TF阅读真题第861篇When Did Humans First Colonize the Americas?

When Did Humans First Colonize the Americas?

 

Nineteenth-century archaeologists struggled to estimate ages of American prehistoric sites and artifacts. Without radiocarbon isotope and other laboratory technologies to calculate years elapsed, some mistook stones obtained from old quarries (places where stone is dug out of a large hole in the ground) for million-year-old Early Paleolithic artifacts; others went to the opposite extreme, insisting that sites and artifacts couldn’t be more than 2,000 years old. The breakthrough came in 1927 when excavation of a New Mexico site from which bison bones were eroding revealed a finely crafted stone weapon point (blade) between bison ribs. Calls went out to a paleontologist at the American Museum in New York, an archaeologist at the Smithsonian in Washington, and the most respected Southwestern United States archaeologist. The three authorities agreed that the large bison bones belonged to a species that became extinct about ten thousand years ago, and that the stone artifacts had been used to kill and butcher the bison. Therefore, there were people in America that long ago, hunting huge animals soon to become extinct.

Soon after “Folsom points,” named after the village near the site with bison bones, became accepted as evidence of late-Pleistocene migration of humans into America, a somewhat similar style of stone weapon blade was discovered in another New Mexico site, near the town of Clovis. This type of stone blade is larger than the Folsom type, and the characteristic long, vertical handle groove (a narrow line cut into the surface) extends only about a third of the way up the blade, whereas the Folsom type has the groove nearly up to the tip. The two types share expert flint-knapping (chipping) skill, making the artifacts beautiful and easily noticed. At Blackwater Draw near Clovis, excavation demonstrated that Clovis points were in a layer lower than the layer with Folsom points, indicating that Clovis technology was older than Folsom technology. Clovis but not Folsom points have been found with mammoths, another clue to Folsom being later, after mammoths became extinct in America.Clovis- style points have been found over most of North America, even more in the East than in the West. Proponents of the Clovis First theory claim that this style of blade was ideally suited for hunting mammoths and other large animals and was used by the first wave of migrants moving south into the unpopulated Americas from Beringia, the land bridge between present-day Siberia and Alaska. Opponents of the Clovis First hypothesis interpret Clovis as a technology and style that spread through already-populated North America.

The answer to the debate hinges on whether there is any evidence of settlers in the Americas before Clovis. Clovis First archaeologists demanded copious evidence for earlier settlers, against those thinking there is an uncountable number of earlier sites destroyed or not yet discovered. Lack of evidence in archaeology should not be construed to prove that something never existed. Evidence for humans in America earlier than the Clovis horizon is thin-thin, but there. Skeptical archaeologists, citing abundant data, argue that sites alleged to predate Clovis may be incorrectly dated, or the simpler artifacts recovered might come from camps used by Clovis-equipped hunters who took their weapons with them when they moved on. Opponents of the “Clovis First” hypothesis say, of course, that the evidence is thin, because there have been many more years for sites to be buried or destroyed, and furthermore, first colonizers would have been less numerous than their descendants, so their sites would be less numerous. Most important, we don’t have a clear idea of what pre-Clovis technology looked like. What do you look for to find a pre-Clovis settlement?

A newer twist in the Clovis First debate is the assertion that Clovis technology looks like the stone tools of Eurasian Upper Paleolithic Solutrean culture, most famous for Paleolithic cave art. This culture predates Clovis by several thousand years. Proponents of the Solutrean theory see hunters paddling along the North Atlantic ice front spearing seals and fish and then settling throughout eastern North America, modifying their tool technology eventually into Clovis blades.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Nineteenth-century archaeologists struggled to estimate ages of American prehistoric sites and artifacts. Without radiocarbon isotope and other laboratory technologies to calculate years elapsed, some mistook stones obtained from old quarries (places where stone is dug out of a large hole in the ground) for million-year-old Early Paleolithic artifacts; others went to the opposite extreme, insisting that sites and artifacts couldn’t be more than 2,000 years old. The breakthrough came in 1927 when excavation of a New Mexico site from which bison bones were eroding revealed a finely crafted stone weapon point (blade) between bison ribs. Calls went out to a paleontologist at the American Museum in New York, an archaeologist at the Smithsonian in Washington, and the most respected Southwestern United States archaeologist. The three authorities agreed that the large bison bones belonged to a species that became extinct about ten thousand years ago, and that the stone artifacts had been used to kill and butcher the bison. Therefore, there were people in America that long ago, hunting huge animals soon to become extinct.

