市面上流傳的GRE閱讀機經真題有三百多篇，同時又存在多種版本的答案和解析，有些疑難題目讓考生不知道聽誰的，還有些版本的解析像是用谷歌翻譯把同題目和選項翻譯了一下。TD GRE教研組認為，GRE閱讀的解析，可以講得再清楚一點。
GRE不光有技巧，不光有快速解題法，GRE更加考察大家的邏輯硬實力，文字理解實打實的深度。良好的GRE備考應當在課堂上向老師學習快速解題法，取同取反邏輯的同時，課下扎紮實實的讀懂每一句話。讀懂，是一切技巧使用的前提。皮之不存，毛將焉附？
有感於此，我們嘗試用比較長的時間，原創一個解析，力求做到超詳細，大白話，包你懂。之前為大家推送了Passage 1 - Passage 22的解析，今天繼續為大家推出Passage 23（長閱讀）解析，這篇閱讀一共有5段，帶5道題，TD版超詳細「包你懂」系列對此篇文章進行了清楚地解析。
Passage 23
In his recent book, Louis Gerteis argues that nineteenth-century Northern reformers in the United States attacked slavery in the South by invoking the values of a utilitarian political economy: proper public policy requires government to endorse anything that gives all people the opportunity to maximize their individual pleasure and their material gain. Social good, according to this thinking, is achieved when individuals are free to pursue their self-interests. Gerteis argues that, since slavery in the South precluded individual autonomy and the free pursuit of material gain, major Northern reformers opposed it as early as the 1830s.
In making this argument, Gerteis offers the most persuasive formulation to date of the Growth of a Dissenting Minority interpretation, which argues that a slow but steady evolution of a broad-based Northern antislavery coalition culminated in the presidential victory of the antislavery Lincoln in 1860. This interpretive framework, which once dominated antislavery historiography, had beendiscounted by historians for two basic reasons. First, it tended to homogenize the political diversity of Northern reformers; Northern reformers differed significantly among themselves and belonged to diverse political parties. Second, it seemed incompatible with emerging scholarship on the slaveholding South, which held that Northern abolitionists of the 1830s did not succeed in mobilizing Northern public opinion and paving the way for Lincoln in 1860.
Instead, Southern slaveholders misconstrued abolitionist views of the 1830s as main- stream rather than marginal Northern public opinion, and castigated Northerners generally for opposing slavery. In this view, it was the castigation by Southerners that gradually caused widespread antislavery feeling throughout the North.
Gerteis revives the Growth interpretation by asserting that, rather than Southern attitudes, the unified commitment of Northern reformers to utilitarian values served to galvanize popular political support for abolitionism. However, unlike earlier proponents of the Growth interpretation, Gerteis does not reduce the Northern reformers to a homogeneous group or try to argue that the reformers shared views undermined their differing party loyalties. Members of the two major political parties still attacked each other for ideological differences.
Nevertheless, Gerteis argues, these disparate party affiliations did not diminish the actuality of reformer unity, most prominent in the 1830s. At this time, Northern reformers, such as William Lloyd Garrison and Samuel Chase, portrayed the framers of the United States Constitution as proponents of individual autonomy and capitalist values. This vision of the founders served as a basis for asserting that freedom was a national moral imperative, and that the United Sates Constitution was an antislavery document. Gerteis differs from traditional adherents of the Growth framework by asserting that the basic elements in the antislavery coalition were firmly in place and accepted by all elements in the Northern reform community as early as the late 1830s.
第一自然段：
In his recent book, Louis Gerteis argues that nineteenth-century Northern reformers in the United States attacked slavery in the South by invoking the values of a utilitarian political economy: proper public policy requires government to endorse anything that gives all people the opportunity to maximize their individual pleasure and their material gain. Social good, according to this thinking, is achieved when individuals are free to pursue their self-interests. Gerteis argues that, since slavery in the South precluded individual autonomy and the free pursuit of material gain, major Northern reformers opposed it as early as the 1830s.
