▶ Your Answer :
Although the author of the reading
passage argues that there are three plausible reasons why the population in
Angkor decreased seriously, the speaker brings up several points to contradict
the argument.
Firstly, the professor maintains that there
were no reasons why the Ayutthaya Kingdom expelled people when the Kingdom
occupied the city. Rather, having many people in the city would be economically
beneficial to the invader. This contradicts the writer’s contention that foreign
invasion attributed to decline of the population in Angkor.
Secondly, the speaker claims that changing
in the primary religion had no serious impact on the decline of population. Although
it was true that the state religion changed from Hinduism to Buddhism, the
state religion had always changed even before Buddhism was adopted as the state
religion. Additionally, the temples did not play an important role in
maintaining the population because many religions could coexist at that time. This
refutes the author’s argument that alteration of the state religion led to decrease
the population in Angkor.
The final point made by the author is
that the claim related to the drought is flawed. It was true that there was
serious drought, but it occurred much before the collapse of Angkor. Also, even
when suffered from more intense drought, people could manage to sustain their
lives. This goes against the writer’s assertion that a long drought had a
serious influence on the decline of the population in Angkor.
Good (26–30)
내용 정리 아주 잘 하셨습니다. 문법도 좋습니다.
수고하셨습니다~~
|