ChaseDream

标题: 大全-16-16 [打印本页]

作者: bejiao    时间: 2003-10-11 19:53
标题: 大全-16-16
16. The recent upheaval in the office-equipment retail business, in which many small firms have gone out of business, has been attributed to the advent of office equipment “superstores” whose high sales volume keeps their prices low. This analysis is flawed, however, since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market.

   Which of the following, if true, would most weaken
   the argument that the analysis is flawed?
   (A) Most of the larger customers for office
       equipment purchase under contract directly
       from manufacturers and thus do not participate
       in the retail market.
   (B) The superstores’ heavy advertising of their low
       prices has forced prices down throughout the
       retail market for office supplies.
   (C) Some of the superstores that only recently
       opened have themselves gone out of business.
   (D) Most of the office equipment superstores are
       owned by large retailing chains that also own
       stores selling other types of goods.
   (E) The growing importance of computers in most
       offices has changed the kind of office
       equipment retailers must stock.
这道题的答案是B,但是我觉得B并没有反对the argument that the analysis is flawed。
只是加强了前半部分的论述。但是其他的选项应该也都不对。请指教阿


作者: ninishine    时间: 2003-10-12 01:16
Hi, you can look at the one jdxf posted at 10/10 "两个逻辑题目,新东方的。请指教", there are answers in it.
作者: carol1216    时间: 2005-8-6 17:25

why choose B? I chose A.


作者: nickt    时间: 2005-8-7 00:01
他因.
作者: a-ga    时间: 2005-8-11 19:43
以下是引用bejiao在2003-10-11 19:53:00的发言:
16. The recent upheaval in the office-equipment retail business, in which many small firms have gone out of business, has been attributed to the advent of office equipment “superstores” whose high sales volume keeps their prices low. This analysis is flawed, however, since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market.

   Which of the following, if true, would most weaken
   the argument that the analysis is flawed?
   (A) Most of the larger customers for office
       equipment purchase under contract directly
       from manufacturers and thus do not participate
       in the retail market.
   (B) The superstores’ heavy advertising of their low
       prices has forced prices down throughout the
       retail market for office supplies.这道题的答案是B,但是我觉得B并没有反对the argument that the analysis is flawed。
只是加强了前半部分的论述。但是其他的选项应该也都不对。请指教阿


想再請教各位MM,為何A不行??我覺得A是他因導致analysis flaw的論述結果,那不就是weaken了analysis flaw了嗎??為何不對?謝謝.


作者: likui    时间: 2005-8-11 19:55

analysis是如何分析many small firms have gone out of business的呢?是price;price怎么了呢?the advent of superstores导致了price low,这其中突出了“以价格为武器”的概念。


把问题转换一下,就是support that the analysis is right;A有理,但不是原题里面的理;B中体现了原题的思路。


作者: rosebudxiaojie    时间: 2005-8-12 14:30

补充一句,A 选项没说是买superstore时才directly from manufacturers 而是说买office equipment 那岂不是说不管买的是哪种equipment都直接从厂家买,大家都一样了,自然市场份额不会变化太大,所以没有起到削弱作用。


看来要认真读选项呀


我也做错了


作者: ESeraph    时间: 2005-8-12 15:02
顺着这道题的思路,A应该是无关选项
作者: a-ga    时间: 2005-8-12 23:03

我常犯這種毛病...想請教是否有這種做題技巧??當文章分前後轉折.前面論述而後面反對,題目問削弱後者時,我是不是可以不管後面反對的內容,直接去找支持前面論述的答案就好了呢??謝謝!!


作者: amber0919    时间: 2006-4-6 08:56
我也绕进去了.不懂.求解答.
作者: greenbow43    时间: 2006-4-28 09:35

还是不懂 期待lawyer解答之中


……………………


作者: shzzhengfan    时间: 2006-4-29 17:00
我的理解是:   要weaken这句:"This analysis is flawed, however, since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market"  就要说" 这个分析是对的,不是因为 even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market,而是因为superstore 的low price"     即支持原结论, 就象版主分析的一样.
作者: 晴天小狗    时间: 2006-9-28 11:32

(B) The superstores’ heavy advertising of their low prices has forced prices down throughout the retail market for office supplies.

B选项weaken的应该是这句话啊:has been attributed to the advent of office equipment “superstores” whose high sales volume keeps their prices low.

原文不是说

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument that the analysis is flawed?

怎么解释?

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument that the analysis is flawed?

怎么解释?


作者: Miranda_a    时间: 2007-6-25 01:10

flaw是因为small share of the retail market,削弱了文中的“high sales volume -----> their prices low”。即削弱了their prices low。

要反对flaw,则支持their prices low,来支持它所推出的的结论:many small firms have gone out of business

文中用了他因来支持their prices low,即B中The superstores’ heavy advertising of their low prices ----->prices down throughout the retail market for office supplies.


作者: o_c_01    时间: 2007-7-4 16:45

这题应该选D啊~~~

This analysis is flawed, however, since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument that the analysis is flawed?

(D) Most of the office equipment superstores are owned by large retailing chains that also own stores selling other types of goods.

