上QQ阅读APP看书，第一时间看更新

Day 21

英文重现

——GMAT OG 2015, Reading Comprehension, Passage 14

解析

1.第一个句子中，“flowing through…Belknap Indian Reservation”是现在分词作后

置定语，修饰前面的“waters”，现在分词作后置定语多表示主动含义。

2.第一个句子中，“held”的宾语是后面“that”引导的从句“that the right to...the reservation”，其主干是“the right to use waters was reserved to American Indians”。“by +逻辑主语”在被动语态中作状语，此处“treaty”即为“reserve”的逻辑主语，“establishing the reservation”是现在分词作后置定语，修饰“treaty”。

3.第二个句子的主干是“the Court ruled that the federal government intended to deal fairly with American Indians”；“Although”引导的是一个让步状语从句，“when it created the reservation”是时间状语从句，“by reserving for them the waters without which their lands would have been useless”作方式状语，其中的“without which their lands would have been useless”是带介词的定语从句，修饰前面的“waters”（当介词与引导定语从句的关系代词之间存在介宾关系时，可以将介词置于关系代词前）。

词义辨析

参考翻译

在Winters v. United States（1908）案件中，高等法院认为：根据建立保留区的条约，流经或毗邻贝尔纳普堡印第安人保留区的水域的使用权是被保留给美洲印第安人的。尽管这一条约没有提到用水权，但是法院判定，联邦政府在创建保留区的时候，目的是通过为美洲印第安人保留水域公平地对待他们；没有这些水域，他们的（印第安人的）土地将会一无是处。

实战演练

In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held that the right to use waters flowing through or adjacent to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation was reserved to American Indians by the treaty establishing the reservation. Although this treaty did not mention water rights, the Court ruled that the federal government, when it created the reservation, intended to deal fairly with American Indians by reserving for them the waters without which their lands would have been useless. Later decisions, citing Winters， established that courts can find federal rights to reserve water for particular purposes if (1) the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction, (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands—i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws—and set aside or reserved, and (3) the circumstances reveal the government intended to reserve water as well as land when establishing the reservation.

…This fact, however, has not barred application of the Winters doctrine. What constitutes an American Indian reservation is a question of practice, not of legal definition, and the pueblos have always been treated as reservations by the United States. This pragmatic approach is buttressed by Arizona v. California (1963), wherein the Supreme Court indicated that the manner in which any type of federal reservation is created does not affect the application to it of the Winters doctrine. Therefore, the reserved water rights of Pueblo Indians have priority over other citizens’ water rights as of 1848, the year in which pueblos must be considered to have become reservations.

According to the passage, which of the following was true of the treaty establishing the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation?

(A) It was challenged in the Supreme Court a number of times.

(B) It was rescinded by the federal government, an action that gave rise to the Winters case.

(D) It failed to mention water rights to be enjoyed by the reservation's inhabitants.

(E) It was modified by the Supreme Court in Arizona v. California.

答案：D

答案解析

题目问的是关于建立贝尔纳普堡印第安人保留区的条约，以下哪项是正确的。

选项A“它多次受到高等法院的怀疑”，文中虽然提到高等法院依据条约做出判决（by the treaty establishing the reservation），可是并未提到高等法院质疑过该条约，因此错误。

选项B“它被联邦政府撤回/废止了”在文中也未提及。

选项C“它引用了美洲印第安人对土地上的资源传统的使用”在条约中并未提及，不符合题干，虽然下一段提到了“美洲印第安人对水域传统的使用”（Some American Indian tribes have also established water rights through the courts based on their traditional diversion and use of certain waters prior to the United States’ acquisition of sovereignty）。

选项D“它未提及保留区的居民对水域的使用权”正确，与文中“Although this treaty did not mention water rights”对应，虽然这是让步，可是依然是一个事实。

选项E“在Arizona v. California案件中，条约被高等法院修改了”错误，下一段虽然也提及了Arizona v. California（This pragmatic approach is buttressed by Arizona v. California），但是并不是因为条约，且也未提及对条约进行了修改，也不符合题干。