summersmile 发表于 2004-11-25 04:11
The imposition of quotas limiting imported steel will not help the big American steel mills. In fac ...
64. The imposition of quotas limiting imported steel will not help the big American steel mills. In fact, the quotaswill help "mini-mills" flourish in the United States. Those small domestic mills will take more business from thebig Americal steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
Which of the following, if true, would cast the most serious doubt on the claim made in the last sentence above?
(A) Quality rather than price is a major factor in determining the type of steel to be used for a particular application.
(B) Foreign steel mills have long produced grades of steel comparable in quality to the steel produced by the big American mills.
(C) American quotas on imported goods have often induced other countries to impose similar quotas on American goods.
(D) Domestic "mini-mills" consistently produce better grades of steel than do the big American mills.
(E) Domestic "mini-mills" produce low-volume, specialized types of steels that are not produced by the big American steel mills.
请教此题的解题思路？谢谢。
可是如果小型厂和大型厂生产不一样的产品，比如小厂做粗加工，大厂精加工，小厂才能和海外厂竞争大厂的订单，如果一样不久是和大厂竞争了吗，那不就变成A,B,C,三者同时竞争了吗？
我有点不明白，请指教。谢谢
撄宁
他们说的竞争不是小厂和海外厂之间竞争从大厂得到的订单，而是大厂小厂和海外厂一起竞争同一个美国国内市场。如果配额限制了海外厂参加，那么就要看配额对余下的两个竞争对手谁有利，是大厂得益还是小厂。如果大厂和小厂生产的产品不一样，那么小厂不会对大厂是否从配额政策得益构成影响，那么也就削弱了题目中说的配额实际对小厂有益，而不是对大厂有益的结论。因为从逻辑上讲，排除了这个原因。
The imposition of quotas limiting imported steel will not help the big American steel mills. In fact, the quotas will help “mini-mills” flourish in the United States. Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big America steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
Which of the following, if true, would cast the most serious doubt on the claim made in the last sentence above?
(A) Quality rather than price is a major factor in determining the type of steel to be used for a particular application.
(B) Foreign steel mills have long produced grades of steel comparable in quality to the steel produced by the big American mills.
(C) American quotas on imported goods have often induced other countries to impose similar quotas on American goods.
(D) Domestic “mini-mills” consistently produce better grades of steel than do the big American mills.
(E) Domestic “mini-mills” produce low-volume, specialized types of steels that are not produced by the big American steel mills.
E is the best answer.
If, as choice E asserts, large and small mills produce different types of steels, increasing sales by small mills need not lead to decreasing sales by large one. Thus, choice E casts a serious doubt on the claim and is the best answer.
Choice A does not present enough information about the relative quality of steel from foreign and domestic mills to cast any doubt on the claim. Similarly, choice B does not provide enough information about small American mills, nor does choice C provide enough information about the likely consequences of quotas imposed by foreign countries to cast doubt on the claim. Choice D tends to support the claim, since better steel should sell better than poorer steel.
不明白D为什么是支持？Domestic “mini-mills” consistently produce better grades of steel than do the big American mills.－－》所以有无进口限制，小厂都比大厂销量好
You are wrong, because the conclusion is "Those small domestic mills will take more business from thebig Americal steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas", not "进口钢铁限额的施加有益于小型钢铁厂",
"那么施加进口限额后，其实小型厂并没有得到什么好处" is wrong, because "In fact, the quotaswill help "mini-mills" flourish in the United States". it is the evidence, not the conclusion.
版主们一定要帮我看看这题，严重怀疑ETS的严谨性！
正确答案是一般现在时，可是题目确实将来时，这明显是用现在推断将来，能算削弱吗？万一人家明天就改生产相同的话这个现在的推断不就等于没说过嘛？！
请教了！谢谢！！
N人们出山看看吧，绝对挑战你们的CR！
题目用的是将来时态,它也是一种用现状推将来,那么e说的那个现状削弱了题目中的推理基础,当然也就削弱了结论.
打个比方, 今天多云,所以今天will not rain .
那我说,那不是云,是附近工厂排放的烟气.很显然我也是削弱今天will not rain 的结论的,因为我把那个结论推理的基础给推翻了
am i right??
open to discuss
我开始也是这么想的,但是后来觉得这题不是那么简单, 因为现在的是否竞争似乎不能说明未来的情况, 而且题目也并没有给出任何对将来的暗示.
而楼上的例子指出云是烟气, 这个是把实事推翻, 而且是不能复员的推翻, 但是64题似乎就不能那么肯定了, 继续请教!!
