ChaseDream

标题: [讨论] og 76 谢谢！：） [打印本页]
作者: juliet01192000    时间: 2006-4-3 21:31
标题: [讨论] og 76 谢谢！：）
76. A famous singer recently won a lawsuit against an advertising firm for using another singer in a commercial to evoke the famous singer’s well-known rendition of a certain song. As a result of the lawsuit, advertising firms will stop using imitators in commercials. Therefore, advertising costs will rise, since famous singers’ services cost more than those of their imitators.



The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?


(A) Most people are unable to distinguish a famous singer’s rendition of a song from a good imitator’s rendition of the same song.


(B) Commercials using famous singers are usually more effective than commercials using imitators of famous singers.


(C) The original versions of some well-known songs are unavailable for use in commercials.


(D) Advertising firms will continue to use imitators to mimic the physical mannerisms of famous singers. E


(E) The advertising industry will use well-known renditions of songs in commercials.



76.


If choice E were not assumed, the costs of the services of the famous singers of well-known renditions of songs would not be said to affect advertising costs. Since advertising costs are, however, projected to rise because of the relatively high cost of famous singers’ services, choice E is assumed and is the best answer.



Choice A is irrelevant to the argument, since famous singers’ service cost more than imitators’ anyway. The argument addresses commercials’ cost, not their effectiveness, so choice B is not assumed. The argument assumes that some well-known renditions of songs are available, but does not require that any versions be unavailable (choice C). Since the argument states that advertising firms will stop using imitators, choice D is not assumed.


在选项


76. A famous singer recently won a lawsuit against an advertising firm for using another singer in a commercial to evoke the famous singer’s well-known rendition of a certain song. As a result of the lawsuit, advertising firms will stop using imitators in commercials. Therefore, advertising costs will rise, since famous singers’ services cost more than those of their imitators.



The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?


(A) Most people are unable to distinguish a famous singer’s rendition of a song from a good imitator’s rendition of the same song.


(B) Commercials using famous singers are usually more effective than commercials using imitators of famous singers.


(C) The original versions of some well-known songs are unavailable for use in commercials.


(D) Advertising firms will continue to use imitators to mimic the physical mannerisms of famous singers. E


(E) The advertising industry will use well-known renditions of songs in commercials.



76.


If choice E were not assumed, the costs of the services of the famous singers of well-known renditions of songs would not be said to affect advertising costs. Since advertising costs are, however, projected to rise because of the relatively high cost of famous singers’ services, choice E is assumed and is the best answer.



Choice A is irrelevant to the argument, since famous singers’ service cost more than imitators’ anyway. The argument addresses commercials’ cost, not their effectiveness, so choice B is not assumed. The argument assumes that some well-known renditions of songs are available, but does not require that any versions be unavailable (choice C). Since the argument states that advertising firms will stop using imitators, choice D is not assumed.


在选项B与E之间由于。最终还是选错。。。


我觉得B和E都有道理。


原文结论：advertising costs will rise, since famous singers’ services cost more than those of their imitators.



广告费将变高，因为名歌手价格高。


感觉原文有ｇａｐ，即中间并没有说是否要用名歌手。


如果在原文中补充Ｅ．推理链就完整了。


即：公司要用名歌手－－－〉名歌手要钱多－－－〉广告费高。（有点像ｓｕｐｐｏｒｔ题）


但是如果选Ｂ的话也能建立上面的推理链。只不过多一步。


即：用名歌手的广告更有效，公司要用名歌手－－－〉名歌手要钱多－－－〉广告费高。


ｏｇ说Ｂ为无关选项。。。疑惑。。。


盼解答，谢谢ｘｄｊｍ了，先！：）



作者: katie83    时间: 2006-4-4 22:29

我也不知道这道题属于Lawyer中的哪种类型,但是B用逆否的方法推不出来,即:not efficient推不出cost不会提高

作者: 顾风    时间: 2006-4-5 14:32

B确实是无关选项。


通过based　on可以看出。原文并没有说到任何　famous singer影响力比翻唱的高。

作者: 天天灿烂    时间: 2006-4-6 21:55

there is no comment about the relation between famous singers and the imitators.


so, you cannot get the conclusion about which one is more effective, because no one knows which one sings better.


just like gufeng said, it's very common that an imitator sings as well as, or even better than a so-called famous one.

作者: 司香尉    时间: 2006-4-7 00:01

MM你又多想了一步，B是说用名歌手的广告影响力会比较大，但是文章并没有提及公司因为名歌手影响力大而要用名歌手做广告啊。OG解释也说了文章涉及的内容是广告的成本，和影响力无关。


看了你的理解：


但是如果选Ｂ的话也能建立上面的推理链。只不过多一步。


>即：用名歌手的广告更有效，公司要用名歌手－－－〉名歌手要钱多－－－〉广告费高>


>你的问题出在：用名歌手的广告更有效，公司要用名歌手这一步推理是你自己推出来的，而不是用文章内容推出来的。>


>>


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-4-7 10:27:35编辑过]
作者: liyixixr    时间: 2006-4-7 03:47

顶5楼的！

作者: allen0018    时间: 2006-5-23 15:50

谢谢

作者: wanjing119    时间: 2006-12-3 18:33

up

作者: wanjing119    时间: 2006-12-3 18:39

其实我觉得原文有个假设就是名歌手和模仿歌手的效果是一样的,所以公司才不会特别请名歌手

作者: christy42728    时间: 2007-10-7 11:39
还是不明白为什么E不成立则结论无法被推出，请高人指点，谢谢！
作者: ada3063    时间: 2008-8-11 11:50

我想不通的是e里的The advertising industry

题干说的是一家广告公司， 怎么能用整个行业做假设呢

作者: iamwuyan    时间: 2008-8-12 12:56
题干: 知名歌手赢了有人冒名模仿其名作的官司, 导致广告公司不能在商业广告中用模仿者了===>广告费会增加, 因为用知名歌手费用高
题目问ASSUMPTION
用取反的方法, 当E不成立的时候(即商业广告无需用名作), 则广告公司就不必要用知名歌手, 之前也无需找模仿者模仿名作了,




欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3