prep1-27
27. (31231-!-item-!-188;#058&004411)
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. However, since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.
In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction.
(D) The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
我觉得C有一个问题，however后面才应该是文章的真正观点，所以其实文章是认为转基因作物是可以普及的，那前面的 “Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer“就不应该叫做是文章的预测（argument predicts will have a certain outcome）了呀，否则文章不就是前后矛盾的么; 而且，因为C说the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction，而C的前半句说这个预测是文章做出的，所以C的意思是第二句是反对文章的，这不符合HOWEVER的作用啊？？求教，谢谢！ | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2010-3-14 19:08:50
收藏
收藏
楼主