大厂和小厂市场分额可以比较的前提是两者生产同类产品，E项说两者生产不同产品属于断桥。
D项支持因为它说明了小厂抢占市场的原因，属于建立桥梁。
题目要求是对“the Last Sentence”所表达的claim构成weaken，the last sentence的意思是：小厂会从大厂那里得到更多的原来属于国外厂商的生意。E中说小厂生产的是大厂不生产的产品，当然就不会从大厂那里得到更多的生意，这样就weaken了the last sentence。
不知这样理解对否？
我对OG的解释也迷惑，OG解释说增加小厂的销售不必（need not）导致大厂销售的减少。本来the last sentence也没说小厂的销售会对大厂产生影响啊？这样解释好像是针对头两句话说的。跟本题问的不相干啊？！
希望NN给予批判。
题目要求是对“the Last Sentence”所表达的claim构成weaken，the last sentence的意思是：小厂会从大厂那里得到更多的原来属于国外厂商的生意。E中说小厂生产的是大厂不生产的产品，当然就不会从大厂那里得到更多的生意，这样就weaken了the last sentence。
同意bt51bt。我认为此题是先给出结论再给出解释的题型，题目要求是对“the Last Sentence”所表达的claim构成weaken，即weaken其解释（论据），如E所说小厂生产的是大厂不生产的产品，当然就不会从大厂那里得到更多的生意，这样就weaken了the last sentence。
我的想法和大家有点不一样，我乱说一下：
此题是原因推结果，原因是 “mini-mills” flourish ，结果是： Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big American steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
进行削弱的方式是，指出其他因素使原因推不出结果，其实也就是有因无果形削弱。
这也就是为什么OG解释说increasing sales by small mills need not lead to decreasing sales by large one 的原因
版主们一定要帮我看看这题，严重怀疑ETS的严谨性！
正确答案是一般现在时，可是题目确实将来时，这明显是用现在推断将来，能算削弱吗？万一人家明天就改生产相同的话这个现在的推断不就等于没说过嘛？！
请教了！谢谢！！
我不是版主，但我觉得答案E用现在时对未来的结果进行削弱没有问题。首先我们要知道怎么才算做是削弱，记得lawyer NN说过削弱是“使作者再考虑他的观点或原文该前提能证明该结论吗，削弱会迫使作者做出反应” 也就是说削弱不是否定作者的结论，削弱也不是在说作者的结论一定是错的，而只是提出了结论是错的的可能性。 （我标注的红色的字体就有可能是作者作出的反映。）
我觉得Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.这句中应该理解成本来大厂应获得的生意被小厂得到了..而不是理解成小厂从大场那里获得生意..
同意楼上的观点.
GMAT的陈述本来就不象LSAT那么严谨,不论是时态还是表述方式上,都不应该过分深究.(否则几乎一半以上的GMAT OG题目都没有正确选项了).
本题其实非常清楚(OG也讲的很清楚了):只有B才是迷惑选项,其中B强调了大厂和国外厂家产品的同质性.A是evaluation,没有方向.C是无关项.D根本是加强.
而E指出了大厂和小厂产品的无关性.比B好(B只说明了大厂获得原外国厂家所占市场分额的可能性,甚至是优势,但没有说明必然性---小厂万一更有优势呢?)
撄宁
他们说的竞争不是小厂和海外厂之间竞争从大厂得到的订单，而是大厂小厂和海外厂一起竞争同一个美国国内市场。如果配额限制了海外厂参加，那么就要看配额对余下的两个竞争对手谁有利，是大厂得益还是小厂。如果大厂和小厂生产的产品不一样，那么小厂不会对大厂是否从配额政策得益构成影响，那么也就削弱了题目中说的配额实际对小厂有益，而不是对大厂有益的结论。因为从逻辑上讲，排除了这个原因。
我觉得Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.这句中应该理解成本来大厂应获得的生意被小厂得到了..而不是理解成小厂从大场那里获得生意..
