The decline of Egypt (Actual Test Writing, Test 2)
*진하게 표시한 부분은 제가 파악한 문단의 주요 내용이니 참고하세요^^
The lecturer argues that the evidences for the Egyptian decline in 2200-2000 BC contain several incoherent flaws. This contradicts the reading passage’s claim that what brought Egypt into decline were the changing attitude of the provisional governors, catastrophic drought, and the long reign of Pepi II. topic과 두 지문의 반대되는 입장을 간결하게 잘 소개한 서론입니다.
To begin with, the lecturer argues that the attitude of the provincial governors toward the pharaoh stayed the same as before mainly due to the fact that they held privileged positions and often received additional rewards from the pharaohs. Also, no revolts against the monarchy could succeed since the central governor possessed a strong army. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s claim that the provisional governors started to oppose the pharaoh’s rule as they got more ambitious and greedy. 지방의 반란세력들에 대한 내용을 기준으로 대립되는 내용을 잘 정리한 문단입니다.
In addition, the lecturer explains that the written documents on natural catastrophes in Egypt are interpreted in a wrong way. The document says that the drought which may have been one of the consequences for the Egyptian decline happened only in the East. Other places experienced no noticeable changes in the climate, and thus, the documents seem to be unclear. "가뭄으로 인해 이집트가 멸망했다는 것을 설명하기에" 부족하다는 점을 분명하게 제시해준다면 더 좋겠습니다. This again counters the reading passage’s claim that historical records show images of drought, which supposedly caused failure in crops and famine.
Lastly, the lecturer disagrees with the fact the reading passage saying that the long reign of Pepi II brought monarchy into political turmoil. This assumption contradicts the fact that no collapse had occurred in other times. Furthermore, fighting among siblings was a common thing and the kingdom was quite organized. This refutes the reading passage’s claim that the sons and grandchildren of the king were in constant power struggle and competition for the throne, which led to political unrest. 권력투쟁을 기준으로 대립되는 요소들을 잘 포함하고 있습니다. lecturer가 정확하게 반론을 제기하고 있는 부분이 어떤 부분인지 명확하게 드러나도록 'reading'의 이러이러한 주장에 대립하는 내용이라는 것을 강조해주세요.
전반적으로 내용 정리에 필요한 부분을 잘 노트테이킹해주신 것 같습니다. 대립되는 내용들이 잘 보이게끔 정리도 잘 해주셨습니다. 내용을 정리할 때 두 지문이 다루고 있는 topic이 무엇인지 정확하게 정한 후 그에 초점을 맞춰서 내용을 정리하면 더 일목요연한 답안이 될 수 있으니 참고하세요. 문제지의 답안과 직접 확인하셔서 노트테이킹에서 빠진 부분이나 잘못 이해된 부분은 없는지 다시 한 번 내용 체크해주시기 바랍니다. 수고 많으셨습니다^^