ChaseDream

标题: GWD31-8 40 question!!! [打印本页]

作者: cracker1010 时间: 2007-10-11 23:33
标题: GWD31-8 40 question!!!

GWD31-8 40

B & E 不知道该如何想了,不会用取非削弱法.只会从意思上硬想,请办班班和牛牛帮我开开壳!

Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. 本文论述的前提P1:批评家CLAIM总统取消HIGHWAY计划是对反对党控制的选区采取的报复行为.

They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. 例证支持P1:90%被取消的项目都是在该选区.

But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. 本文论述的结论c前提: 但是,所有这些被取消的项目在一个无党派审计员所写的报告中被认为是浪费的项目.

So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.本文论述的结论C: 所以总统的选择不是因为党派政治斗争,而是由可靠的预算政策MOTIVATED的.

这是一个ASSUMPTION题,归为因果结论型,CAUSE是无党派审计员所写的报告,EFFECT是总统的选择不是因为党派政治斗争,而是由可靠的预算政策MOTIVATED的.所以要排除他因的可能.

Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. 本文谈论的前提是总统取消HIGHWAY计划报复反对党控制的选区,不涉及其他报复行为,也不讨论还有多少种报复行为.(论述范围扩大了) 第三个CRACK掉.
The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future. 项目取消的数量与本文无关,第一个CRACK掉.
The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President’s party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties. 同C,项目的花费与本文无关. 第二个CRACK掉.
Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.

B is the answer

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