The paradox of patrimony laws, as discussed in the passage, lies in the contrast between their intended purpose and their actual outcome. These laws were enacted to safeguard a nation's cultural heritage by preventing artifacts from being removed and held abroad. However, the passage highlights that such protective measures have led to an unintended decline in archaeological exploration, especially by foreign institutions.
Since these laws make it difficult for external organizations to retain or display discovered artifacts, they discourage investment and participation in excavations. As a result, fewer new sites are unearthed, undermining the very goal of preserving and understanding cultural history.
Best expression of the paradox: They were aimed at protecting cultural property, but instead reduced new archaeological discoveries.
The passage indicates that archaeological sites hold value for source countries not only for their cultural and historical significance but also due to their economic and societal benefits. Specifically, the text states that countries should consider modifying strict cultural property laws so they can “reap the benefits of new archaeological discoveries, which typically increase tourism and enhance cultural pride.”
This clearly shows that archaeological sites are viewed as a means to attract tourism and boost national pride. Therefore, it can be inferred that some source countries see these sites as important because they give a boost to the tourism sector.
Correct inference: Archaeological sites are considered important by some source countries because they give a boost to the tourism sector.
Option A: The author acknowledges that strict cultural property laws may deter foreign funding of archaeological expeditions. Hence, it is logical that the author would support efforts to persuade international organizations to continue funding such research in source countries.
Option B: The passage presents China as a successful example of transitioning from strict regulation to international collaboration, which resulted in more archaeological discoveries. Thus, this is a valid and supported suggestion.
Option C: The text supports global cooperation in archaeology and implies that allowing foreign examination and exhibition of artifacts can be beneficial. This aligns with the author's concerns about the restrictive nature of cultural property rules.
Option D: Although the passage promotes international collaboration, it does not support the idea that outsourcing research to foreign nations (i.e., conducting research entirely outside the source country) is beneficial. Rather, the author argues for collaborative work within the nation of origin. Thus, Option D is not consistent with the author's likely recommendations.
Therefore, the correct answer is: Option D — it is not a suggestion the author would likely support.
The passage argues that strict rules protecting cultural property—while well-intentioned and widely supported—could reduce the willingness of international organizations to fund archaeological research abroad. This, in turn, might negatively affect discoveries, tourism, and national pride in the source countries.
Option D challenges this reasoning by suggesting that external financial support continues despite the rules, thereby weakening the link between regulation and decreased funding. If true, this implies that the lack of archaeological discoveries might be due to other unrelated factors not considered by the author.
Therefore, the correct answer is: Option D — it introduces an alternative explanation that counters the passage’s main point.
Read the sentence and infer the writer's tone: "The politician's speech was filled with lofty promises and little substance, a performance repeated every election season."