[求助]大全-20-5

5.      In several cities, the government is going ahead with ambitious construction projects despite the high office vacancy rates in those cities. The vacant offices, though available for leasing, unfortunately do not meet the requirements for the facilities needed, such as court houses and laboratories. The government, therefore, is not guilty of any fiscal wastefulness.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) Adaptation of vacant office space to meet the government’s requirements, if possible, would not make leasing such office space a more cost-effective alternative to new construction.

(B) The government prefers leasing facilities to owning them in cases where the two alternatives are equally cost-effective.

(C) If facilities available for leasing come very close to meeting the government’s requirements for facilities the government needs, the government can relax its own requirements slightly and consider those facilities in compliance.

(D) The government’s construction projects would not on being completed, add to the stock of facilities available for leasing in the cities concerned.（A）

(E) Before embarking on any major construction project, the government is required by law to establish beyond any reasonable doubt that there are no alternatives that are most cost-effective.

答案是a这题我看不太懂意思,我只知道b可以排除,有人可以帮我解释一下吗

how to exclude E? it also sounds reasonable, even stronger.

because "is required" not equal to "has done"?

我再看一遍,我是觉得assumption 要建立在construction project 和adaptation of vacant 上的金钱方面(because author said that the government ,therefore, is not guilty of any fiscal wastefulness)所以a选项有在这上面,而e选项没有建立construction project 和adaptation of vacant 上的关系,而且我觉得the government is required by law to establish…文章中没提到,所以不可以选

不知道这样说对不对耶

这种问题取非很有效

A不成立的话, 结论不成立,反之答案是A

另外ASSUMPTION题目可以抓住前提和结论的各个论据要素, 然后看选项中涉及这个要素的论述, 这样可以提高正确率

选项E有点意思，E似乎逻辑性比较差，好像government既然这样做了那就一定是beyond any reasonable doubt  no alternative！这样就和原文的任何推导都没有关系了，还请大家指点一下！

up  今天又看了一次還是看不懂意思

(E) is not correct. If we 取非 (E). it becomes that "by law, the government is not required to establish that there are no alternative that are most cost-effective". 取非 argument main idea, it is "government is guilty of wastefullness"

取非 (E), we can conclude that "by law, the government can do actions that there costs more money", in another word "government might waster money and but it is legal". This does not match "government is guilty of wastefullness". So 取非 (E) -> 取非 argument main idea, then (E) is not valid assumption.