託福TPO5綜合寫作材料是討論美國西南部墨西哥地區查科峽谷的巨屋的作用。下面是小編整理的託福TPO5綜合寫作範文和材料，希望能幫到大家!
The author of the reading passage proposes three theories as likely explanations of the primary function of Chaco Canyon houses, grant structures built in the I2th century. The lecturer, however, points to the inaccuracies in each of these theories.
The lecturer argues that the modest number of fireplaces in these structures is in contradiction with the huge size of these houses, indicating that these structures could not have been used for Residential purposes. The Reading, however, draws comparisons between the Chaco houses and other similar large Residential structures in support of the “Residential” theory.
The second theory, that the houses were used for food storage, is also rejected by the lecturer. He explains that a place that had been used for storing maize would have many traces of scattered Maize, which is not the case in the area of the Chaco Canyon houses. This proves that the “food storage theory” is unlikely.
Finally, regarding the third theory, the “ceremony theory”, the lecturer contends that the presence of broken pots close to the great houses does not offer sufficient proof that this was a place for ceremonial activities. He argues that there are other materials such as pieces of construction trash found along with the broken pots, which suggest that these pots were probably not used for ceremonial purposes but instead were discarded by construction workers upon completion of the great houses.
託福TPO5綜合寫作閱讀材料As early as the twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their “great houses,” massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand three or four stories high. Archaeologists have been trying to determine how the buildings were used. While there is still no universally agreed upon explanation, there are three competing theories.
早在12世紀，美國西南部墨西哥地區查科峽谷的居民就以他們的“巨屋”而聞名。這種石質材料建成的“巨屋”包好有數百個房間，而且通常有三到四層高。很多考古學家都試圖解釋這些建築的用途。儘管業界尚未達成一致，但現在有三個比較有競爭力的理論。
One theory holds that the Chaco structures were purely residential, with each housing hundreds of people. Supporters of this theory have interpreted Chaco great houses as earlier versions of the architecture seen in more recent Southwest societies. In particular, the Chaco houses appear strikingly similar to the large, well-known “apartment buildings” at Taos, New Mexico, in which many people have been living for centuries.
一個理論認為這些巨屋是單純用來居住的，每個可以容納數百人。持有這種理論的.人解釋說查科巨屋同時間較近的一些西南族群早期建築的雛形。尤其值得一提的是，查科的這些建築同新墨西哥陶斯鎮著名的“寓所式建築”非常相似。這些寓所式建築供很多人居住了數個世紀。
A second theory contends that the Chaco structures were used to store food supplies. One of the main crops of the Chaco people was grain maize, which could be stored for long periods of time without spoiling and could serve as long-lasting supply of food. The supplies of maize had to be stored somewhere, and the size of the great houses would make them very suitable for the purpose.
第二個理論認為查科建築是用來儲存食物的。查科人的主食之一是玉米。玉米可以不宜變質，可長期儲存，因此可以作為長期的食物來源。這些玉米一定是要儲存在某個地方的。而巨屋的規模非常適合作為儲存地。
A third theory proposes that houses were used as ceremonial centers. Close to one house, called Pueblo Alto, archaeologists identified an enormous mound formed by a pile of old material. Excavations of the mound revealed deposits containing a surprisingly large number of broken pots. This finding has been interpreted as evidence that people gathered at Pueblo Alto for special ceremonies. At the ceremonies, they ate festive meals and then discarded the pots in which the meals had been prepared or served. Such ceremonies have been documented for other Native American cultures.
第三個理論認為這些房屋是用來作祭司中心的。離一個巨屋不遠的地方有個阿爾託村莊，考古學家在那裡發現了一個由古代材料堆積成的山包。對這個山包挖掘後發現了大量破碎罐子。這個發現佐證了人們聚集到巨屋是為了某種祭祀。在祭祀中他們使用節日佳餚，然後把做飯和盛食物的器皿拋棄。而這樣的祭祀活動在其他美洲土著文化中有所記載。
託福TPO5綜合寫作聽力材料Unfortunately none of the arguments about what the Chaco great houses were used for is convincing.
很遺憾，關於查科峽谷巨屋用途的三個理論，都不具有說服力。
First, sure, from the outside, the great houses look like later and Native American apartment buildings. But the inside of the great houses casts serious doubt on the idea that many people lived there. I’ll explain. If hundreds of people were living in the great houses, then there would have to be many fireplaces, where each family did its daily cooking, but there are very few fireplaces. In one of the largest great houses, there were fireplaces for only around ten families. Yet there were enough rooms in the great house for more than a hundred families, so the primary function of the houses couldn’t have been residential.
首先，當然從外部卡萊，這些巨屋同之後出現的美洲土著居住建築很相似。但是巨屋的內部構造卻反駁著居住說觀點。我來解釋一下。如果真有數百人居住與此，那麼一定有很多灶火坑以便每家都可以用來做飯。但事實上巨屋裡只有很少很少的灶火坑。在其中最大的一個巨屋裡，存在的灶火坑只夠十家人使用。然而，存在的空間卻可以供一百家人居住。所以，巨屋的主要功能不可能是居住。
Second, the idea that the great houses were used to store grain maize is unsupported by evidence. It may sound plausible that large empty rooms were used for storage, but excavations of the great houses have not uncovered many traces of maize or maize containers. If the great houses were used for storage, why isn’t there more spilled maize on the floor? Why aren’t there more remains of big containers?
第二，證據也不支援巨屋用來儲存玉米的說法。巨大的空屋子用來儲存物品，這樣的說法聽起來挺合理的。但是對巨屋挖掘後卻沒有發現太多的玉米以及容器的痕跡。如果巨屋真的是用來儲存的，為什麼沒有在地上發現更多的散落的玉米呢?為什麼沒有更多大號容器的痕跡呢?
Third, the idea that the great houses were ceremonial centers isn’t well supported either. You know that mound at Pueblo Alto? It contains lots of other materials besides broken pots, stuff you wouldn’t expect from ceremonies. For example, there are large quantities of building materials, sands, stones, even construction tools. This suggests that the mound is just a trash heap of construction material, stuff that was thrown away or not used up when a house was being built. The pots in the pile could be regular trash too, leftover from the meals of the construction workers. So the Pueblo Alto mound is not good evidence that the great houses were used for special ceremonies.
第三，祭祀中心的說法同樣也站不住腳。大家知道阿爾託村莊嗎?在那裡，除了破碎罐子之外還有很多發現，這這些東西是不會出現在祭祀中的。比如，有很多建築材料、沙子、石頭還有建築工具。這說明這個山包知識一個建築材料垃圾堆，都是一些用後拋棄或者在建築過程中沒有用完的材料。這些罐子也是屬於垃圾，是建築工人吃飯的容器。所以，阿爾託村莊的這個山包不能作為證據支援祭祀說。