题目问的是,如何能weaken “This analysis is flawed”这一论点, 作者认为analysis is flawed的理由是 the superstores control a very small share of the retail market.
D说明,虽然,superstore只control a very small share of the retail market,但是它实际被一些大的连锁店掌控~~

直接weaken结论的原因~~


作者: judyzhang    时间: 2007-9-25 11:47

这道题说的是:办公用品市场的大动荡是由于那些superstores 的低价战略引起的。作者认为这种归因是错误的,因为那些superstores所销售的办公用品占市场的份额很小。

选择反对作者分析错误的选项,就是赞同题干--办公用品市场的大动荡是由于那些superstores 的低价战略引起的

不知道说明白了没有。


作者: wangshu0306    时间: 2008-8-7 05:08

这题的答案显然是A。

analysis的逻辑链是这样的:superstores的销售量很大————superstores的价格很低————(引发价格战,导致其他公司利润降低)造成其他小公司倒闭

指出analysis有flaw的逻辑链是这样的:superstores的零售市场份额很低————(superstores的销售量不是很大)————analysis论证的前提不存在————所以有flaw。

现在题干要我们找出weaken the argument that the analysis is flawed的论据,那么也就是能够weaken“superstores的零售市场份额很低”的观点的论据。仔细看看A选项就发现了下面的逻辑链:

大多数大客户不通过零售市场买office equipment,而是直接和厂家签合同 + superstores也是office equipment————大多数大客户购买superstores的方法也是直接和厂家签合同————“superstores的零售市场份额很低”并不能推出“superstores的销售量不是很大”的结论————analysis其实没有flaw。

选择B其实有点像自说自话,王顾左右而言他,人家攻击你的论据A有flaw,最直接的回应就应该是去defend论据A,而不是把论据B再加强一下,何况论据B的成立还是建立在论据A的基础上的。


作者: mac_bobo    时间: 2008-8-27 13:06

到底答案是什么啊?

晕!


作者: flyuo2006    时间: 2009-1-31 11:08

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-3-30 16:39:44编辑过]

作者: ghgriffin    时间: 2009-5-9 16:23

14楼讲的很清楚,谢谢了

价格低是一个事实,在题里是让其他厂商退出竞争的原因

在weaken的选项中要坚持这个事实

而A中则没有这样的事实出现,属于无关!


作者: ckwok    时间: 2009-8-24 01:36

14楼显然错误,16楼正解。

but thanks to both.


作者: melodyflying    时间: 2009-8-24 17:20

这道题的key是price

要证明是flawed就要证明是price导致的

查看几个选项

明显是B涉及到了price

迅速选出


作者: zxygtx    时间: 2009-10-19 14:01
A选项的不对之处在于:题干中提出的范围是在retail market中对small firms 和superstores进行比较。而A中说larger customers不参与retail market。和题目讨论的范围不同,所以是无关选项。
作者: sunjin1988    时间: 2009-10-19 16:33
我的理解是虽然since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market.但是B说导致了由于自己价格过于廉价导致整个市场恶性降价 ,破坏了市场规律 这样就说明确实 has been attributed to the advent of office equipment “superstores

作者: sumerlaw    时间: 2009-11-19 23:49
16. The recent upheaval in the office-equipment retail business, in which many small firms have gone out of business, has been attributed to the advent of office equipment “superstores” whose high sales volume keeps their prices low. This analysis is flawed, however, since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market.

  Which of the following, if true, would most weaken
  the argument that the analysis is flawed?
  (A) Most of the larger customers for office
      equipment purchase under contract directly
      from manufacturers and thus do not participate
      in the retail market.
  (B) The superstores’ heavy advertising of their low
      prices has forced prices down throughout the
      retail market for office supplies.
  (C) Some of the superstores that only recently
      opened have themselves gone out of business.
  (D) Most of the office equipment superstores are
      owned by large retailing chains that also own
      stores selling other types of goods.
  (E) The growing importance of computers in most
      offices has changed the kind of office
      equipment retailers must stock.
这道题的答案是B,但是我觉得B并没有反对the argument that the analysis is flawed。
只是加强了前半部分的论述。但是其他的选项应该也都不对。请指教阿

-- by 会员 bejiao (2003/10/11 19:53:00)



这题A有迷惑性!

题目问那个最能削弱文中的反驳

文中反驳的立场是:superstore占领的市场很少,进一步反对文中的superstore的价格低

反驳有两种办法:

1, superstore占领的市场不少.

2,superstore的价格确实低.

A说明了很多大客户都是直接从厂商购买的,貌似好像支持了superstore的市场占有率达,其实无关(thus do not participate
      in the retail market.
),且我们并不能从A推出任何和价格有关的信息!

B说明了第二点:价格确实低! 为答案
作者: wildmantomba    时间: 2012-1-16 15:55
The recent upheaval in the office-equipment retail business, in which many small firms have gone out of business, has been attributed to the advent of office equipment “superstores” whose high sales volume keeps their prices low. This analysis is flawed(Conclusion), however, since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market(Premise).
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument that the analysis is flawed?

(A) Most of the larger customers for office equipment purchase under contract directly from manufacturers and thus do not participate in the retail market.(既然没有参与零售市场,就是无关选项)


(B) The superstores’ heavy advertising of their low prices has forced prices down throughout the retail market for office supplies.superstores的广告对零售产业产生了影响)


(C) Some of the superstores that only recently opened have themselves gone out of business.(superstores自行退出竞争跟有没有影响是两码子事情)


(D) Most of the office equipment superstores are owned by large retailing chains that also own stores selling other types of goods.(有没有卖其他的东西跟有没有影响无关)


(E) The growing importance of computers in most offices has changed the kind of office equipment retailers must stock.(还是没有提到影响的问题)

Analysis:最近办公设备零售产业的变动主要归因于"能以量制价的superstores"的出现
Argument:Analysis是错的(superstores对零售产业有影响),因为superstores的市场份额小
Weaken:即使份额小,仍会有影响

作者: hanyichen    时间: 2012-6-26 10:47
@ wildmantomba
你的帖子才是又简洁又易懂 瞬间明朗!
谢谢
作者: wendydou    时间: 2012-10-10 15:24
wildmantomba  THANK U




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