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

Vocabulary Questions词汇题

Apresenting evidence

Bsaying incorrectly

Cstating forcefully

Dseeking arguments

 

2

Nineteenth-century archaeologists struggled to estimate ages of American prehistoric sites and artifacts. Without radiocarbon isotope and other laboratory technologies to calculate years elapsed, some mistook stones obtained from old quarries (places where stone is dug out of a large hole in the ground) for million-year-old Early Paleolithic artifacts; others went to the opposite extreme, insisting that sites and artifacts couldn’t be more than 2,000 years old. The breakthrough came in 1927 when excavation of a New Mexico site from which bison bones were eroding revealed a finely crafted stone weapon point (blade) between bison ribs. Calls went out to a paleontologist at the American Museum in New York, an archaeologist at the Smithsonian in Washington, and the most respected Southwestern United States archaeologist. The three authorities agreed that the large bison bones belonged to a species that became extinct about ten thousand years ago, and that the stone artifacts had been used to kill and butcher the bison. Therefore, there were people in America that long ago, hunting huge animals soon to become extinct.

According to paragraph 1， paleontologists and archaeologists were able to answer which of the following questions based on discoveries made at the New Mexico site?

Factual Information Questions事实信息题

AWere there people in America ten thousand years ago?

BWhen did people first migrate to North America?

CWhen did bison first appear in the American Southwest?

DWhen did people in the Americas begin using stone weapons?

 

3

Soon after “Folsom points,” named after the village near the site with bison bones, became accepted as evidence of late-Pleistocene migration of humans into America, a somewhat similar style of stone weapon blade was discovered in another New Mexico site, near the town of Clovis. This type of stone blade is larger than the Folsom type, and the characteristic long, vertical handle groove (a narrow line cut into the surface) extends only about a third of the way up the blade, whereas the Folsom type has the groove nearly up to the tip. The two types share expert flint-knapping (chipping) skill, making the artifacts beautiful and easily noticed. At Blackwater Draw near Clovis, excavation demonstrated that Clovis points were in a layer lower than the layer with Folsom points, indicating that Clovis technology was older than Folsom technology. Clovis but not Folsom points have been found with mammoths, another clue to Folsom being later, after mammoths became extinct in America.Clovis- style points have been found over most of North America, even more in the East than in the West. Proponents of the Clovis First theory claim that this style of blade was ideally suited for hunting mammoths and other large animals and was used by the first wave of migrants moving south into the unpopulated Americas from Beringia, the land bridge between present-day Siberia and Alaska. Opponents of the Clovis First hypothesis interpret Clovis as a technology and style that spread through already-populated North America.

In paragraph 2,all of the following are mentioned as differences between Clovis points and Folsom points EXCEPT:

Negative Factual Information Questions否定事实信息题

AClovis points are larger than Folsom points.

BClovis points have shorter grooves than Folsom points.

CClovis points show evidence of greater chipping skill than Folsom points.

DClovis points have been found in a lower layer than Folsom points.

 

4

Soon after “Folsom points,” named after the village near the site with bison bones, became accepted as evidence of late-Pleistocene migration of humans into America, a somewhat similar style of stone weapon blade was discovered in another New Mexico site, near the town of Clovis. This type of stone blade is larger than the Folsom type, and the characteristic long, vertical handle groove (a narrow line cut into the surface) extends only about a third of the way up the blade, whereas the Folsom type has the groove nearly up to the tip. The two types share expert flint-knapping (chipping) skill, making the artifacts beautiful and easily noticed. At Blackwater Draw near Clovis, excavation demonstrated that Clovis points were in a layer lower than the layer with Folsom points, indicating that Clovis technology was older than Folsom technology. Clovis but not Folsom points have been found with mammoths, another clue to Folsom being later, after mammoths became extinct in America.Clovis- style points have been found over most of North America, even more in the East than in the West. Proponents of the Clovis First theory claim that this style of blade was ideally suited for hunting mammoths and other large animals and was used by the first wave of migrants moving south into the unpopulated Americas from Beringia, the land bridge between present-day Siberia and Alaska. Opponents of the Clovis First hypothesis interpret Clovis as a technology and style that spread through already-populated North America.

