalfactshavedeliberatelybeendestroyed,misinterpretedanddistorted.Thatisonereasonwhyitissoimportantforustoknowwhyhistoriansdisagree.TextText3.Structure

Thetextcanberoughlydividedintothreeparts,whichcanbefurtherdividedintoseveralsections.I.Theintroduction(paras.1–5)1.Misconceptionsaboutthestudyofhistory(paras.1–3)2.Definitionofhistory(paras.4–5)II.Thebody:reasonswhyhistoriansdisagree(paras.6–11)1.Selectionofdifferentfactsaboutthesameevent(para.6)2.Useofthesamefactsfromdifferentpremises(paras.7–10)3.Analysisofdifferentlevelsofcauseandeffect(para.11)III.Theconclusion:inevitabilityofdisagreement(paras.12–13)WhyHistoriansDisagreeAllenF.DavisandHaroldD.Woodman1

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.Thestudents’skillsarethentestedbyexaminationsthatrequirethemtoshowhowmuchofthedatatheyremember;themoretheyremember,thehighertheirgrades.Fromthisexperienceanumberofconclusionsseemobvious:Thestudyofhistoryisthestudyof“facts”aboutthepast;themore“facts”youknow,thebetteryouareasastudentofhistory.Theprofessionalhistorian

issimplyonewhobringstogetheraverylargenumberof“facts.”Thereforestudentsoftenbecomeconfusedupondiscoveringthathistoriansoftendisagreesharplyevenwhentheyaredealingwiththesameevent.Text2

Theircommonsensereactiontothisstateofaffairsistoconcludethatonehistorianisrightwhiletheotheriswrong.Andpresumably,historianswhoarewrongwillhavetheir“facts”wrong.Thisisseldomthecase,however.Historiansusuallyallarguereasonablyandpersuasively.And,the“facts”—thenames,dates,events,statistics—usuallyturnouttobecorrect.Moreover,theyoftenfindthatcontendinghistoriansmoreorlessagreeonthefacts;thatis,theyusemuchthesamedata.Theycometodifferentconclusionsbecausetheyviewthepastfromadifferentperspective.History,whichseemedtobeacut-and-driedmatterofmemorizing“facts,”nowbecomesamatterofchoosingonegoodinterpretationfromamongmany.Historicaltruthbecomesamatterofpersonalpreference.Text3

Thispositionishardlysatisfying.Theycannothelpbutfeelthattwodiametricallyopposedpointsofviewaboutaneventcannotbothberight;yettheylacktheabilitytodecidebetweenthem.4

Tounderstandwhyhistoriansdisagree,studentsmustconsideraproblemtheyhavemoreorlesstakenforgranted.Theymustaskthemselveswhathistoryreallyis.Text5

Initsbroadestsense,historydenotesthewholeofthehumanpast.Morerestrictedisthenotionthathistoryistherecordedpast,thatis,thatpartofhumanlifewhichhasleftsomesortofrecordsuchasfolktales,artifacts,orwrittendocuments.Finally,historymaybedefinedasthatwhichhistorianswriteaboutthepast.Ofcoursethethreemeaningsarerelated.Historiansmustbasetheiraccountsontheremainsofthepast,leftbypeople.Obviouslytheycannotknoweverythingforthesimplereasonthatnoteveryevent,everyhappening,wasfullyandcompletelyrecorded.Thereforethehistoriancanonlyapproximatehistoryatbest.Noonecaneverclaimtohaveconcludedthequest.6

Butthisdoesnotsayenough.Ifhistorianscannotknoweverythingbecausenoteverythingwasrecorded,neitherdotheyusealltherecordsthatareavailabletothem.Rather,theyselectonlythoserecordstheydeemmostsignificant.Moreover,theyalsorecreatepartsofthepast.Likedetectives,theypiecetogetherevidencetofillinthegapsintheavailablerecords.Text7

Historiansareabletoselectandcreateevidencebyusingsometheoryofhumanmotivationsandbehavior.Sometimesthisappearstobeeasy,requiringverylittlesophisticationandsubtlety.Thus,forexample,historiansinvestigatingAmerica’sentryintoWorldWarIwouldprobablyfindthatthesinkingofAmericanmerchantshipsonthehighseasbyGermansubmarineswasrelevanttotheirdiscussion.Atthesametime,theywouldmostlikelynotuseevidencethatPresidentWoodrowWilsonwasdissatisfiedwithanewhatheboughtduringthefirstmonthsof1917.Thechoiceastowhichfacttouseisbasedonatheory—admittedly,inthiscasearathercrudetheory,butatheorynonetheless.Itwouldgosomethinglikethis:Nationalleaderscontemplatingwararemorelikelytobeinfluencedbybelligerentactsagainsttheircountriesthanbytheirunhappinesswiththeirhaberdashers.Text8

