看了115的所有讨论，还是有点不明白，外加所有相关链接都是及个题一起讨论很乱，我想为方便以后的xdjm查看还是为115单起一帖吧！：）
115. Many people argue that tobacco advertising plays a crucial role in causing teen-agers to start or continue smoking. In Norway, however, where there has been a ban on tobacco advertising since 1975, smoking is at least as prevalent among teen-agers as it is in countries that do not ban such advertising.
Which of the following statements draws the most reliable conclusion from the information above?
(A) Tobacco advertising cannot be the only factor that affects the prevalence of smoking among teen-agers.
(B) Advertising does not play a role in causing teen-agers to start or continue smoking.
(C) Banning tobacco advertising does not reduce the consumption of tobacco.
(D) More teen-agers smoke if they are not exposed to tobacco advertising than if they are.
(E) Most teen-agers who smoked in 1975 did not stop when the ban on tobacco advertising was implemented.
ans:A
我明白为什么选A.但是我觉得E也可以接受。
我对E的理解是: 既然说没广告国家少年吸烟的情况和有广告国家少年吸烟的情况一样。那么自然可以想到禁止广告对少年没什么作用，所以可以得出E措提到的情况。
不知道是不是理解有误？
(B) Advertising does not play a role in causing teen-agers to start or continue smoking.
我觉得该项是说：广告对于使少年开始或继续吸烟没起作用。这和题干第一句话（事实）不符，所以错。不知道理解是否对？
盼解答，谢谢！：）
(B) Advertising does not play a role in causing teen-agers to start or continue smoking.
我觉得该项是说：广告对于使少年开始或继续吸烟没起作用。这和题干第一句话（事实）不符，所以错。不知道理解是否对？
盼解答，谢谢！：）
我对B的看法跟你同
因为题目是广告-->青少年吸烟增加
而B选项是 广告-->对青少年吸烟无影响 所以不对
且此无法从题目中推论而得
我对E的理解是: 既然说没广告国家少年吸烟的情况和有广告国家少年吸烟的情况一样。那么自然可以想到禁止广告对少年没什么作用，所以可以得出E措提到的情况。
不知道是不是理解有误？
E 我个人看法为假使不考虑前面人所讨论过的因素(即题目为国家之间相比 但E为自己跟自己以前比)
这个选项应仍是有误
因为我觉得他最多仅是题目的同意叙述(处罚广告播放-->吸烟仍多)
但并不是conclusion from 115's informaiton
不知道这样的理解是否正确?
(我是at新手 请多指教阿><)
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |