ChaseDream

标题: GWD2 Q32 [打印本页]

作者: edmundshi 时间: 2009-7-24 22:22
标题: GWD2 Q32

Press Secretary:
Our critics claim that the President’s recent highway project
cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts
controlled by opposition parties. They
offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such
districts. But all of the canceled
projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected
nonpartisan auditors. So the President’s
choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan
politics.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the
press secretary’s argument depends?

Canceling
highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative
districts controlled by opposition parties.

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.

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.

Reports by
nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a
source of objective assessments of government projects.

哪位大虾帮忙讲讲，能翻译下吗？题目看的都糊涂了～

作者: viviansecret 时间: 2009-7-25 01:46

答案应该是B吧。题目意思是这样的：新闻部说：一些批评家说president最近对公路工程的取消显示了他对对手政党所控制区域的报复心理。他们（ie.这些批评家）提供证据说90%被取消的公路在这样的区域（ie.对手政党控制的区域）。但是根据可靠的无党派倾向的审计人员（auditors）报告，这些被取消的公路全部被认定是浪费（wasteful）。所以总统的选择动机是合理的预算政策而并非是出于党派政策。题目问前提假设。B的意思是在报告里面被认作是wasteful的公路工程大部分不在总统党派所控制的区域内。因为考虑取反，如果被报告认作不合格的公路工程大部分都在总统党派所控制的区域内，而真正取消的90%却在敌方党派控制区域内。那么很有可能是出于党派斗争了，这样原文不是出于党派斗争的结论就会被削弱。既然取反是削弱，很好理解B本身就是得出结论的前提假设了。

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