Ifthechoiceswereassimpleasthis,theproblemwouldbeeasilyresolved.Butthechoiceswerenotsoeasytomake.HistoriansinvestigatingtheUnitedStates’entryintoWorldWarIwillfindinadditiontoGermansubmarinewarfareawholeseriesofotherfactsthatcouldberelevanttotheeventunderstudy.Forinstance,theywillfindthattheBritishgovernmenthadapropagandamachineatworkintheUnitedStatesthatdiditsbesttowinpublicsupportfortheBritishcause.TheywilldiscoverthatAmericanbankershadmadelargeloanstotheBritish,loansthatwouldnotberepaidintheeventofaBritishdefeat.Theywillreadoftheinterceptionofthe“ZimmermannNote,”inwhichtheGermanforeignsecretaryorderedtheGermanministerinMexico,intheeventofwar,tosuggestanalliancebetweenGermanyandMexicowherebyMexico,withGermansupport,couldwinbackterritorytakenfromMexicobytheUnifiedStatesintheMexicanWar.TheywillalsofindamongmanyAmericanpoliticalleadersadeepconcernoverthebalanceofpowerinEurope,abalancethatwouldbedestroyed—toAmerica’sdisadvantage—iftheGermanswereabletodefeattheFrenchandtheBritishandthereby

emergeasthesolemajorpowerinEurope.Text9

Whatthenarehistorianstomakeofthesefacts?Onegroupcouldsimplylistthem.Bydoingso,theywouldbemakingtwoimportantassumptions:(1)thosefactstheyputontheirlistarethemainreasons,whilethosetheydonotlistarenotimportant;and(2)thosethingstheyputontheirlistareofequalimportanceinexplainingtheU.S.role.Butanothergroupofhistoriansmightarguethatthelistisincompleteinthatitdoesnottakeintoaccountthegenerallypro-BritishviewsofWoodrowWilson,viewsthatstemmedfromthePresident’sbackgroundandeducation.Theresultwillbeadisagreementamongthehistorians.Moreover,becausethesecondgroupraisesthequestionofWilson’sviews,theywillfindanumberofrelevantfactsthatthefirstgroupwouldignore.TheywillconcernthemselveswithWilson’seducation,theinfluenceofhisteachers,thebooksheread,andthebookshewrote.Inshort,althoughbothgroupsofhistoriansaredealingwiththesamesubjecttheywillcometodifferentconclusionsandusedifferentfactstosupporttheirpointsofview.Thefactsselected,andthoseignored,willdependnotontheproblemstudiedbutonthepointsofviewofthehistorians.Text10

Similarlyathirdgroupofhistoriansmightmaintainthatthevariousitemsonthelistshouldnotbegivenequalweight,thatoneofthereasonslisted,say,bankers’loans,wasmostimportant.Thetheoryherewouldbethateconomicmattersarethekeytohumanmotivation,andthatasmallnumberofwealthybankershaveadisproportionateabilitytoinfluencegovernment.11

