『新东方在线托福阅读』为托福考生准备了ETS托福TPO/Official 21 Passage 2阅读练习：According to paragraph 1, all of the following are advantages of hunting and gathering over agriculture EXCEPT:真题题目及答案解析，TPO/Official 21 Passage 2阅读原文范文音频翻译

托福TPO/Official 21 Passage 2阅读原文According to paragraph 1, all of the following are advantages of hunting and gathering over agriculture EXCEPT:题目答案及解析-新东方托福官方网校手机版

农业是如何在世界上多个中心（东南亚大陆、西南亚、中美洲、南美低地和高原、赤道非洲）或多或少同时独立发展？

How did it come about that farming developed independently in a number of world centers (the Southeast Asian mainland, Southwest Asia, Central America, lowland and highland South America, and equatorial Africa) at more or less the same time?

在对动植物有广泛了解的人群中，农业发展缓慢。

Agriculture developed slowly among populations that had an extensive knowledge of plants and animals.

从狩猎和采集转变为农业没有立竿见影的好处。

Changing from hunting and gathering to agriculture had no immediate advantages.

首先，它迫使人们放弃游牧生活，定居下来，发展储藏方法，通常还有灌溉系统。

To start with, it forced the population to abandon the nomad’s life and become sedentary, to develop methods of storage and, often, systems of irrigation.

当资源枯竭时，狩猎采集者总是可以选择迁移到其他地方，但对于农业而言，（人们这么做）变得更加困难。

While hunter-gatherers always had the option of moving elsewhere when the resources were exhausted, this became more difficult with farming.

此外，正如考古记录所显示的那样，农民的健康状况比他们同时代的狩猎采集者更差。

Furthermore, as the archaeological record shows, the state of health of agriculturalists was worse than that of their contemporary hunter-gatherers.

传统上，人们认为向农业的过渡是世界人口危机的结果。

Traditionally, it was believed that the transition to agriculture was the result of a worldwide population crisis.

有人认为，一旦狩猎采集者占领了整个世界，世界各地的人口就开始增长，食物变得匮乏；农业本来是解决这个问题的办法。

It was argued that once hunter-gatherers had occupied the whole world, the population started to grow everywhere and food became scarce; agriculture would have been a solution to this problem.

然而，我们知道，当代狩猎采集社会以各种方式控制着他们的人口。

We know, however, that contemporary hunter-gatherer societies control their population in a variety of ways.

因此，尽管在一些地区可能已经出现了人口压力，但世界人口危机的想法是不太可能的。

The idea of a world population crisis is therefore unlikely, although population pressure might have arisen in some areas.

一万三千年前冰川期末期的气候变化被认为是（导致）农业出现的原因。

Climatic changes at the end of the glacial period 13,000 years ago have been proposed to account for the emergence of farming.

气温在很短的时间内（几年而不是几个世纪）急剧上升，由于资源丰富，狩猎采集人口得以增长。

The temperature increased dramatically in a short period of time (years rather than centuries), allowing for a growth of the hunting-gathering population due to the abundance of resources.

然而，气候条件也有波动，结果就是潮湿的气候之后紧接着为干燥的气候，因此植物和动物的可利用性就会急剧地波动。

There were, however, fluctuations in the climatic conditions, with the consequences that wet conditions were followed by dry ones, so that the availability of plants and animals oscillated brusquely.

气候条件的不稳定导致了原本游牧的人们定居下来，并形成了一种久坐的生活方式，这反过来又导致了人口增长和增加可用食物量的需要。

It would appear that the instability of the climatic conditions led populations that had originally been nomadic to settle down and develop a sedentary style of life, which led in turn to population growth and to the need to increase the amount of food available.

后来，由于这些人口的显著扩张，改变就变得非常困难。

Later on, it became very difficult to change because of the significant expansion of these populations.

然而，（人们）可能认为这些条件不足以解释农业的起源。

It could be argued, however, that these conditions are not sufficient to explain the origins of agriculture.

地球经历了前几个时期的气候变化，但农业并没有发展起来。

Earth had experienced previous periods of climatic change, and yet agriculture had not been developed.

