2月17日未换库放狗--攒人品

celinezhao11

710好尴尬，好伤心，下个月继续战
跪在语法了……
语意中的很多。

狗：
RC
1、peacemeal ads那篇，JJ里的英文基本为原文！！！好好看
问题：1、主旨；2、原文最后一段中scientist说做了实验，培训了人，人还是很难区分出deception，问这个scientist的实验说明了什么；3、问ad具有欺骗性的3个原因

2、管理层变化，以前direct,现在cross-function那篇，长，4段。分别问了每段的重点，JJ全。
3、APOLO号从月亮带sample回来：难
     大意：第一段，阿波罗号登月了，带了土壤的sample回来，专家们都认为月亮收到的disturbance很少. 但对sample的研究发现，土壤里有很多XXX成分……blablabla，表明月亮其实受到了很多方面的干扰
              第二段，这个从土壤sample很珍贵，专家对他研究兴趣很大。于是专家就准备进行模拟。解释这些乱七八糟的成分
              第三段，模拟需要的材料之类
第二段第一句有考这个sample对专家的态度。大家仔细看题，我不确定我理解是否对了。

CR：
1、T城市和V城市各方面size\population都差不多，但T城市health care比V城市好。现在某种病，T城市的死亡率却比V城市高，问为什么
2、草原上moose动物死很多，查出体内有M这种物质。而农民用lime处理植物之类，lime和酸雨结合在土里就行程了M，所以moose是吃了这片草的植物。问assumption。答案参考：土壤里的M是否会渗透到很远的地方去
3、人给星星喝soup用spoon，所以猩猩就知道有勺子就有汤。因此专家座实验，给他水果和勺子让他选，猩猩选的勺子。得出结论是他们忽略直接刺激而选择对他们诱惑更大的间接刺激（背后的汤）。问assumption.

作文是：
城市公交一直亏本，所以GF要减少公交线。而这样下去人们利益受损，公交线会越减越少，最后整个公交系统就会关闭。人们受的损失就更大了，因此人们will show interest to the increased bus fares. 就说应该加收费用，维护公交利益。

Crystal_Chai

我是2月16日考的，发现你说的题目全部都没有遇到。。。

HKUST.Warwick

peacemeal ads那篇

In a piecemeal ad, the sponsor brand is compared to one competitor on a particular
dimension, a second competitor on a different dimension, a third competitor on yet another
dimension, and so on. The danger to consumers lies in the tendency to believe that the
sponsor is superior in an overall sense, as would be true if the sponsor were being
compared to competitors that truly excel on each dimension. In fact, the sponsor mayscore next-to-last on each dimension, surpassing only the lone identi®ed competitor. Thus,
an erroneous conclusion may be drawn from literally true assertions.
When a ®rm's messages are deliberately structured to foster misinterpretation, the
potential for deception arises (see Harris and Monaco 1978). Consumers may fall prey to
such deception for at least three reasons. First, there are strong conventions that govern
communication. For example, the most obvious meaning of a message should be the
correct one and, more generally, messages should be informative, relevant, and truthful
(Grice 1975). Unless led to believe otherwise, consumers may assume that these
conventions are being followed in commercial messages. Second, irrespective of conversa-
tional norms, a fundamental bias of the cognitive system is to assume that comprehended
information is veridical (Gilbert 1991). Disbelief, in contrast, requires a subsequent and
deliberate effort. When considered in the context of pragmatic implication, this bias
suggests two additional barriers to accurate interpretation: (i) Attempts to disbelieve must
be made quickly because verbatim memory for a linguistic expression may be ¯eeting (see
Alba and Hasher 1983). (ii) Disbelief will be especially unlikely when processing is
constrained. Thus, consumers may explicitly assess the believability of a message only
when prompted by skepticism-inducing cues in the message or environment. Finally,
proper interpretation of an utterance can be exceedingly dif®cultÐeven when the normal
conventions are abandoned and one deliberately attempts to assess the veracity of a
statement. Research performed across a variety of domains, including advertising, has
demonstrated the relative ineffectiveness of forewarning and training on consumers' ability
to discriminate between literal assertions and the pragmatic implications of those
assertions (Harris 1977; Harris, Teske, and Ginns 1975). Taken together, these character-
istics of linguistic processing suggest that consumers may be very vulnerable to the effects
of misleading piecemeal messages

united-states

请问楼主，你的jj是在哪个具体的地址找到的，多谢！！！