Q22.
Springfield Fire Commissioner: the vast majority of false fire alarms
are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes on street
corners. Since virtually everyone has access to a private telephone,
these alarm boxes have outlived their usefulness. Therefore, we
propose to remove the boxes. Removing the boxes will reduce the
number of prank calls without hampering people’s ability to report a fire.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the
proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?
A. The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private tele-
phones and records where they came from.
B. Maintaining the fire alarm boxes costs
five million dollars annually.
C. A telephone call can provide the fire department with more informa-
tion about the nature and size of a fire than can an alarm placed
from an alarm box.
D. Responding to false alarms significantly reduces the fire depart-
ment’s capacity for responding to fires.
E. On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones
in
Answer:c
mine:d
我一直在c,d间犹豫,哪位给讲一下为什么选c不选d?
number of prank calls without hampering people’s ability to report a fire. that's the point
that's the point
偶也是选的C,但是是因为那个prank calls 不认识
如果认识的话偶想偶会选择A
我觉得选A.
The question is "Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?" The announced effect is "Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people’s ability to report a fire." C固然是说了 telephone call 的好处，但并没有直接support这个announcement. A 里说"The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from. " 那么报火警的人就不敢随便打prank calls (prank是恶作剧的意思）。 文章里说的"prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes." 也就被reduced 了。 所以A support the announced effect. 再打个比方吧。 如果经常有人用公用电话打110搞恶作剧。那么禁止用公用电话打110的话会不会减少恶作剧的次数，并且不妨碍正常报警呢？因为大家都有private telephone，所以不会妨碍正常报警（这个在题目里有说明）。 再加上报警电话是可以被跟踪的（选项A里说的），那么肯定很少人敢用自己的电话搞恶作剧。至于用自己电话的其他好处（选项C里说的），没有直接Support "禁止用公用电话打110的话会不会减少恶作剧的次数，并且不妨碍正常报警" 的说法。
The announced effect is "Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people’s ability to report a fire." C固然是说了 telephone call 的好处，但并没有直接support这个announcement.
A 里说"The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from. " 那么报火警的人就不敢随便打prank calls (prank是恶作剧的意思）。 文章里说的"prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes." 也就被reduced 了。 所以A support the announced effect.
再打个比方吧。 如果经常有人用公用电话打110搞恶作剧。那么禁止用公用电话打110的话会不会减少恶作剧的次数，并且不妨碍正常报警呢？因为大家都有private telephone，所以不会妨碍正常报警（这个在题目里有说明）。 再加上报警电话是可以被跟踪的（选项A里说的），那么肯定很少人敢用自己的电话搞恶作剧。至于用自己电话的其他好处（选项C里说的），没有直接Support "禁止用公用电话打110的话会不会减少恶作剧的次数，并且不妨碍正常报警" 的说法。
晕了，不知道为什么系统给我贴了2次。
编辑好几次都改不过来，后半部分是重复的。
There are two lines in in:
Line 1: false fire alarm destroys normal work---removing alarm boxes can reduce prank calls;
Line 2: nearly everyone has private telephone---people are still able to report a fire after removing alarm boxes.
In my opinion, line 2 is core line. If not everyone has private telephone, alarm boxes cannot be removed even though lots of prank calls made; so we should focus on line 2, any choice related with line 1 is irrelevant. Then what we should do is to find advantage of using private call to report fire.
还是不明白，我觉得B也可以呀。。
...
...汗 我也是A...underlying assumption 就是 it is workable to reduce prank calls.
支持应该首先支持暗含的假设 从而达到支持结论的目的
A. The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private tele-
phones and records where they came from.
既然可以追踪电话的来源 无疑是对制造prank calls的人的一个威慑
胡说了a 绝对错误，不用说也会trace这的电话的来源。不然怎么定位火灾。个人是否用个人电话打骚扰电话与本题无关。
Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls 。
既然可以追踪电话的来源 无疑是对制造prank calls的人的一个威慑－－－－－这里是说Removing the boxes ，不是个人电话的主题
追踪的确可以减少骚扰电话，但与取消报警合所减少的骚扰电话是两回事。
thx, like that
总结一下，原文有两个目的
1。reduce the number of prank calls
2。without hampering people’s ability to report a fire.
争论是，support应该加强第一个目的还是第二个目的
答案A和C：
A made from private telephones and records where they came from.
（alarm box本身是可以被追踪location的，这算是个背景知识吧，同意michaellu说的）私人电话可以被追踪，达到和alarm box定位一样的作用（哪里发生了火灾）（然而私人电话不会有prank call）
这个答案满足了原文结论的两个目的，减少prank call，也达到alarm box一样的定位位效果（如果没有定位功能就会hamper people's ability to report a fire)
C 是说这样可以提供more information about the nature and size of a fire。 提供火灾的大小和性质信息其实和本题所说的目的：prank call和hamper people's ability to report a fire无关。因为原文需要support的是私人电话没有牵制人们的能力，而不是增强了其他什么能力，比如报告火灾的大小和性质
希望nn出来指正
选C
A是无关选项。理由：题干说the vast majority of false fire alarms
are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes on street
corners.是说假警报绝大部分都是从fire alarm box出来的，注意：人家可没说私人电话有可能报假警哦。所以，蓝色部分就不在我们考虑范围了Removing the boxes will reduce the
number of prank calls
without hampering people’s ability to report a fire
C说电话比火警箱的好处则可以加强绿色部分
此题选D
题目的论点是：Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people’s ability to report a fire.
A，C那个跟report a fire的ability有关系？A,C说的都是消防系统的ability强，跟老百姓打电话报警的ability没关系
D说明取消boxes 可以增加老百姓report a fire的ability（因为box产生的乱打电话导致接待火警的人忙于应付，反而正常的报警电话打不进来，阻碍了老百姓report a fire的ability），刚好加强。
选择A应该是go too far了。
23楼讲的很清楚了。GWD也告诫我们，不要用常识去推理，就算能知道 traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from这些信息又如何，文章没有说因此可以减少prank call,更何况大多数prank call是由于fire box而来，A更加是无关信息。
C
大家仔细读一下加强的部分:
Removing the boxes will reduce the
number of prank calls without hampering people’s ability to report a fire.
再注意一下黄色区域里people’s ability to report a fire.
只有C加强的是people’s ability to report
这样看来A.D都是无关
C
大家仔细读一下加强的部分:
Removing the boxes will reduce the
number of prank calls without hampering people’s ability to report a fire.
再注意一下黄色区域里people’s ability to report a fire.
只有C加强的是people’s ability to report
这样看来A.D都是无关
我也有这方面的疑问....我一开始就选d的
但是我感觉cd上关注的重点不同,但是说不出来~~~~~~~~~~~~
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |