ChaseDream

标题: 请教Prep-1-41 [打印本页]

作者: floraxycn 时间: 2007-5-13 22:55
标题: 请教Prep-1-41

41. (32917-!-item-!-188;#058&006462)

In the two years following the unification of Germany in 1989, the number of cars owned by residents of East Germany and the total distance traveled by cars in East Germany both increased by about 40 percent. In those two years, however, the number of East German residents killed each year as car occupants in traffic accidents increased by about 300 percent.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the disproportionate increase in traffic fatalities?

A. The average number of passengers per car was higher in the years before unification than it was in the two years after.

B. After unification, many people who had been living in East Germany relocated to West Germany.

C. After unification, a smaller proportion of the cars being purchased by East German residents were used vehicles.

D. Drivers who had driven little or not at all before 1989 accounted for much of the increase in the total distance traveled by cars.

E. Over the same two-year period in East Germany, other road users, such as motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, experienced only small increases in traffic fatalities.

答案是D,请问A为什么不对？D的推理过程是怎样的？谢谢！

作者: tasteofbit 时间: 2007-5-14 14:29

我也错了这题，很冤啊。

请LZ再仔细看看A，说合并前每辆车里的乘客人数比合并后的多。而题目说的是合并后死的人比合并前的多。如果A中的时间关系倒过来还可以考虑。

至于D，新的马路杀手多了，所以死亡率高。

作者: floraxycn 时间: 2007-5-16 14:32

哎，确实太粗心了，把A的意思看反了。

谢谢！

作者: qiqiaiwo 时间: 2008-9-17 22:12
偶也错了。。。晕

作者: vivienneshui 时间: 2010-8-20 23:46
A确实不对，我也看反了。。可是D是说89年前不怎么开车的后来开的多，，这不是用了“常识”就是自己的推测觉得以前没怎么开过车的容易出事。。

做逻辑不是不能用常识，和自己的推断么？
有人来帮帮我么。。

作者: sxf112233 时间: 2010-8-21 00:48
41. (32917-!-item-!-188;#058&006462)

In the two years following the unification of Germany in 1989, the number of cars owned by residents of East Germany and the total distance traveled by cars in East Germany both increased by about 40 percent. In those two years, however, the number of East German residents killed each year as car occupants in traffic accidents increased by about 300 percent.

2年内，德国在1989年合并，C的数量在东德和驾驶的里程上升了40%，但是，东德被汽车事故杀的人上升了300%

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the disproportionate increase in traffic fatalities?
解释

A. The average number of passengers per car was higher in the years before unification than it was in the two years after.

无关，平均有小汽车数量比
B. After unification, many people who had been living in East Germany relocated to West Germany.
无关，人搬到哪去

C. After unification, a smaller proportion of the cars being purchased by East German residents were used vehicles.
汽车性质，无关

D. Drivers who had driven little or not at all before 1989 accounted for much of the increase in the total distance traveled by cars.
支持，不就是马路杀手多了吗~

E. Over the same two-year period in East Germany, other road users, such as motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, experienced only small increases in traffic fatalities.

其他路，无关，范围错

答案是D,请问A为什么不对？D的推理过程是怎样的？谢谢！

作者: 1030430882 时间: 2014-4-27 14:05
楼上解释有道理~A是削弱而不是解释的

作者: jing513 时间: 2018-10-18 21:23

作者: TonyHung 时间: 2022-8-23 17:07
A)其實也沒有辦法削弱！因為題目已經說了“當地居民持有的車增加40%”
所以
即使真如A)所說“平均的乘客人數減少”->當地居民持有的車增加(即:那些原本塞在同一台車的乘客現在可能都在開自己的車上路),路上的車變多->當地居民因為車禍而死亡的人數可能還是不會減少

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)