Intheexamplesgiven,historiansdisagreebecausetheybeginfromdifferentpremises.Butthereisstillanotherrealmofdisagreementwhichstemsfromsomethingratherdifferent.Historianssometimesdisagreebecausetheyarenotreallydiscussingthesamething.Oftentheyaremerelyconsideringdifferentlevelsofcauseandeffect.Supposetheteacheraskedyou“Whywereyoulateforclassthismorning?”“Iwaslateforclass,”youexplained,“becauseIoverslept.”Ortouseahistoricalexample,“TheCivilWarbeganbecauseSouthCarolinashorebatteriesopenedfireonthefederalgarrisonatFortSumteronApril12,1861.”Neitherstatementcanbefaultedonthegroundsthatitisinaccurate;atthesametime,however,neitherissufficientasanexplanationoftheeventbeingconsidered.TextThenextquestionisobvious:Whydidyouoversleep,orwhydidrelationsbetweenonestateandthefederalgovernmentreachthepointwheredifferenceshadtobesettledbyWar?Inotherwords,wehavetogobeyondtheproximatecauseandprobefurtherandfurther.Butaswedigmoredeeplyintotheproblem,theanswerbecomesmoredifficultandcomplex.Intheend,youmightarguethattheultimatecauseofyourbeinglatewasthefactthatyouwereborn,butobviouslythisgoestoofarbacktobemeaningful.Thatyouwerebornisofcourseanecessaryfactor,butitisnotasufficientfactor;itdoesnotreallytellenoughtoexplainyourbehaviortoday.SimilarlyyoucouldtracethecauseoftheCivilWarbacktothediscoveryofAmerica,butagain,thatisanecessarybutnotasufficientcause.Thepointatwhichcausesarebothnecessaryandsufficientisnotself-evident.Thereforehistoriansmayagaindisagreeaboutwheretobegintheanalysis.Bynowstudentsshouldseethatthewell-usedphrase“letthefactsspeakforthemselves”hasnorealmeaning.Thefactsdonotspeakforthemselves;historiansusethefactsinaparticularwayandthereforethey,andnotthefacts,aredoingthespeaking.Text12

Historiansnotonlyoftendisagreewithothers.Theyoftendisagreewiththemselves.Indeedtheyareoftenrevisingtheirideas.Theyhavetodosobecausetheyareconstantlydiscoveringnewinformation,gainingnewinsightsfromothersocialscientistsandmasteringandusingnewtechniques.Historiansalsolearnfromeachotherandbenefitfrominternationalcomparisonsofsimilareventsandinstitutions.Text13

Canweeliminatealldisagreement?Ifthestateofourknowledgeweresuchthatitprovideduswithamodelofunquestionedvaliditythatcompletelyexplainedhumanbehavior,wecould.Butsincewedonothavesuchacompleteandfoolproofexplanation,disagreementsaredestinedtoremain.Whenstudentsrealizethatthereisnooneeasyanswertotheproblemshistoriansraiseandthat“truth”isbutanelusiveyetintriguinggoalinanever-endingquest,theywillfindthestudyofhistorytobeasignificant,exhilarating,andusefulpartoftheireducation.(1,627words)Text历史学家们为何意见有分歧艾伦·F.戴维斯哈罗德·D.伍德曼1

大多数学生一般都是通过厚厚一大本教科书开始学习历史的，接着很快就陷入名字、日期、事件和数据的汪洋大海当中。然后学生的技能通过考试来检查，这类考试要求他们表明自己记住了多少数据；记住的东西越多，得分就越高。根据这样的经历，似乎可以得出几条明显的结论：学习历史就是学习过去的“事实”；你知道的“事实”越多，你的历史就学得越好。专业的历史学家不过是能收集到大量“事实”的人。因此，当学生发现历史学家们即使对同一个事件的意见也往往有严重分歧时，常常会感到困惑。Text2

他们根据常识对此作出判断，认为其中一个历史学家是对的，另一个则是错的。并且他们会认为，错的那些历史学家所掌握的“史实”肯定也是错的。实际上，情况很少如此。历史学家们的论证通常都合情合理，具有说服力。而且，名字、日期、事件、数据这样的“事实”，通常都正确无误。不仅如此，他们还常常发现，那些意见相左的历史学家们或多或少都认同这些史实；也就是说，他们使用的基本上是同样的资料。他们之所以得出不同的结论是因为他们看待历史的角度不同。原先历史似乎只是一件记住“史实”的事，但这么一来却变成一件从很多解释当中挑选一种好的解释的事了。历史真理变成了一种个人喜好。Text3

这种解释自然很难令人满意。人们难免会觉得，对一个事件的两种针锋相对的观点不可能都是正确的，但他们又没有能力判断孰是孰非。4

为了了解历史学家为何有分歧，学生们必须考虑一个他们一直都或多或少认为理所当然的问题。他们必须问问自己，历史究竟是什么。Text5

广义而言，历史是指人类过去的一切。如果加以限定，历史是指留有记录的过去，也就是说，人类生活中留下记载的那部分，诸如民间故事、各类手工艺品及书面文件等。最后，历史还可以定义为历史学家对人类过去的描述。这三种意思当然是互相关联的。史学家的阐述必须以过去人们留下的记载为依据。他们显然不可能知道过去的一切，理由很简单，因为并不是大大小小每一件事都有全面完整的记录。因此历史学家最多也只能是接近历史。无人能宣称已经终结了对它的探索。6

