ChaseDream

标题: 大全-D-5-->携隐修改标题（Test D-5） [打印本页]

作者: susan7375 时间: 2003-12-7 20:06
标题: 大全-D-5-->携隐修改标题（Test D-5）
Test D 5,
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights, has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts. Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty, and even when it has been clear that the police officers were acting in good faith, the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even by introduced. In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again.
5. The author of the passage above assumes all of the following EXCEPT:
(A) The constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected.
(B) Most cases in which the exclusionary rule has been invoked have involved purely technical violations of constitutional principles.
(C) The number of cases whose outcome has been affected by the exclusionary rule is significant.
(D) Some of the defendants set free under the exclusionary rule have been guilty of serious criminal offenses.
(E) Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights.
答案B.当时在B，C之间犹豫了很久。觉得两个都不是assumption。现在仍不知道如何可以看出暗示了number is significant？当然相比较，B更不对一些。

作者: rabbitbug 时间: 2003-12-7 21:19
B中的假设与原文逻辑相背: B说几乎所有的牵涉倒exclusionary rules的案件,都是因为purely technical violations , 而这一点在原文仅仅是列举的其中一项而已,显然这里不行.
C, 尽管原文是没有说,但是我们这里要判断的就是原文没有说得assumption, 将C取非, 如果这样的案例没有几个, 那么作者就没有必要说the exclusionary rule has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts, 也没有必要说In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again., 所以这里一定是B.

作者: susan7375 时间: 2003-12-8 13:15
明白了，没有抓住关键adv. unduly 。
谢谢rabbitbug！

作者: tianwan 时间: 2004-5-21 18:01

turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty

这一句话是什么意思？turn on的意思是什么？

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-5-21 18:01:14编辑过]

作者: wwwhahchn 时间: 2005-2-14 23:50

偶認為turn on是開啓的意思

作者: tuzq 时间: 2005-2-19 21:03
B显然是正确答案，但是我在做的时候，一看了A就觉得A不是assumption,就选了它。请教A为什么是assumption呢？当然这个common sense来讲，是对的，但是从题目里看，仿佛和它没有一点关系呀。难道就是由第一句：Although its purpose is laudable来的？

作者: 豆豆开机 时间: 2005-9-20 14:25
E为什么不对？为什么用merely?

作者: hyte 时间: 2006-2-10 18:05

我覺得turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty 這句中的turn on是取決於...的意思! 例句: The success of the picnic turns on the weather. 所以這句的意思應該是(從前一句翻): 即使這個權利的侵犯是非常微小的或是只是一種技術性的侵犯(取決於搜索証據時的過程細節,而非根本上的自由權利之廢除),因為原文用turning(分詞形式,我個人判斷是關代省略改分詞,是在形容前一句的technical one)

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-2-10 18:16:13编辑过]

作者: hyte 时间: 2006-2-10 18:27
E選項:Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights. 是說只有與証據相關的技術性人權侵犯應要與蓄意的人權侵犯做區隔, 換言之, 就是technical violation技術性侵犯和deliberate assaults蓄意的侵犯不同! 這是作者的假設,因為作者提到了Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty(中文翻譯在上一篇) 作者認為技術性侵犯是取決於程序的一些細節而非基本人權的剝奪,從這句可看出作者認為技術性的侵犯與蓄意的機本人權剝奪是不同的~就是E選項,所以E不能選! p.s.這是我一點想法^^

作者: gonghao 时间: 2006-8-1 10:45
up

作者: lloottuuss 时间: 2007-7-24 22:46
merely是purely的改写，是说“纯”技术，而不是“只有”。取非时不要取错了意思。

作者: Xunan 时间: 2008-8-19 16:28
``

作者: Xunan 时间: 2008-8-19 19:49
up

作者: smartsky11 时间: 2009-3-8 14:04
人

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