白話版講解：
Louis Gerteis最近出了一本書，在書中，他提出理由想證明這樣一種觀點（argue）：19世紀美國北方的主張改革的人（reformers）通過求助於（invoke）實用政治經濟學的價值觀來攻擊南方的奴隸制。這種價值觀就是：「任何事情，只要能夠給所有人最大化自己的個人滿足和物質利益的機會，政府都應該批准。這才是適宜的公共政策」。而當（社會中的）個體可以自由追逐自己的利益時，就能實現社會利益（的增加）。（所以政府應該批准社會中的個體獲得自由）。但南方的奴隸制卻阻撓個體獲得自由、自由地去追求物質利益，所以南方的奴隸制不是適宜的公共政策。因為這個原因，北方的主張改革的人反對南方的奴隸制。而且，這種反對早在1830年代就開始了。
註解：
argue vt. （為支持某一想法、行動或理論而）提出理由（或證據）（多用於說服他人同意自己觀點）
give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view
簡單地說，argue我們可以翻譯成「主張、認為」，那我們也要知道，說「誰argues that……」，意思就是說誰不僅提出了一個觀點，還提出了很多理由和證據來支持這個觀點。
第二自然段第一部分：
In making this argument, Gerteis offers the most persuasive formulation to date of the Growth of a Dissenting Minority interpretation, which argues that a slow but steady evolution of a broad-based Northern antislavery coalition culminated in the presidential victory of the antislavery Lincoln in 1860.
白話版講解：
在進行上述論證時，Gerteis對關於本來就有的一個理論給出了迄今為止（to date）最有說服力的表述（formulation）。這個理論就是Growth of a Dissenting Minority interpretation。這個理論認為，在北方，（從1830年代開始到）逐漸而穩定地形成了一個基礎很廣的反奴隸制的勢力的聯合，這個勢力的聯合在林肯（林肯是反對奴隸制的）於1860年獲得總統大選時達到了頂峰。
註解：
formulation n. 某種思想或理論的某種具體表述
a particular expression of an idea, thought, or theory
第二自然段第二部分話：
This interpretive framework, which once dominated antislavery historiography, had been discounted by historians for two basic reasons. First, it tended to homogenize the political diversity of Northern reformers; Northern reformers differed significantly among themselves and belonged to diverse political parties. Second, it seemed incompatible with emerging scholarship on the slaveholding South, which held that Northern abolitionists of the 1830s did not succeed in mobilizing Northern public opinion and paving the way for Lincoln in 1860.
白話版講解：
這個詮釋框架（指Growth of a Dissenting Minority interpretation），曾經一度在關於反奴隸制的歷史書寫中佔據首要地位，但是後來歷史學家們又都否定（不再考慮）這個理論了。他們之所以否定這個理論，主要有兩個基本的原因。第一個原因是，這種理論傾向於把北方主張改革的人的政治多樣性搞均勻（即忽視他們的political diversity），而實際上北方的主張改革的人內部是有很大不同的，且他們屬於不同的多個政黨。這種做法是錯的，所以那個Growth of a Dissenting Minority理論錯了。第二個原因是，新出現了一些研究推行蓄奴制的南方的學者，他們認為在1830年代，北方的廢奴主義者（abolitionist）是想動員北方民眾的，想為林肯在1860年贏得大選創造條件，但是他們並沒有成功。所以認為「是北方的abolitionist的動員搞成了一個coalition」的那種觀點（即Growth of a Dissenting Minority interpretation），錯了。
第三自然段：
Instead, Southern slaveholders misconstrued abolitionist views of the 1830s as main- stream rather than marginal Northern public opinion, and castigated Northerners generally for opposing slavery. In this view, it was the castigation by Southerners that gradually caused widespread antislavery feeling throughout the North.
