ChaseDream

标题: gwd Q28: GWD-2-10 求教 [打印本页]

作者: cate88cn 时间: 2010-4-25 20:39
标题: gwd Q28: GWD-2-10 求教
Environmentalist:The use of snowmobiles in the vast park north of Milville create sun acceptable levels of air pollution and should be banned.

Milville business spokesperson:Snowmobiling brings many out-of-towners to Milville in winter months, to the great financial benefit of many local residents.So, economics dictate that we put up with the pollution.

Environmentalist: I disagree:A great many cross-country skiers are now kept from visiting Milville by the noise and pollution that snowmobiles generate.

Environmentalist responds to the business spokesperson by doing which of the following?

A.Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome can derive from only one set of circumstances[C1]

B.Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome is outweighed by negative aspects associated with producing that outcome[C2]

C.Maintaining that the benefit that the spokesperson desires could be achieved in greater degree by a different means[C3]

D.Claiming that the spokesperson is deliberately misrepresenting the environmentalist’s position in order to be better able to attack it[C4]
E.Denying that an effect that the spokesperson presents as having benefited a certain group of people actually benefited those people[C1]

看不懂这道题，请问哪位大侠可以指导一下！答案选E

E.Denying that an effect that the spokesperson presents as having benefited a certain group of people actually benefited those people[C1]

看不懂这道题，请问哪位大侠可以指导一下！答案选E

作者: Rebeldom 时间: 2010-4-26 11:53
环境保护者认为,snowmobiles给整个地区造成了不能接受的污染,应当被禁止
地区经济发言人认为,snowmobiles给地区带来了很多经济收入,我们应该接受它所带来的污染
环境保护者反击道,由于snowmobiles带来的污染,已经有很有游客不来我们这里,更不要谈带来经济收入了

作者: lovepiao 时间: 2010-5-6 19:32
明白题干~可是还是不明白为什么选E。。。。

作者: gigi68788 时间: 2011-8-9 22:08
选e是可以理解的，Environmentalist否认了spokeman认为snowmobiles带来经济效益的说法。

但是a和b为什么不行？尤其是b，什么意思阿？

作者: davisyang 时间: 2011-11-7 17:09
我不懂的是 create sun acceptable levels
這個sun 是什麼意思導致我整句話不知道是汙染多還是汙染少..

作者: darkforever 时间: 2011-11-7 21:09
这道题感觉比较tricky，环保者说雪车污染环境，厂家说（要特别注意，这里是关键）雪车可以带来很多out-of-towners！因此有利于经济（这里有一个因果关系，结果是振兴经济）。环保者反驳说由于污染滑雪者大幅减少，因此削弱经济。其实这三句话都不挨着。。。但是都是事实！
E对，因为把原文归纳起来就是，发言人说雪车有益于当地人，通过振兴经济。但是环保者说，雪车无益于当地人，通过雪车污染，污染阻止滑雪者。E几乎是这个逻辑的原文转述。
A,B错，因为发言人没有假设，雪车带来更多的人是事实，这个是原因，然后推论出对经济好这个结果。
C无关选项。
D错是因为，环保者并没有指责发言人转移话题，而是针对发言人的解释本身进行攻击。

作者: wsyzzydy 时间: 2011-11-9 22:45
能帮忙翻译下B选项的意思么？谢谢啦
Challenging an assumption that certain desirableoutcome is outweighed by negative aspects associated with producing thatoutcome

作者: SamanthaTung 时间: 2014-3-22 11:26

darkforever 发表于 2011-11-7 21:09
这道题感觉比较tricky，环保者说雪车污染环境，厂家说（要特别注意，这里是关键）雪车可以带来很多out-of-t ...

这题我也做错了。很同意你的解读~

作者: 镇阿p 时间: 2017-7-2 01:09
我看见ab 选项里有assumption，就认为不必再看了，因为发言人说的是事实，不是一种假设

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