不同意MM的见解，这里大家疑惑是没法理解比较的对象，我原来只能理解出意思，但是无法补全省略的比较对象，看了MM的翻译，我试试补全，看能不能对大家的理解有帮助。
Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than business would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
在配额缺乏时，国内小型钢厂从大型钢厂取得的市场份额比外国钢厂得到的市场份额高。
推理过程：国内市场容量固定，由大型钢厂、小型钢厂和国外钢厂分配；由于配额的缺乏，导致国外钢厂的份额缩少，国内钢厂的份额增加；最后一句提出小型钢厂因此从与大型钢厂竞争中得到的份额增加（因为少了国外钢厂的竞争）；由此，配额制会使得小型钢厂蓬勃发展。
题目结论应该是第二句，或者说是头两句，最后一句是解释说明第二句。E是削弱原因，从而削弱结论。
撄宁
他们说的竞争不是小厂和海外厂之间竞争从大厂得到的订单，而是大厂小厂和海外厂一起竞争同一个美国国内市场。如果配额限制了海外厂参加，那么就要看配额对余下的两个竞争对手谁有利，是大厂得益还是小厂。如果大厂和小厂生产的产品不一样，那么小厂不会对大厂是否从配额政策得益构成影响，那么也就削弱了题目中说的配额实际对小厂有益，而不是对大厂有益的结论。因为从逻辑上讲，排除了这个原因。
“如果大厂和小厂生产的产品不一样，那么小厂不会对大厂是否从配额政策得益构成影响，那么也就削弱了题目中说的配额实际对小厂有益，而不是对大厂有益的结论。”。有问题。
E大厂和小厂生产不同型号的钢才削弱结论“小厂将从大厂手里抢走生意”，而非大厂小厂谁受益。
版主们一定要帮我看看这题，严重怀疑ETS的严谨性！
正确答案是一般现在时，可是题目确实将来时，这明显是用现在推断将来，能算削弱吗？万一人家明天就改生产相同的话这个现在的推断不就等于没说过嘛？！
请教了！谢谢！！
我的理解是：题目是根据设立进口配额这一现象作出对市场一系列的预测。
小企业相对外国企业将会抢走大企业更多的业务，小企业在美国将会更加发荣。
而题目没有给出这一预测的原因，只是再说预测现象。A,B,C都是在说一些原因，又信息不足无法削弱。D给出原因，说小企业质量高，竞争强，支持了题目，小企业会从大企业抢走更多市场。
E说小企业和大企业生产不同产品，之间根本不存在竞争，也就没有了小企业抢大企业市场，削弱题目。
不同意MM的见解，这里大家疑惑是没法理解比较的对象，我原来只能理解出意思，但是无法补全省略的比较对象，看了MM的翻译，我试试补全，看能不能对大家的理解有帮助。
Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than business would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
在配额缺乏时，国内小型钢厂从大型钢厂取得的市场份额比外国钢厂得到的市场份额高。
推理过程：国内市场容量固定，由大型钢厂、小型钢厂和国外钢厂分配；由于配额的缺乏，导致国外钢厂的份额缩少，国内钢厂的份额增加；最后一句提出小型钢厂因此从与大型钢厂竞争中得到的份额增加（因为少了国外钢厂的竞争）；由此，配额制会使得小型钢厂蓬勃发展。
题目结论应该是第二句，或者说是头两句，最后一句是解释说明第二句。E是削弱原因，从而削弱结论。
你的补出不对，偶觉得应该是：
Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than business from the big American steel mills would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
也就是说，有了quota后，大厂更吃亏了，小厂比外国厂更狠。
不同意MM的见解，这里大家疑惑是没法理解比较的对象，我原来只能理解出意思，但是无法补全省略的比较对象，看了MM的翻译，我试试补全，看能不能对大家的理解有帮助。
Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than business would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
在配额缺乏时，国内小型钢厂从大型钢厂取得的市场份额比外国钢厂得到的市场份额高。
推理过程：国内市场容量固定，由大型钢厂、小型钢厂和国外钢厂分配；由于配额的缺乏，导致国外钢厂的份额缩少，国内钢厂的份额增加；最后一句提出小型钢厂因此从与大型钢厂竞争中得到的份额增加（因为少了国外钢厂的竞争）；由此，配额制会使得小型钢厂蓬勃发展。
题目结论应该是第二句，或者说是头两句，最后一句是解释说明第二句。E是削弱原因，从而削弱结论。
是这样的吗？
你的补出不对，偶觉得应该是：
Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than business from the big American steel mills would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
也就是说，有了quota后，大厂更吃亏了，小厂比外国厂更狠。
我也同意这个补全。
试着翻译一下：在没有配额时，国内小型钢厂从大型钢厂取得的市场份额比（有配额时）外国钢厂从大型钢厂取得的的市场份额高。
如果能明白中文意思，这道题可能就好理解了，应该关注“国内小型钢厂”和“国内大型钢厂”之间的比较。B选项肯定不对。
Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than business from the big American steel mills would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
同意这个补全。我对这句话的理解是：在没有配额的情况下，小工厂从大工厂那比外国工厂从大工厂那抢到更多的生意。
答案E说大小工厂生产的不一样，也就不抢生意了，那么销售的增减也就不相关了，所以削弱了最后一句话。
1. import quotes rule out foreign steel companies in the dometic stell mareket to compete with the domestic stell companies. So anything about foreign stell companies bear nothing with claim in the last sentense.
