ChaseDream

标题: 问一句取非GWD-23-Q32 [打印本页]

作者: thierryf 时间: 2007-9-12 20:48
标题: 问一句取非GWD-23-Q32
Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species: a hare, a partridge, and various Mediterranean fish. Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created. Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in other Roman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A.   The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in the Sepphoris area.
B.   There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native.
C.   No motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.
D.   All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosaics are readily identifiable as representations of known species.
E.   There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman Empire were familiar

答案是E
想问以下这里的C该怎么取非呢？

作者: benyneb 时间: 2007-9-15 16:36

是不是这样取非?

先把双重否定变成肯定:

All motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.

然后取非:

Not all motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.

我感觉that从句是修饰"all motifs的.不知道对不对. 请nn站出来指正.

作者: raikey 时间: 2007-9-15 22:52

把C选项的第一个no去掉,就是C的取非.
也就是 Some motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.有一些图在S的mosaic上出现,但其他地方没有.

结论取非:the mosaics of Sepphoris were not very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire. S的mosaic不大可能被那些移民来的艺术家所创作.
这未必成立,移民来的艺术家完全可以先观察当地的动物,然后创作mosaic.

也就是说选项取非后,未必能推得"结论取非".所以该选项不是正确答案.

作者: joanna0630 时间: 2007-12-1 01:09

我觉得C应该对also前的NOT取非，因为在有动词为否定形式的时候应该首先考虑主句动词的取非，再看是不是削弱

大家觉得呢？

作者: xiaoniuren 时间: 2009-7-19 09:37
DD

作者: 路吉儿 时间: 2009-7-27 16:40

作者: 路吉儿 时间: 2009-7-27 16:49

作者: elvis0214 时间: 2010-10-11 00:36

把C选项的第一个no去掉,就是C的取非.
也就是 Some motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.有一些图在S的mosaic上出现,但其他地方没有.
结论取非:the mosaics of Sepphoris were not very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire. S的mosaic不大可能被那些移民来的艺术家所创作.
这未必成立,移民来的艺术家完全可以先观察当地的动物,然后创作mosaic.
也就是说选项取非后,未必能推得"结论取非".所以该选项不是正确答案.

-- by 会员 raikey (2007/9/15 22:52:00)

可否简单地说：文章关心的是identical motifs appear found in other Roman cities，而不是some motifs which don’t appear in other cities，故这是无关选项。
ps: 就算some motifs which don’t appear in other cities (对C取非)，也无法削弱结论。

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