求解一道机经阅读题
Some historians have recently challenged the “party period paradigm,” the view, advanced byMcCormick and others, that political parties—especially the two major parties—in the United States between the years 1835 and 1900 evoked extraordinary loyalty from voters and dominated political life. Voss-Hubbard cites the frequency of third-party eruptions during the period as evidence of popular antipathy to the two-party regime. He correctly credits third parties with helping generate the nineteenth-century’s historically high rates of voter turnout by forcing major parties to bolster supporters’ allegiance, lest minor parties siphon off their votes, and with pushing policy demands that the major parties ignored. Formisano stresses the pervasive record of nonpartisan and antiparty governance at the local level, and women’s frequent participation in nineteenth-century public life, prior to their enfranchisement, in nonpartisan and antiparty ways as evidence of the limitations of the
party period paradigm. Yet McCormick would deny that the existence of antiparty sentiment during the period undermines the paradigm, since he has always acknowledged the residual strength of such sentiment during the nineteenth century. In any case, the strength of the paradigm is its comparative thrust: the contrast it draws between the period in question and later political eras.
问题：
2. Select the sentence in the passage that describes how a historian might reply to attempts to call his theory into question.
答案是 Yet McCormick would deny that the existence of antiparty sentiment during the period undermines the paradigm, since he has always acknowledged the residual strength of such sentiment during the nineteenth century.
不是很理解这题问的是什么？一般这种题的答题思路是什么？ 这个题很简单，文章结构就是MC发展的PPP理论被质疑，然后讲了具体是怎么质疑的，再然后就是MC本人对质疑的回复，最后总结，表明PPP这个理论具有一定的正确性。问题问的是“选择一个句子，这个句子描述了一个历史学家可能会怎样回复质疑他的理论的尝试”，于是就选择Yet。。。
页:
[1]