但是，这个解释还不够。历史学家不可能什么都知道，因为过去的一切并非都有记载。不仅如此，历史学家对手头的材料也并不会都采用，而仅仅选择他们认为最为重要的记录。此外，他们还会重建过去的某些部分。就像侦探那样，他们把已有证据串在一起，填补现有纪录中的空白。Text7

历史学家能够利用某个有关人类动机和行为的理论选择并创造证据。这有时似乎十分简单，并不需要什么深奥的学问和妙思。举例来说，研究美国参加第一次世界大战原因的史学家，很可能会认为德国潜水艇击沉在公海航行的美国商船这一事件与他们的研究相关。同时，他们绝不会拿伍德罗·威尔逊总统对他1917年头几个月里买的一顶帽子的不满来作为证据。选择使用哪一种事实需要有理论依据——诚然，这是一种十分不成熟的理论，但仍然是一个理论。这理论大致是说，对正在考虑战争问题的国家领导人来说，他们的决策更可能取决于针对他们国家的战争行为，而非他们对衣帽商的不满。Text8

假如选择都如此简单，问题就不难解决了。但实际上，做选择并不容易。研究美国参加第一次世界大战问题的史学家们会发现，除了德国的潜水艇战，还有其他一系列的史实与所研究的问题有关。比如，他们会发现，英国政府有一个宣传机器活跃在美国，它不遗余力地争取美国公众对英国的支持。他们会发现美国的银行家们在英国有巨额贷款，一旦英国战败，这些贷款就不可能得到偿还。他们还会了解到截获“齐默曼外交照会”一事，里面提到当时德国外交部部长命令其驻墨西哥公使，一旦德美开战，就向对方建议建立德墨同盟，根据该同盟条约，墨西哥可以在德国的支持下夺回在墨西哥战争中被美国占领的领土。他们还会发现，很多美国政治领袖对欧洲的实力平衡怀有深深的关切。如果德国人真能击败英法从而成为欧洲唯一的主要强国，这一平衡就会被破坏，这对美国极其不利。Text9

那么，史学家们如何使用这些事实呢？有一派会干脆将它们罗列起来。他们这样做，实际上是作出了两个重要的假设：（1）他们罗列的都是主要理由，而没有罗列的都不重要；（2）在解释美国扮演的角色时，他们所列的理由都同等重要。但是另外一派史学家会争辩说，表上所列事实不完整，因为它没有考虑到伍德罗·威尔逊因其出身背景和所受教育而形成的总体上亲英的观点。这么一来，史学家之间就会产生意见分歧。而且，由于第二派史学家提出了威尔逊的个人观点这一问题，他们就会找到许多第一派史学家所忽视的史实。他们会关注威尔逊所受的教育、他的老师对于他的影响、他看过的书、他所写的书。总之，虽然两派史学家探讨的是同一个问题，他们仍然会得出不同的结论，而且会用不同的史实来支持他们的观点。至于选什么，不选什么，并不是取决于他们所研究的问题，而是他们所持的观点。Text10

同样地，第三派史学家也许会认为，所列各项不能同等看待，而其中某个理由——比如说银行家的贷款——才是最重要的。这里所依据的理论是经济是人类的关键动机，并且，极少数富有的银行家对政府有着与其人数极不成比例的影响力。11

在上面所举的例子中，史学家们之所以意见不同，是因为他们分析问题的前提不同。但是，还有一种分歧是由完全不同的原因产生的。史学家们有时看法不同是因为实际上他们谈论的不是同一件事情。通常他们考虑的是不同层次的因果关系。假如，老师问你“你今天上午为什么迟到？”你会解释说，“我上课迟到是因为我睡过头了。”我们换个有关历史的例子吧，“美国内战的爆发是因为南卡罗莱纳州的海岸炮兵部队在1861年4月12号向驻守在萨姆特要塞的联邦部队开火。”以上两个例子中的原因，都不能以不精确为由被说成是错的；但同时，两者都不足以用来解释相关问题。……Text