考古学家史蒂芬·迈滕在他的著作《思想的前史》（1996年）中出色地阐述了这一论点：大约在4万年前，人类的思想发展了认知流动性，即思想的专业化的整合：技术、自然历史（着眼于理解自然资源的特性和分布）、社会智力和语言能力。

It is archaeologist Steven Mithen’s thesis, brilliantly developed in his book The Prehistory of the Mind (1996), that approximately 40,000 years ago the human mind developed cognitive fluidity, that is, the integration of the specializations of the mind: technical, natural history (geared to understanding the behavior and distribution of natural resources), social intelligence, and the linguistic capacity.

认知流动性解释了艺术、宗教和复杂语言的出现。

Cognitive fluidity explains the appearance of art, religion, and sophisticated speech.

一旦人类拥有了这样的思想，他们就能够找到一个富有想象力的解决方案来解决像前面描述的农业困境这样的严重经济危机。

Once humans possessed such a mind, they were able to find an imaginative solution to a situation of severe economic crisis such as the farming dilemma described earlier.

迈滕提出，存在四个心理因素来解释农业的出现：（1）开发可被集中用于收获和加工植物资源的工具的能力；（2）利用植物和动物作为媒介以获得社会声望和权力的倾向；（3）与动物发展“社会关系”的倾向，在结构上类似于与人发展的“社会关系”——具体地说，是将动物视为人（拟人化）和将人视为动物（图腾主义）的能力；以及（4）控制植物和动物的倾向。

Mithen proposes the existence of four mental elements to account for the emergence of farming: (1) the ability to develop tools that could be used intensively to harvest and process plant resources; (2) the tendency to use plants and animals as the medium to acquire social prestige and power; (3) the tendency to develop “social relationships” with animals structurally similar to those developed with people—specifically, the ability to think of animals as people (anthropomorphism) and of people as animals (totemism); and (4) the tendency to manipulate plants and animals.

一些社会驯养了动植物，发明了金属工具的使用，（人们）变得有文化，发展了国家，这一事实不应该让我们忘记，另一些社会发展了牧业或园艺（蔬菜园艺），但（人们）仍然文化水低、生产力水平很低；一些社会进入了现代时期，成为狩猎和采集社会。

The fact that some societies domesticated animals and plants, discovered the use of metal tools, became literate, and developed a state should not make us forget that others developed pastoralism or horticulture (vegetable gardening) but remained illiterate and at low levels of productivity; a few entered the modern period as hunting and gathering societies.

从人类学的角度探讨是什么条件使一些社会采用农业，而另一些社会仍然以狩猎采集者或园艺家为主，这一点在人类学上很重要。

It is anthropologically important to inquire into the conditions that made some societies adopt agriculture while others remained hunter-gatherers or horticulturalists.

然而，应该记住的是，许多了解农业的社会或多或少都有意识地避免了农业。

However, it should be kept in mind that many societies that knew of agriculture more or less consciously avoided it.

迈滕的解释是否令人满意尚有争议，而且有些作者最近强调了其他因素的重要性。

Whether Mithen’s explanation is satisfactory is open to contention, and some authors have recently emphasized the importance of other factors.

The word “option” in the passage is closest in meaning to

According to paragraph 1, all of the following are advantages of hunting and gathering over agriculture EXCEPT:

The word “therefore” in the passage is closest in meaning to

Which of the following best describes the way paragraph 2 is organized?

Which of the sentences below best expresses the essential information in the highlighted sentence in the passage? Incorrect choices change the meaning in important ways or leave out essential information.

According to paragraph 3, the abundance of resources fluctuated sharply after the end of the glacial period because

It can be inferred from paragraph 4 that it was difficult for people to change from farming back to hunting and gathering because

Why does the author state that “Earth had experienced previous periods of climatic change, and yet agriculture had not been developed”?

The word “imaginative” in the passage is closest in meaning to

According to paragraph 5, Steven Mithen believes that all of the following contributed to the emergence of farming EXCEPT

The word “contention” in the passage is closest in meaning to

According to paragraph 6, which of the following is a weakness of Mithen’s explanation?

