学年

教科

質問の種類

英語 高校生

以前画像3枚目の様に修飾限定予告のthatというものを習ったので今回もその形なのかと思い、それらのと入れずに訳してしまったのですがこのthoseの識別は文脈判断ということでしょうか? 教えて頂きたいです。よろしくお願いいたします。

実理 K The starting point for today's *meritocracy, of course, is the idea that intelligence exists and can be measured, like weight or strength or fluency in French. The most obvious difference between intelligence and these other traits is that all the others are presumably changeable. If someone weighs too much, he can go on a その人 →Heyで受けるのが一般的 5 diet; if he's weak, he can lift weights; if he wants to learn French, he can take a course. But in principle he can't change his intelligence. There is another important difference 原則として MV between intelligence and other traits. Height and weight and speed and strength and サフィス体例 関係性が強い文がくる even conversational fluency are real things; there's no doubt about what's being 間違いなん measured. Intelligence is a much murkier concept. Some people are generally (2) m2 Vogue 10 smarter than others, and some are obviously talented in specific ways; they're chess 天才 S masters, math *prodigies. But can the factors that make one person seem quicker than another be measured precisely, like height and weight? Can we confidently say that one person is 10 percent smarter than another, in the same way we can say he's 10 へんて、いつだっ S percent faster in the hundred-yard dash? And can we be confident that two thirds of 櫂へん 言いかえ 15 all people have IQs within one standard deviation of the norm that is, between 90 ように and 110 - - as we can be sure that two thirds of all people have heights within one standard deviation of the norm for height? Yes, they can, and yes, we can. besure least, are the answers that the IQ part of the meritocracy rests on. Those, at (3)-

解決済み 回答数: 2
英語 高校生

カッコで囲んだとこの英文の1つ目のandからの訳がどうして2枚目のようになるのか教えてください。 2枚目のどんな疑問が重要か〜の次のとこからです

ample practices varied across time and place. The truth is that we about what preliterate societies knew or believed. But they left behind *. evidence of their attention to the movements of the Sun and the phases of the Moon. And we can be sure that whatever questions they asked of the heavens were very different from those that motivate space exploration today. (A) rotic othe In reality, the difference between ancient and modern knowledge systems is more qualitative than quantitative; it is not about how much is known, but about what questions are important and about the acceptable ways of asking and answering those questions. And while we may not easily be able to slip between our modern worldview and those of others, we can nonetheless attempt to do so by asking not what ancient people knew about the world, but what their questions were when they looked at it. If we do this in the case of Mars, examining a few of the earliest known examples from around the world, we can see how sky knowledge was considered important to the functioning of the state whether it was *astrological knowledge in the service of good governance, or knowledge of bloodlines and relationships with the gods and other sky entities, which was used (B) - verdd

回答募集中 回答数: 0