清華大學（後西醫）
111年
英文
第 44 題
📖 題組：
Reading 4
In analyzing the representation of white ethnic groups, it has been customary to use a framework I term responsive pluralism, which emphasizes the response of political elites to newly mobilized political forces that are demanding recognition. A key tenet of responsive pluralism is that all votes are equal and fungible. In other words, political elites---those with power---will entertain the possibility of a coalition with any group that possesses votes. In return for these votes, the elites will make available a stream of public goods in the form of patronage, symbolic recognition, and social services.
But for minorities, the situation is more complex and considerably less flattering to America’s preferred conception of its political traditions. Simply put, minorities have often faced constraints on their participation in the American polity due to their social and legal status. This situation has resulted in what I term stratified pluralism. As members of racial or other categories, they have often been defined out of the realm of full citizenship as it is usually understood in a democracy.
Blacks in particular could not vote for a long time so candidacies for office were not feasible. It was not until the democratic rights of citizenship were formally recognized by the polity that racial minorities could even compete as players in the electoral arena. Moreover, racism further hampered minority advancement even after the vote had been granted. In some cases, white voters simply refused to vote for minority candidates; in others, the elites themselves made it clear that they wished to limit or prevent minority representation. Minority votes were considered less desirable than white votes, and they were therefore less fungible as a commodity to be exchanged for public goods. Minorities were often incorporated into a dominant coalition only if a race-oriented agenda was abandoned by the minority leaders. As a consequence of stratified pluralism, widespread and efficacious minority officeholding has been the exception rather than the rule in U.S. history.
A group trying to elect representatives to office must use the electoral process to convert its demographic raw materials into positions of authority in government: in effect, the group tries to translate numbers into power. There is nothing automatic or mechanical about this process of conversion. It is conditioned by at least five distinct factors, each of which can intervene to prevent a group from being represented in office in relation to its proportion of the population: enfranchisement, mobilization, spatial concentration, favorable districts, and coalitions.
Reading 4
In analyzing the representation of white ethnic groups, it has been customary to use a framework I term responsive pluralism, which emphasizes the response of political elites to newly mobilized political forces that are demanding recognition. A key tenet of responsive pluralism is that all votes are equal and fungible. In other words, political elites---those with power---will entertain the possibility of a coalition with any group that possesses votes. In return for these votes, the elites will make available a stream of public goods in the form of patronage, symbolic recognition, and social services.
But for minorities, the situation is more complex and considerably less flattering to America’s preferred conception of its political traditions. Simply put, minorities have often faced constraints on their participation in the American polity due to their social and legal status. This situation has resulted in what I term stratified pluralism. As members of racial or other categories, they have often been defined out of the realm of full citizenship as it is usually understood in a democracy.
Blacks in particular could not vote for a long time so candidacies for office were not feasible. It was not until the democratic rights of citizenship were formally recognized by the polity that racial minorities could even compete as players in the electoral arena. Moreover, racism further hampered minority advancement even after the vote had been granted. In some cases, white voters simply refused to vote for minority candidates; in others, the elites themselves made it clear that they wished to limit or prevent minority representation. Minority votes were considered less desirable than white votes, and they were therefore less fungible as a commodity to be exchanged for public goods. Minorities were often incorporated into a dominant coalition only if a race-oriented agenda was abandoned by the minority leaders. As a consequence of stratified pluralism, widespread and efficacious minority officeholding has been the exception rather than the rule in U.S. history.
A group trying to elect representatives to office must use the electoral process to convert its demographic raw materials into positions of authority in government: in effect, the group tries to translate numbers into power. There is nothing automatic or mechanical about this process of conversion. It is conditioned by at least five distinct factors, each of which can intervene to prevent a group from being represented in office in relation to its proportion of the population: enfranchisement, mobilization, spatial concentration, favorable districts, and coalitions.
Which of the following best captures the meaning of "coalition" in paragraph 1?
- A Collusion
- B Collision
- C Alliance
- D Relation
- E Meeting
思路引導 VIP
如果我們先不看這個單字本身，試著看看它前後的句子：掌握權力的政治菁英想要獲得某個群體的「選票」，並願意在事後提供「公共利益與服務」作為交換。你覺得這兩個群體之間，正在建立一種什麼性質的互動關係呢？這種關係是正向合作、秘密違法，還是互相衝突的呢？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
太棒了！你非常精準地掌握了文章脈絡，選出了正確答案 (C) Alliance，展現了很棒的詞彙辨析與上下文推敲能力。
上下文語境推敲與字根解析
在第一段中，作者提到政治菁英（political elites）為了獲得選票，會考慮與擁有選票的群體建立「coalition」，並提供公共財作為回報。這是一種雙方互利、共同合作的關係，因此指的就是「聯盟、結盟（Alliance）」。從字根來看，co- 代表「共同（together）」，而 al- 源自拉丁文 alescere（成長、結合），合起來就是「結合在一起成為同盟」。
▼ 還有更多解析內容