ChaseDream

标题: LSAT-11-1-24 [打印本页]

作者: merlion 时间: 2003-9-1 09:38
标题: LSAT-11-1-24
24. The body of anyone infected by virus X will, after a week, produce antibodies to fight the virus: the antibodies will increase in number for the next year or so. There is now a test that reliably indicates now many antibodies are present in a person’s body. If positive, this test can be used during the first year of infection to estimate to within a month how long that person has had the virus.

Which one of the following conclusions is best supported by the statements above?

(A) Antibodies increase in number only until they have defeated the virus.

(B) Without the test for antibodies, there is no way of establishing whether a person has virus X.

(C) Antibodies are produced only for viral infections that cannot be fought by any other body defenses.

(D) If a person remains infected by virus X indefinitely, there is no limit to the number of antibodies that can be present in the person’s body.

(E) Anyone infected by virus X will not a time fail to exhibit infection if tested by the antibody test

the answer is E. why? i think none of them is right, E is better than the rest. 我认为E错，因为原题说“after a week, produce antibodies ”。如果某人被感染不超过一星期，文中提的方法不能成功检测到抗体，E不成立。是不是我想偏了，还是理解错了？
还有，BEST SUPPORTED 和INFER的题，该用什么解题思路？我只知道服从原文内容和原文的逻辑推理。在读题方面有什么该注意的呢？谢谢了。

作者: merlion 时间: 2003-9-2 15:13
没人理？

帮忙看看吧，谢谢

作者: 心静 时间: 2003-9-2 15:45
MM考虑得很细致，我刚也想了很久。我是这么认为的：因为antibodies 是在一星期后产生，也就是说这种virus. 必须在一周内不好，才会产生antibodies；如果一周后不产生antibodies，就说明这种病在一周内已经好了，就没有检查的必要了。而因为这种检测，检测的是antibodies的数量，也就是说这种病一直都没有好，所以才会不断产生antibodies。

而E，是结论的一个必要条件，如果“a time fail to exhibit infection ”，那么antibodies 就有可能不产生或产生数量偏差，那么这个检测结果就可能错，也就不能“ reliably ”

作者: prince 时间: 2003-9-2 15:52
我觉得你想偏了。这种推论题中都是假定作者提供的信息是可靠的，是正确的。只有这样才能进行推理。
如果问weaken，也是找作者提供的信息以外的信息来减弱作者的结论。

作者: merlion 时间: 2003-9-3 11:01
谢谢MMGG的解答。

reliably indicates now many antibodies ... E取非不反对此句(如果取非为 sometimes fail to...)。if someone got infected by virus x within a week, and produce no antibodies, we can still say that the test reliably indicates now many antibodies... (since there is no antibody, and the test can tell there is no antibody). if remove "after a week", there should be no such doubt. 如果E取非为all fail, 那E是答案。

anyway, i have to admit E is better than the rest answers.

thanks

作者: G-CRACKER 时间: 2004-10-24 13:50

(E) Anyone infected by virus X will not a time fail to exhibit infection if tested by the antibody test

这里的NOT A TIME 怎么翻译才对呢？是不只一次吗？藕实在看不懂。

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-10-25 00:24

以下是引用G-CRACKER在2004-10-24 13:50:00的发言：

(E) Anyone infected by virus X will not a time fail to exhibit infection if tested by the antibody test

这里的NOT A TIME 怎么翻译才对呢？是不只一次吗？藕实在看不懂。

致命的错误：NOT A TIME应该是FOR A TIME。整句话意思为：如果用抗体实验检查，任何感染X病毒的人有一段时间不能显示被感染。

作者: zenger 时间: 2005-8-16 12:15
for a time更象是一次啊！

作者: 懒猫必胜 时间: 2005-8-20 01:50

我的思路跟楼主一模一样，也是觉得E不完全对，但是比其它的选项要好。

另外我觉得E选项应该这样理解：

Anyone infected by virus X will not fail to exhibit infection for a time if tested by the antibody test.

任何被X病毒感染过的人如果进行抗体测试都会显示出被感染。a time在这里应该理解成 “for a time”。

我也觉得E错误的可能在于如果该患者是在被感染后一周内做测试，那他身体里边应该还没有抗体。但也许题目的意思是去做这种测试的人都是已知被感染的，只是不知道确切时间。在这种情况下E是完全正确的。如果已知被感染却没有抗体，就可以证明病人感染还不到一周。

作者: songgigi 时间: 2008-4-12 16:35

疯狂感谢

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)