Which of the following can be inferred from paragraph 2 about the Folsom points found in North America?

Inference Questions推理题

AThey were made with greater skill than Clovis points were.

BThey were primarily used by hunters in eastern North America.

CThey were found in places that indicated that they were older than Clovis points.

DThey may not have been used to hunt mammoths.

 

5

The answer to the debate hinges on whether there is any evidence of settlers in the Americas before Clovis. Clovis First archaeologists demanded copious evidence for earlier settlers, against those thinking there is an uncountable number of earlier sites destroyed or not yet discovered. Lack of evidence in archaeology should not be construed to prove that something never existed. Evidence for humans in America earlier than the Clovis horizon is thin-thin, but there. Skeptical archaeologists, citing abundant data, argue that sites alleged to predate Clovis may be incorrectly dated, or the simpler artifacts recovered might come from camps used by Clovis-equipped hunters who took their weapons with them when they moved on. Opponents of the “Clovis First” hypothesis say, of course, that the evidence is thin, because there have been many more years for sites to be buried or destroyed, and furthermore, first colonizers would have been less numerous than their descendants, so their sites would be less numerous. Most important, we don’t have a clear idea of what pre-Clovis technology looked like. What do you look for to find a pre-Clovis settlement?

Why does the author state,”Lack of evidence in archaeology should not be construed to prove that something never existed”?

Rhetorical Purpose Questions修辞目的题

ATo criticize the position taken by some Clovis First archaeologists

BTo introduce an archaeological principle agreed upon by both supporters and opponents of Clovis First

CTo suggest that it is not possible to determine when humans first colonized the Americas

DTo explain an important difference between archaeology and other disciplines

 

6

The answer to the debate hinges on whether there is any evidence of settlers in the Americas before Clovis. Clovis First archaeologists demanded copious evidence for earlier settlers, against those thinking there is an uncountable number of earlier sites destroyed or not yet discovered. Lack of evidence in archaeology should not be construed to prove that something never existed. Evidence for humans in America earlier than the Clovis horizon is thin-thin, but there. Skeptical archaeologists, citing abundant data, argue that sites alleged to predate Clovis may be incorrectly dated, or the simpler artifacts recovered might come from camps used by Clovis-equipped hunters who took their weapons with them when they moved on. Opponents of the “Clovis First” hypothesis say, of course, that the evidence is thin, because there have been many more years for sites to be buried or destroyed, and furthermore, first colonizers would have been less numerous than their descendants, so their sites would be less numerous. Most important, we don’t have a clear idea of what pre-Clovis technology looked like. What do you look for to find a pre-Clovis settlement?

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.

Sentence Simplification Questions句子简化题

AIn spite of the abundant evidence for alleged pre- Clovis sites, some archaeologists still argue that hunting camps and other sites must be incorrectly dated.

BSome archaeologists believe that there is abundant data to support alleged pre-Clovis sites and the pre- Clovis origin of the simple artifacts found at those sites.

CSome archaeologists argue that alleged pre-Clovis sites may either be incorrectly dated or may actually be temporary sites used by Clovis hunters.

DSome archaeologists argue that Clovis hunters who occupied alleged pre-Clovis sites left behind simple artifacts but took their weapons along when they moved on.

 

7

The answer to the debate hinges on whether there is any evidence of settlers in the Americas before Clovis. Clovis First archaeologists demanded copious evidence for earlier settlers, against those thinking there is an uncountable number of earlier sites destroyed or not yet discovered. Lack of evidence in archaeology should not be construed to prove that something never existed. Evidence for humans in America earlier than the Clovis horizon is thin-thin, but there. Skeptical archaeologists, citing abundant data, argue that sites alleged to predate Clovis may be incorrectly dated, or the simpler artifacts recovered might come from camps used by Clovis-equipped hunters who took their weapons with them when they moved on. Opponents of the “Clovis First” hypothesis say, of course, that the evidence is thin, because there have been many more years for sites to be buried or destroyed, and furthermore, first colonizers would have been less numerous than their descendants, so their sites would be less numerous. Most important, we don’t have a clear idea of what pre-Clovis technology looked like. What do you look for to find a pre-Clovis settlement?