……很明显，接下去的问题是：你为什么会睡过头？或者，为什么一个州政府和联邦政府的关系会发展到必须通过战争来解决分歧的地步？换句话说，我们得超越近因，更深层次地探究下去。但当我们对问题挖掘得越深，答案就会变得越难、越复杂。到最后，你也许会说，你迟到归根结底是因为你来到了这个世界上，但是这明显扯得太远了，没有任何意义。你的出生当然是一个必要因素，但是这个因素并不充分，它不足以解释你今天的行为。同样，你可以把内战的原因追溯到美洲新大陆的发现，但那也只是一个必要而非充分的原因。究竟在哪一点上，理由既必要又充分，这就不是那么显而易见了。所以史学家们可能对应该从什么地方开始分析又有分歧。说到这里，学生们应该明白，人们常说的那句“让事实说话”并无任何实际意义。事实自己不会说话；是史学家在以一种特殊的方式使用事实，因此，是他们在说话，而不是事实。Text12

史学家们不仅会与他人有分歧，他们还常常和自己意见相左。实际上，他们常常在修订自己的观点。他们不得不这么做，因为他们总会不断发现新的信息，从其他社会科学家那里不断获得新的见解，而且不断掌握、使用新技术。史学家们还互相学习，而且从国际上对相似事件和制度的比较中获益。Text13

我们能够消除所有的意见分歧吗？如果我们掌握的知识能给我们提供一个可以完全解释人类行为的绝对有效的模式，那么答案是肯定的。但是，既然我们没有这样一种完全可靠的、万无一失的解释，意见分歧注定会继续存在。当学生们认识到，史学家们所提出的问题并没有一个简单答案，而真理只是永无休止的探索中一个虽然迷人但却难以达到的目标，他们才会发现历史研究是他们所受的教育中一个重要的、令人激动的、有益的组成部分。Text

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.Formoststudents,theybegintheirstudyofhistorywithathicktextbookinwhichthereareagreatnumberofnames,datesandstatisticsforthemtoremember.bywayof:through;byrouteof经由e.g.

YoucangetthisinformationbywayoftheInternet.Cf.

bywayof:

asameansof当作e.g.1.Hesenthersomeflowersbywayofanapology.2.I’dliketosayafewwordsbywayofself-introduction.3.Theydecidedtogiveapartybywayofwelcometothedistinguishedguests.TextAnalysis

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.fat:thick;widee.g.afatperson/man/woman/child;afatbook/volume;afatsalary;afatcigar;afatcheckNote:Payattentiontothesubtledifferencesbetweenthesewords:fat,plump,chubby,stoutandobese.Rememberthatitisnotpolitetosaysomebodyisfat.Amorepolitewayistosaythatheorsheisratheroverweightorheavy.“Stout”alsomeans“slightlyfat.”Forchildrenandwomenwhoareslightlyandpleasantlyfat,wecanusetheword“plump.”Anotherpleasantwordforbabiesandchildrenis“chubby.”Thestrongestwordis“obese,”anditisalsothewordusedoftenbydoctors.TextAnalysis

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.beimmersedin:becompletelycoveredorsubmergedinaliquid;bedeeplyinvolvedorabsorbede.g.1.I’mimmersedinthisproject.2.Theideaistohavethestudentsimmersedinanideallearningenvironment.3.Theydecidedtogiveapartybywayofwelcometothedistinguishedguests.avastseaof:agreatamountofTextAnalysis

Thestudents’skillsarethentestedbyexaminationsthatrequirethemtoshowhowmuchofthedatatheyremember;themoretheyremember,thehighertheirgrades.testedbyexaminations:evaluatedbywayofexaminationsNoticehowrepetitionisavoidedbyusingsynonyms.data:thepluralformof“datum”Also:

medium(media);curriculum(curricula);phenomenon(phenomena);criterion(criteria);stratum(strata);bacterium(bacteria)themoretheyremember,thehighertheirgrades:Payattentiontothispatternofcomparison.After“themore...themore...”thewordordershouldbethesameasinastatement.Inthissentence,“willbe”hasbeenomittedafter“thehighertheirgrades.”TextAnalysis

Theprofessionalhistorianissimplyonewhobringstogetheraverylargenumberof“facts.”simply:only;nothingbute.g.