白話版講解：
（這些新出的研究南方的學者）認為，恰恰相反，北方的coalition形成的原因是這樣的：在1830年代，當時南方的奴隸主搞錯了，誤以為當時北方的abolitionist是北方的主流（其實當時這些abolitionist只是邊緣群體）了，誤認為北方人普遍反對奴隸制，於是就嚴厲責罵全部北方人。然後北方人（覺得這種castigation是冤枉他們了，就對南方人很反感），於是在北方就真的出現了廣泛的反奴隸制情緒。
第四自然段：
Gerteis revives the Growth interpretation by asserting that, rather than Southern attitudes, the unified commitment of Northern reformers to utilitarian values served to galvanize popular political support for abolitionism. However, unlike earlier proponents of the Growth interpretation, Gerteis does not reduce the Northern reformers to a homogeneous group or try to argue that the reformers shared views undermined their differing party loyalties. Members of the two major political parties still attacked each other for ideological differences.
白話版講解：
那個Growth of a Dissenting Minority interpretation本來已經被拋棄了，Gerteis卻使得這種理論重獲（歷史學家）的興趣，他堅稱：激起大眾在政治上支持abolitionist的，不是南方人對北方人的態度，而是北方的主張改革的人全都信奉了（第一自然段提到的那種）實用主義價值觀。不過，早些時候支持Growth of a Dissenting Minority interpretation的歷史學家，把北方主張改革的人的複雜情況簡化，把他們簡單地歸為一個同質的群體；或認為這些主張改革人的有些共同的觀點，以至於削弱了他們對各自所屬黨派的忠誠（以至於他們內部一團和氣）。Gerteis沒有像那些歷史學家一樣，他承認：在在那些主張改革的人內部，分屬兩大黨派的人是會因為關於政治經濟思想體系不同而互相攻擊的。
第五自然段第一部分：
Nevertheless, Gerteis argues, these disparate party affiliations did not diminish the actuality of reformer unity, most prominent in the 1830s. At this time, Northern reformers, such as William Lloyd Garrison and Samuel Chase, portrayed the framers of the United States Constitution as proponents of individual autonomy and capitalist values. This vision of the founders served as a basis for asserting that freedom was a national moral imperative, and that the United Sates Constitution was an antislavery document.
白話版講解：
不過，Gerteis又說，北方主張改革的人內部存在的不同黨派，並沒有減損他們的實際團結。這種團結在1830年代尤其顯著。在這一時期，北方主張改革的人（如William Lloyd Garrison 和 Samuel Chase）大都將起草美國憲法的人描繪為支持個人自治（自由）和（自由）資本主義價值觀的人（即反對奴隸制的人）。其實這只是他們把國父們構想成會這樣（真實情況沒有這麼簡單，也可以把國父們構想成不是這樣的人）。以這種構想（vison）為基礎，就可以進一步堅稱：實現（人人）自由是美國在道德上的義務，美國憲法是一個反奴隸制的文件。
第五自然段第二部分話：
Gerteis differs from traditional adherents of the Growth framework by asserting that the basic elements in the antislavery coalition were firmly in place and accepted by all elements in the Northern reform community as early as the late 1830s.
白話版講解：
Gerteis和那些傳統的贊同Growth of a Dissenting Minority理論的歷史學家又有另一個不同。Gerteis堅稱，早在1830年代末期，反奴隸制聯盟的一些基本群體已經牢牢地就位，且已被北方提倡改革的大群內所有小群體接受了。
註解：
element n.(常作 elements) 某群人或組織中的一組，一夥
a group of people of a particular kind within a larger group or organization
例句：
Those are the extreme right-wing elements in the army.
那些人是軍隊中的極端右翼分子。
1. The passage is primarily concerned with
A. criticizing adherents of a traditional view for overlooking important data.
B. reconciling two different explanations for the same phenomenon.
C. describing a reformulation of a traditional interpretation.
D. advocating a traditional approach to a controversial subject.
E. suggesting that a new interpretation is based on faulty assumptions.
白話版講解：
問全文修辭功能。
A「批評一些堅持某個傳統觀點的人忽視了一些重要的數據」
B「調和對同一個現象的兩種不同解釋」
C「描述對一種傳統解讀的重新表述」
D「主張對一個有爭議的主題採用一種傳統的研究方法」
E「暗示一項新的解讀是基於幾個錯誤的前設的」
文章是在講Gerteis 給舊理論提出了一個（新的）formulation（根據第二自然段第一句話），revives了舊的理論 the Growth interpretation（根據第四自然段第一句話），可以對應C選項中的reformulation of a traditional interpretation，所以C選項正確。
2. The author would be most likely to agree with which of the following about Gerteis formulation of the Growth interpretation?
