这题大家选什么呢?我选C,但是我觉得A,B也是assumption---排除他因。
请大家讨论,别浪费宝贵的真题,万分感谢!!!
28-9: Early in the twentieth century, Lake Konfa became very polluted. Recently fish populations have recovered as release of industrial pollutants has declined and the lake’s waters have become cleaner. Fears are now being voiced that the planned construction of an oil pipeline across the lake’s bottom might revive pollution and cause the fish population to decline again. However, a technology for preventing leaks is being installed. Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless.
The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
A: Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.
B: Other than the possibility of a leak, there is no realistic pollution threat posed to the lake by the pipeline’s construction
C: There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.
D: Damage to the lake’s fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.
E: The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.
答案应该是B
C是不对的。C否定的是结论中的条件。
不好意思,我不赞同2楼观点。请看最重要的一句话:Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless.
红线部分的provided不是很清楚地说明了technology 的有效性是前提麽?
我感觉用not+weaken的话,C是最明显的。anyway, 我感觉AB也有一定道理,就是排除他因。请继续讨论!!谢!
同意B.建议mm再看看原文的推理过程.没有leaking=>没有pollution(忽略其他可能)
C太空了.groundless
A的"there will be no new industrial development "没有针对性,原文只是说Pipeline.
同意B
原文中的provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless,中的红线部分已经作为作者推出结论的假设条件,作者的意思是如果C了,就一定不会污染小河。可是如果C了,还有B的话,结论一样是不成立的,所以我选B
"provided this technology is effective" is a premise the arguer provides.
C tries to challenge the premise. This is not the logical weakening in GMAT.
原文的推理是防止泄露的技术被安装,因此关于泄露会污染的担心是没道理的。B排除了它因(安装会导致污染)。C挑战了前提 ,不是假设。
我选B,C是说believe,谁相信这东西有没有用对客观事实没作用。大家相信这技术有用,但是客观上这技术不实用完全有可能。
所以C就是一个干扰选项。
B 对!
provided this technology is effective!这个是文中结论的前提!作者承认在这样的前题下才能推得结论!所以,对这个前提的反驳是无效的削弱!(因为作者也知道没有这个前提,他的结论是不成立的!)
"provided this technology is effective" is a premise the arguer provides.
C tries to challenge the premise. This is not the logical weakening in GMAT.
前提不能被challenge
有意思的一道题
该题结论为充分必要型结论,答案取非后削弱该结论的必要条件。B取非正好削弱该结论的必要条件,故为假设无疑。
A错在结论的FEAR是针对油管道导致的污染,和其它工业导致的FEAR无关。C错在它取非后否定的是结论中的充分条件,不是必要条件,所以不能成为假设。
支持B, 排除了涉及PIPELINE的其他污染可能.原文的PREMISE已经说明了technology is effective,所以这里补的是条件,排除他因.
如果从整体看的话,即条件+Pemise=结论,这里要support结论,必须补的ASSUMPTION其实是条件.只说C,其实是个必要非充分条件,只有条件(排他)+Premise才能组成充分必要条件.
但是OG186 96 43 61 12都可以削弱前提啊
C的感觉就是:因为他是这样,所以他是这样。
now got it, was really confused about A and B
为什么选C???
B选项排出对假设的干扰,提出only leak(可能表达不准确。。。。)will lead to 结论
对结论的做出有帮助
而C选项只是对假设的重复叙述,
个人认为
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |