▶ Your Answer :
In
the reading passage there is ample support to the author’s point that there are
some plausible theories on the functions of petroglyphs. However, the professor
in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the reading passage’s
claim.
First
of all, the speechmaker insists that many researchers does not accept the
thought of petroglyphs as mutual comprehensive ways. This is because the images
happened in hostile relationship. It is hard to believe to teach dangerous
situations for enemies. In addition, some studies have shown that same symbols
in petroglyphs can indicate different meanings. This casts doubt on the reading
passage’s suggestion that petroglyphs were one of the communication methods.
On
top of that, the man in the lecture says that it seems ridiculous to see
petroglyphs as religious pictures. If petroglyphs were used for ceremonial
functions, they had would been more complex. Carve paintings in the ancient
time, For example, are very detailed and specific. On the other hand,
petroglyphs are too crude and simple. This counters the reading passage’s
argument that petroglyphs were created for holy events.
Finally,
the lecturer contends that the premival images have practical sides. Young man
in the past playing war game, for example, learned about useful skills such as
hiding and hunting from that. Petroglyphs must have been tangible functions even
we do not know yet. This refutes the reading passage’s claim that people in the
olden times drew petroglyphs just for entertainment.
|