Itissimplyamatteroftime.Cf.1.Helivedverysimply.(inaplainandordinaryway)2.It’ssimplyimpossible.(usedtoemphasizewhatthespeakerissaying)3.Shewasaskedtoexpressherselfmoresimply.(inawaythatiseasytounderstand)bringtogether:gathertogether;collect“facts”:

Thequotationmarksindicatethattheauthorsdonotthinkthattherearepure“facts.”Theyhavetobearranged,sortedoutandgivenmeaningbyprofessionalhistorians.TextAnalysis

Thereforestudentsoftenbecomeconfusedupondiscoveringthathistoriansoftendisagreesharplyevenwhentheyaredealingwiththesameevent.Thereforewhentheydiscoverthathistoriansoftendisagreecompletelyeventhoughtheyaretalkingaboutthesameevent,theyoftencannotunderstandthereason.upondiscovering:(fml)whentheydiscoverdisagreesharply:disagreeseriously,bitterlyTextAnalysis

Theircommonsensereactiontothisstateofaffairsistoconcludethatonehistorianisrightwhiletheotheriswrong.theircommonsensereaction:theirresponsebasedoncommonsenseastateofaffairs:asituatione.g.1.Thisisaveryunpleasantstateofaffairs.2.Thereisnotmuchwecandointhepresentstateofaffairs.while:whereasTextAnalysis

Moreover,theyoftenfindthatcontendinghistoriansmoreorlessagreeonthefacts…moreover:besides;what’smore;notonlythat;inaddition;apartfromthatcontendinghistorians:historianswhoarefightingordebatingmoreorless:almost;anundetermineddegreee.g.1.Thisproblemismoreorlesssettled.2.Theymoreorlessagreetoreopentheirdiscussionsontheborderdispute.Cf.Ouraverageannualincomebythattimewillbe4,000USD,moreorless.(approximately)TextAnalysis

Theycometodifferentconclusionsbecausetheyviewthepastfromadifferentperspective.Peoplelookatthepastfromdifferentpointsofview,angles,approaches,perspectivesortheoreticalstances.Thesewordsconveymoreorlessthesamemeaning.Couldyougivemoreexamplestoshowhowdifferentperspectivescanleadtodifferentconclusionsintheinterpretationofhistoricaleventsorfigures?Also,trytothinkofyourownexamples.TextAnalysis

Historicaltruthbecomesamatterofpersonalpreference.personalpreference:personallikesordislikes;sth.thatsb.likesmorethananyotherthing

Cf.

historical:oforrelatingtohistoryhistoric:havingconsiderableimportanceorinfluenceinhistoryeconomical:notwastefulorextravaganteconomic:oforrelatingtotheeconomyoreconomicsTextAnalysis

Thispositionishardlysatisfying.Thisisnotasatisfyingopinion.Studentsexpecttobegivenclear-cutanswers,eitheryesorno.Butnowtheyhavetoshoparoundfortheproperanswer.Theanswerbecomesapersonalchoice.Thismakesthemfeelveryuncomfortable.TextAnalysis

Theycannothelpbutfeelthattwodiametricallyopposedpointsofviewaboutaneventcannotbothberight…cannothelpbutfeel:cannothelpfeeling;canonlyfeeldiametricallyopposed:absolutelyorirreconcilablyopposed;completelydifferent;polesapartTextAnalysis

Morerestrictedisthenotionthathistoryistherecordedpast,thatis,thatpartofhumanlifewhichhasleftsomesortofrecordsuchasfolktales,artifacts,orwrittendocuments.Inamorerestrictedsense,historyisunderstoodastherecordedpast.thatis:inotherwordsfolktales:Rememberthatwrittendocumentswereimpossiblebeforewrittenlanguageandpaperwereinvented.Theonlyrecordlefttousisintheformoffolktalesandartifacts.TextAnalysis

Finally,historymaybedefinedasthatwhichhistorianswriteaboutthepast.Finally,historymaybedescribedaswhathistorianshavewrittenaboutourpast.Itmeansthathistoryishumanpastthroughtheeyesofhistorians.Historyrequiresthecombinationoftwofactors:theobjectivefactsandthesubjectiveselection,arrangement,andinterpretationofthembyhistorians.Thisiswhyhistoriansoftendisagree.Anditisinthissensethatweoftensaythateveryonetendstowritehisownhistory.TextAnalysis

Obviouslytheycannotknoweverythingforthesimplereasonthatnoteveryevent,everyhappening,wasfullyandcompletelyrecorded.Manyeventsandhappeningswerenotfullyandcompletelyrecordedbecausepeopleatthetimedidnothavethetime,energy,interestorthenecessarymeans.Oftentheywerenotrecordedbecausetheywereconsideredtootrivial,tooembarrassing,ortoodangeroustobeknown.Manyrecordshavealsobee