According to paragraph 3,opponents of the Clovis First hypothesis have provided all of the following explanations for why evidence for pre-Clovis sites is so thin EXCEPT:

Negative Factual Information Questions否定事实信息题

AMany pre-Clovis sites were likely buried or destroyed.

BPre-Clovis people most likely did not have permanent living sites.

CNobody knows what would be characteristic of a pre-Clovis site.

DPre-Clovis populations were small and their sites relatively few.

 

8

A newer twist in the Clovis First debate is the assertion that Clovis technology looks like the stone tools of Eurasian Upper Paleolithic Solutrean culture, most famous for Paleolithic cave art. This culture predates Clovis by several thousand years. Proponents of the Solutrean theory see hunters paddling along the North Atlantic ice front spearing seals and fish and then settling throughout eastern North America, modifying their tool technology eventually into Clovis blades.

According to paragraph 4,which of the following pieces of evidence supports the idea that the Clovis people were descendants of the Solutrean people?

Factual Information Questions事实信息题

AThe Clovis and Solutrean people were hunting in the same area at about the same time.

BClovis blades have been found in parts of Europe and Asia inhabited by the Solutrean people.

CClovis tools were similar in appearance to tools used by the Solutrean people.

DThe earliest Clovis blades were designed for hunting seals and fish rather than land mammals.

 

9

Soon after “Folsom points,” named after the village near the site with bison bones, became accepted as evidence of late-Pleistocene migration of humans into America, a somewhat similar style of stone weapon blade was discovered in another New Mexico site, near the town of Clovis. [■]This type of stone blade is larger than the Folsom type, and the characteristic long, vertical handle groove (a narrow line cut into the surface) extends only about a third of the way up the blade, whereas the Folsom type has the groove nearly up to the tip. [■]The two types share expert flint-knapping (chipping) skill, making the artifacts beautiful and easily noticed. [■]At Blackwater Draw near Clovis, excavation demonstrated that Clovis points were in a layer lower than the layer with Folsom points, indicating that Clovis technology was older than Folsom technology. [■]Clovis but not Folsom points have been found with mammoths, another clue to Folsom being later, after mammoths became extinct in America.Clovis- style points have been found over most of North America, even more in the East than in the West. Proponents of the Clovis First theory claim that this style of blade was ideally suited for hunting mammoths and other large animals and was used by the first wave of migrants moving south into the unpopulated Americas from Beringia, the land bridge between present-day Siberia and Alaska. Opponents of the Clovis First hypothesis interpret Clovis as a technology and style that spread through already-populated North America.

Look at the four squaresthat indicate where the following sentence could be added to the passage

 

Clovis blades also tend to be thicker than Folsom points.

Insert Text Questions句子插入题

Where would the sentence best fit？Click on a square  sentence to the passage.

 

10

Despite advances in dating techniques, archaeologists are still uncertain as to when humans first colonized the Americas

Prose Summary Questions概要小结题

Select 3 answers

AClovis and Folsom points have both been found with the bones of bison that became extinct 10,000 years ago, leading some scientists to conclude that both groups were responsible for their extinction.

BClovis points may have been brought to the Americas by the first settlers traveling across Beringia, or they may have appeared and become widespread after the Americas were populated.

CThere is a lack of definitive evidence for pre-Clovis settlements in the Americas, but many pre-Clovis sites may not have survived to the present day.

DFolsom points were some of the first prehistoric artifacts to be identified, though similar-looking points later discovered·near Clovis, New Mexico, are likely older.

EDifferences between the Clovis-style points found in eastern and western North America suggest that the tools were actually made by two separate prehistoric groups.

FMost recently, the discovery of prehistoric cave art at Clovis sites in the Americas suggests that the Clovis people originally came from Eurasia around 11,000 B.C.E.