Look at the four squares  that indicate where the following sentence could be added to the passage. Because humans had built up this knowledge as hunter-gatherers, it is logical to conclude that over time they would have become extremely efficient.  Where would the sentence best fit? Click on a square  to add the sentence to the passage.

Directions: An introductory sentence for a brief summary of the passage is provided below. Complete the summary by selecting the THREE answer choices that express the most important ideas in the passage. Some sentences do not belong in the summary because they express ideas that are not presented in the passage or are minor ideas in the passage. This question is worth 2 points.

The Origins of Agriculture How did it come about that farming developed independently in a number of world centers (the Southeast Asian mainland, Southwest Asia, Central America, lowland and highland South America, and equatorial Africa) at more or less the same time? Agriculture developed slowly among populations that had an extensive knowledge of plants and animals.  Changing from hunting and gathering to agriculture had no immediate advantages.  To start with, it forced the population to abandon the nomad’s life and become sedentary, to develop methods of storage and, often, systems of irrigation.  While hunter-gatherers always had the option of moving elsewhere when the resources were exhausted, this became more difficult with farming.  Furthermore, as the archaeological record shows, the state of health of agriculturalists was worse than that of their contemporary hunter-gatherers. Traditionally, it was believed that the transition to agriculture was the result of a worldwide population crisis. It was argued that once hunter-gatherers had occupied the whole world, the population started to grow everywhere and food became scarce; agriculture would have been a solution to this problem. We know, however, that contemporary hunter-gatherer societies control their population in a variety of ways. The idea of a world population crisis is therefore unlikely, although population pressure might have arisen in some areas. Climatic changes at the end of the glacial period 13,000 years ago have been proposed to account for the emergence of farming. The temperature increased dramatically in a short period of time (years rather than centuries), allowing for a growth of the hunting-gathering population due to the abundance of resources. There were, however, fluctuations in the climatic conditions, with the consequences that wet conditions were followed by dry ones, so that the availability of plants and animals oscillated brusquely. It would appear that the instability of the climatic conditions led populations that had originally been nomadic to settle down and develop a sedentary style of life, which led in turn to population growth and to the need to increase the amount of food available. Farming originated in these conditions. Later on, it became very difficult to change because of the significant expansion of these populations. It could be argued, however, that these conditions are not sufficient to explain the origins of agriculture. Earth had experienced previous periods of climatic change, and yet agriculture had not been developed. It is archaeologist Steven Mithen’s thesis, brilliantly developed in his book The Prehistory of the Mind (1996), that approximately 40,000 years ago the human mind developed cognitive fluidity, that is, the integration of the specializations of the mind: technical, natural history (geared to understanding the behavior and distribution of natural resources), social intelligence, and the linguistic capacity. Cognitive fluidity explains the appearance of art, religion, and sophisticated speech. Once humans possessed such a mind, they were able to find an imaginative solution to a situation of severe economic crisis such as the farming dilemma described earlier. Mithen proposes the existence of four mental elements to account for the emergence of farming: (1) the ability to develop tools that could be used intensively to harvest and process plant resources; (2) the tendency to use plants and animals as the medium to acquire social prestige and power; (3) the tendency to develop “social relationships” with animals structurally similar to those developed with people—specifically, the ability to think of animals as people (anthropomorphism) and of people as animals (totemism); and (4) the tendency to manipulate plants and animals. The fact that some societies domesticated animals and plants, discovered the use of metal tools, became literate, and developed a state should not make us forget that others developed pastoralism or horticulture (vegetable gardening) but remained illiterate and at low levels of productivity; a few entered the modern period as hunting and gathering societies. It is anthropologically important to inquire into the conditions that made some societies adopt agriculture while others remained hunter-gatherers or horticulturalists. However, it should be kept in mind that many societies that knew of agriculture more or less consciously avoided it. Whether Mithen’s explanation is satisfactory is open to contention, and some authors have recently emphasized the importance of other factors.