OG-11题

耳朵 · 发表于 2004-1-31 11:59:00

11、The fewer restrictions there are on the advertising of legal services, the more lawyers there are who advertise their services, and the lawyers who advertise a specific service usually charge less for that service than lawyers who do not advertise. Therefore, if the state removes any of its current restrictions, such as the one against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements, overall consumer legal costs will be lower than if the state retains its current restrictions.
If the statements in the passage are true, which of the following must be true?
A.    Some lawyers who now advertise will charge more for specific services if they do not have to specify fee arrangements in the advertisements.
B.    More consumers will use legal services if there are fewer restrictions on the advertising of legal service.
C.    If the restriction against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements is removed, more lawyers will advertise their services.
D.    If more lawyers advertise lower prices for specific services, some lawyers who do not advertise will also charge less than they currently charge for those services.
E.    If the only restrictions on the advertising of legal services were those that apply to every type of advertising, most lawyers would advertise their services.

答案为什么是C不是D？
因为题目说，如果对做广告的限制少了，那么做广告的律师就多了；而做具体业务情况广告的律师收费通常比不做广告的律师要低。因此，如果政府取消现有的对做广告的限制，比如不能做没有标明具体业务收费的广告的限制，那么消费者的花费将会降低。
C说的是如果限制取消，更多的律师将会做广告。但是如果必须标明收费的限制取消了，律师虽然做广告但是收费并不比别的低，消费者怎么会降低开销呢？
而D说的是如果限制取消了，越来越多的律师去做广告了，那么某些不做广告的律师自然得降低收费了。这样消费者的花费不是显而易见地就少了吗？

番茄炒蛋 · 发表于 2004-1-31 13:26:00

这题应该是C的
关键点在于原文指出了现在的广告是有一个约束的
such as the one against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements,
那么当完全放开之后，这些律师还愿不愿意继续做广告呢
这就是原文需要假设的地方，因为做广告的一个前提条件发生了变化

而d有一个很明显的错误
其实只要有那部分做广告的律师收费降低，作为律师群体来说，总的收费就已经是降低了，没有必要再过分加强，这个假设也就是多余的了

cocoabean · 发表于 2004-4-21 06:37:00

D does not follow the stated information since it is still possible that none of the lawyers who do not advertise would decide to lower their prices. 没有lawyer决定降价仍然是可能的.

耳朵做了"显而易见"的递推.

homosexual · 发表于 2004-7-2 00:14:00

If the statements in the passage are true我觉得这才是第十一题的关键，所以相关的statements就是the fewer,the more

homosexual · 发表于 2004-7-2 00:17:00

错就错在，passage中的内在逻辑关系比较多，不知道对应什么好

lost_my_account · 发表于 2004-7-2 00:30:00

C说的是如果限制取消，更多的律师将会做广告。但是如果必须标明收费的限制取消了，律师虽然做广告但是收费并不比别的低，消费者怎么会降低开销呢？
而D说的是如果限制取消了，越来越多的律师去做广告了，那么某些不做广告的律师自然得降低收费了。这样消费者的花费不是显而易见地就少了吗？

C是一个REASONLING LINE中的一段。

D。我觉得楼主想当然了，自己往后推了一步。这属于这项政策对整个行业价格的影响。

neohumility · 发表于 2004-9-30 22:47:00

1.限制少=》广告多

2.广告多的律师=》收费少

3.取消限制=》所有收费减少

4.广告多=》收费少

答案必须与广告=》收费有关

best555tw · 发表于 2005-1-8 21:46:00

fewer restriction=》more advertise advertise=》charge less 所以 fewer restrction=>charge less 且 the restriction such as the one against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements 所以答案 C If the restriction against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements is removed, more lawyers will advertise their services.

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-1-8 21:50:45编辑过]

zenithy · 发表于 2005-3-22 00:29:00

参考如下“白痴”思维：

限制少则广告多

某特定限制（表明收费）取消，当然也广告多

徵徵 · 发表于 2005-4-1 15:00:00

D错，难道是跑出了原文的范围？还是不明白D为什么错

本贴相关题目 OG-2015-CR-54OG-2015-CR-54
OG-13-CR-54
OG-12-CR-56
... (BLMC)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

OG-11题

OG-11题

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

本贴相关题目 OG-2015-CR-54OG-2015-CR-54OG-13-CR-54OG-12-CR-56 ... (BLMC)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

OG-11题

OG-11题

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

本贴相关题目 OG-2015-CR-54OG-2015-CR-54
OG-13-CR-54
OG-12-CR-56
... (BLMC)