A. It is too similar to the traditional version of the Growth interpretation.
B. It is of dubious validity and does not expand research on the antislavery movement.
C. It is strongly supported by recent research on the nineteenth-century South.
D. It is more convincing than the traditional version of the Growth interpretation.
E. It is seminal work that will be highly influential on future research.
白話版講解：
下列關於Gerteis對Growth理論的formulation的說法，作者最可能會同意哪一個？
A「和傳統版本的Growth理論太相近」
文章指出了Gerteis的formulation和傳統版本的Growth理論是有差別的，所以A錯誤。
B「其確鑿度不可靠，且沒有擴展關於反奴隸制運動研究的範疇」
文章沒有對關於Gerteis的formulation持批評態度，所以B錯誤。
C「被最近關於19世紀南方的研究強有力地支持」
文章沒有提到，所以C錯誤。
D「比傳統版本的Growth理論更令人信服」
這個Growth of a Dissenting Minority理論曾經被歷史學家們摒棄（根據文章第二自然段第二部分），是Gerteis這個人 revive了 這個Growth of a Dissenting Minority理論（第四自然段第一句話），所以我們可以看出作者認為Gerteis的新的formulation優於舊版本。所以D選項正確。
E「具有開拓性的，對未來的研究會有深遠影響」
文章沒有提到。所以E錯誤。
註解：
seminal adj. 具有開拓性的；有深遠影響的
containing important new ideas and having a great influence on later work
例句：
She wrote a seminal article on the subject while she was still a student.
她在學生時期就寫了一篇有關該主題的文章，文章影響深遠。
3. The passage supports which of the following statements about the Growth interpretation?
A. It had been dismissed by earlier historians but has recently come to dominate antislavery historiography.
B. It has recently received support from emerging scholarship on the nineteenth- century South.
C. It was once very influential in antislavery historiography and has recently been reformulated.
D. It has always been highly controversial and is still widely debated by historians.
E. It has recently been discounted by emerging scholarship on utilitarian values in the nineteenth-century South.
白話版講解：
問下列關於Growth理論的說法，哪一個是文章支持的？
A「曾經被早先的歷史學家摒棄，最近開始在反奴隸制歷史書寫中佔支配地位」
文章沒有提到最近開始佔支配地位，所以A錯誤。
B「最近獲得了研究19世紀南方的學者的支持」
根據文章，應該是曾經被這些學者反對，所以B錯誤。
C「曾經有影響，最近被人重新表述了」
根據文章，確實是曾經once dominated antislavery historiography，然後被Gerteis這個人reformulated了。所以C正確。
D「一直很有爭議，歷史學家至今仍圍繞其爭辯」
根據文章，曾經dominated，至少dominated的那時候是沒有爭議的，所以D錯誤。
E「出現了一些研究19世紀南方的實用主義價值觀的學者，這些學者最近認為Growth理論不可信，不值得考慮。」
文章只提到了北方人求助於utilitarian values，按文章意思應該是用utilitarian values說服那些不反對南方奴隸制的北方人變得反對南方的奴隸制，從而mobilize民眾，形成一個coalition。並沒有說新出現的歷史學家是專門研究南方的utilitarian values的。另外，E選項是現在完成時，而文章第二自然段第二部分第一句話出現的had been discounted by historians是過去完成時。時態不一致。所以E錯誤。
4. Which of the following, if true, would provide the LEAST support for Gerteis arguments as they are discussed in the passage?
A. In the 1870s, following the abolition of slavery, many Northerners remained unified in their desire to see an effective free-labor system implemented in the South.