2. The last sentence assumes that small mills have greater competition than big steel mills for the same products. If small mills's market is different form that of big steel mills, the difference will cast doubt on the claims in the last sentence.
3. I do not think the other parts of GMAT rather than CR also focus on the grammar. So do not care the structure and grammar when we review other parts.
对import quota理解的不好，谁能帮忙解释一下，什么是进口配额？thanks first.
Those small domestic mills will take more business from the
big Americal steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
可不可以将最后一句话理解为：大厂的失败是由于小厂抢了生意。
如果是这样(C) American quotas on imported goods have often induced other countries to impose similar quotas on
American goods.也可以。
因为大厂的失败不是因为小厂，而是其他原因。
盼解答，谢谢！
先问以下, 大家对本题的结论好象不统一,那么结论到底是哪个? ?
我的前提和结论是: 因为进口限制海外的进入竞争, 所以国内小厂能够从国内大厂抢夺更多的市场份额.
up
感觉 E也只说了一半啊。。 我当时 想着是：结论 有三个 东西: mini-mills, big steel mills, foreign mills....
所以 答案因该 出现 三个东西。阿 。。。
是因为 ：结论 中的 foreign mills 是 虚拟 与气吗？ ，所以不包括结论 的一部分。这样的 话,e 就好解释。。 B，也就轻松的排除了。。
请 斑竹 帮忙。 分析一下。。
对import quota理解的不好，谁能帮忙解释一下，什么是进口配额？thanks first.
我觉得Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big Americal steel mills than would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.这句中应该理解成本来大厂应获得的生意被小厂得到了..而不是理解成小厂从大场那里获得生意..
应该是 “本来应该外国厂从大厂抢到的生意被小厂抢到了”
conclusion: mini-mill >foreign>big mill mini is the most competent
eliminate foreign through imposition=> mini compete with big ,
if they do not compete, that means they have different business,thus can weaken
64.
The imposition of quotas limiting imported steel will not help the big American steel mills. In fact, the quotas will help “mini-mills” flourish in the
Which of the following, if true, would cast the most serious doubt on the claim made in the last sentence above?
(A) Quality rather than price is a major factor in determining the type of steel to be used for a particular application.
(B) Foreign steel mills have long produced grades of steel comparable in quality to the steel produced by the big American mills.
(C) American quotas on imported goods have often induced other countries to impose similar quotas on American goods.
(D) Domestic “mini-mills” consistently produce better grades of steel than do the big American mills.
(E) Domestic “mini-mills” produce low-volume, specialized types of steels that are not produced by the big American steel mills.
64.
If, as choice E asserts, large and small mills produce different types of steels, increasing sales by small mills need not lead to decreasing sales by large one. Thus, choice E casts a serious doubt on the claim and is the best answer.
Choice A does not present enough information about the relative quality of steel from foreign and domestic mills to cast any doubt on the claim. Similarly, choice B does not provide enough information about small American mills, nor does choice C provide enough information about the likely consequences of quotas imposed by foreign countries to cast doubt on the claim. Choice D tends to support the claim, since better steel should sell better than poorest steel.
请问og解释中increasing sales by small mills need not lead to decreasing sales by large one是什么意思？谢谢！
這些人都是食神阿 up up
The imposition of quotas limiting imported steel will not help the big American steel mills. In fact, the quotas will help “mini-mills” flourish in the United States. Those small domestic mills will take more business from the big American steel mills than(the business from the big American steel mills) would have been taken by the foreign steel mills in the absence of quotas.
我认为这样补全是正确的
题目意思即在没有进口限额的情况下，国内某类型的钢材市场被三方瓜分，小厂，大厂，和国外厂，大厂面临的竞争主要来自与小厂的有优势产品，而不是国外厂；现在国外厂被限制了进口的分额，这样本应是国外厂的分额被具有优势产品的小厂所吞掉，即小厂在国内市场占的分额更大了。
而选项E根本否定了题目的论据，即小厂和大厂并不是生产同一类型的钢材。
summersmile 发表于 2004-11-25 04:11
The imposition of quotas limiting imported steel will not help the big American steel mills. In fac ...
Andrea625 发表于 2004-6-13 15:59
撄宁他们说的竞争不是小厂和海外厂之间竞争从大厂得到的订单，而是大厂小厂和海外厂一起竞争同一个美国国内 ...
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |
