非NN
原文由1930年之前建的酒店质量比之后建的酒店质量好——>1930年前的建筑技艺更高超
A。in other structures, such as houses and stores. 无关
B。 accommodate more guests 关系不大
C 建筑材料没变,无效果
D正确,建筑技艺与建筑材料是能否建成质量好的酒店的2个条件,如果以前的材料用得更好,那不就可以削弱文中观点了吗?
E 加强
-- by 会员 kennu_r (2010/5/23 22:52:34)
not NN, and dont agree with kennu_r.
i guess first thing is to find the argument. If you change "Clearly" to "because", you will find the argument/conclusion is "1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward".
So to weaken this argument, you need to find premise that against it:
A. out of scope
B. out of scope
C. strong, not weaken
D. since hotels with better qualities are most likely to be saved, so it waken the argument that carpenter's superior ability is the only factor to it
E. out of scope
within the given premises, i can't find 建筑技艺与建筑材料是能否建成质量好的酒店的2个条件, so i think this explanation is incorrect.
-- by 会员 Jiangliu(2010/5/24 15:16:43)
晕,这帮人都在怎么解释啊~D的意思是:30年代以前的家具只有质量过硬的才会保留到现在,质量不好的都在历史的长河中随风而是了。所以现在看到的30年代以前的家具都是质量非常好的那一部分
-- by 会员 lafuria (2010/5/25 10:56:15)
好像OG 解释的是D说的是质量好的留下了,质量不好的都毁了。。。
你只拿质量好的作比较,而你要比较的是全部。。。所以说D是不具有代表性的。。。
-- by 会员 m313739540 (2010/5/25 11:01:09)