B. As early as the 1830s, Northern abolitionists and Northern reformers with a commitment to utilitarian values began to agree that the United States Constitution was an important antislavery document.
C. Many Northern reformers who disagreed about political policies argued that abolishing slavery should be a central goal of the United States government.
D. As early as 1836, many Northern reformers argued that slavery destroyed individuals ability to pursue their self-interests and thwarted the free pursuit of material gain.
E. Owing to their different party allegiances, Northern reformers who shared utilitarian values did not join together in important collective actions against slavery.
題目問下列哪一個選項為真時，會給Gerteis給出的一系列論證最少的支持？可以理解為是要求考生選出可以削弱Gerteis一系列論證的選項。
A「到1870年代，廢除奴隸制後，很多北方人仍然一致有一個願望，希望在南方推行一個有效的自由勞動制度」
Gerteis也贊同北方人是一致的，所以這個選項不會削弱Gerteis的論點。所以A錯誤。
B「早在1830年代，一直贊同實用主義價值觀的北方的abolitionist和贊成改革的人，就開始一致認為美國憲法是一份重要的反奴隸制文件了」
和Gerteis的觀點不矛盾。所以B錯誤。
C「很多北方的贊同改革的人，雖然對有些政策有不同觀點，但是都認為廢除奴隸制應該是美國政府的一項中心目標」
和Gerteis的觀點不矛盾。所以C錯誤。
D「早在1836年，很多北方的贊同改革的人就認為奴隸制毀壞了個人追求自身利益的能力，阻礙了（人們）對物質利益的自由追去求」
和Gerteis的觀點不矛盾。所以D錯誤。
E 「北方的贊同改革的人，雖然都支持實用主義價值觀，但是因為效忠於不同的政黨，所以在一些重要的反對奴隸制的集體行動中，並沒有聯手一起加入」
和Gerteis的觀點矛盾（根據文章第五自然段第一句話），會削弱Gerteis的論證。所以E正確。
5. The author of the passage mentions 「emerging scholarship」 most probably in order to
A. describe an argument that has been advanced to challenge the 「Growth」 interpretation.
B. show how Gerteis has used recent research to support his formulation of the 「Growth」 interpretation.
C. explain how the 「Growth」 interpretation was originally developed.
D. discuss a theory about the nineteenth century North that is very similar to the 「Growth」 interpretation.
E. suggest that the 「Growth」 interpretation is no longer discussed among historians
白話版講解：
問文章作者提到「emerging scholarship」是為了……？
A「描述一個觀點，（有人）提出這個觀點的目的是質疑Growth理論」
根據文章，「emerging scholarship」的觀點是在1830年代，北方的廢奴主義者（abolitionist）是想動員北方民眾的，想為林肯在1860年贏得大選創造條件，但是他們並沒有成功。所以認為「是北方的abolitionist的動員搞成了一個coalition的那個Growth of a Dissenting Minority理論」這種觀點，錯了。也就是說「emerging scholarship」的觀點是反對Growth的，所以A選項正確。
B「展示Gerteis是怎樣使用最近的研究來支持他對Growth理論的formulation」
文章沒有提到，所以B錯誤。
C「解釋Growth理論最開始是這樣被發展出來的」
文章沒有提到，所以C錯誤。
D「討論一個和Growth理論非常相近的、關於19世紀北方的理論」
不是非常相近，所以D錯誤。
E「暗示歷史學家們已經不再討論Growth理論了」
文章沒有提到，所以E 錯誤。
TD GRE教研組還特別為大家準備了「GRE閱讀真題」無條件分享給大家~趕緊私戳小馬甲並發送暗號「GRE閱讀」即可領取資料啦~
* TestDaily是由北美留學領域的教學和申請專家創立的線上教育團隊，專注於為北美留學生的備考和申請提供優質的信息和服務，至今已經服務超過20萬人次。
團隊本著專業、務實、可靠的工作品質，設計了一系列質優價廉的留學語培和申請產品，受到廣泛認可。產品和服務詳情，請查看公眾號菜單「TD好課」了解。