Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate from this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms.
78. Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT:
(A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade.
(B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years.
(C) Evidence suggests that inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen.
(D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures.
(E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment.
答案a,没有问题，但是我看了一些帖子，说a是削弱，我不是很明白，我觉得是无关选项，文中并没有明确说明人口的多少和污染的严重之间的关系，所以人口增加不一定就是污染严重了，是吗？我选a, 是觉得它没有支持的作用，无关痛痒，nn门如何认为？谢谢指教
Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate from this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate.(Conclusion) Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously(Reason1). Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution(Reason2). However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution(~Reason2), one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms(Reason3).
原文逻辑认为reason1和reason2导致了conclusion; 后面否了reason2, 认为是reason3导致的； A选项说了reason4, 削弱了原文说是reason3导致的。不知意下如何？？
a有明显的问题，原文是要找一个对呼吸器的支持，而a中支持的是污染致使死亡率过高，明显不是说一个东西，更别说是support原文的最后一句了
Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate from this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms.
78. Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT:
(A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade.
(B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years.
(C) Evidence suggests that inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen.
(D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures.
(E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment.
答案a,没有问题，但是我看了一些帖子，说a是削弱，我不是很明白，我觉得是无关选项，文中并没有明确说明人口的多少和污染的严重之间的关系，所以人口增加不一定就是污染严重了，是吗？我选a, 是觉得它没有支持的作用，无关痛痒，nn门如何认为？谢谢指教
是啊！这一题我也不理解~明白了XDJM们能不能给我解释一下？题干前半部分说是因为原因1和2引起的高死亡率，后半部分说在原因1,2都不满足的地方，死亡率还是大大增加了，所以说asthma的高死亡率是因为原因3。
(A)到底是怎么样weaken原因3的啊？a说的是人口增长。题干中从头到尾也没有提过这个问题，
1。如果说它是他因的话。文中没有说人口增长也是原因之一，如果选他作他因是不是下了个假设，人口增长所以污染变严重，所以不是原因3而是原因2？如果是这样的话，题干中推出原因3的是在有些地方没有污染的前提下，这里反前提可以吗？
2。如果说人口增长不是代表污染严重，只是他自己是原因4，所以证明不是原因3。可是文中如果没有提过人口增长也有可能造成高的死亡率，我们没有足够的证据把它当作是原因4啊？
想不通啊！请各位帮帮忙~~感谢感谢啊！！
这个题确实有点狡猾！
前面一直说死亡率什么什么，而结论是 one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms. 其中的the cause of increased deaths 说的是死亡数增加的原因。陷阱阿！（不知道ETS是不是也这么狡猾？？）
而A选项说，可能是人口增加导致了死亡数增加，所以，是他因削弱！
不知道我的解释是否清晰，希望有所帮助吧。
NN们怎么解此题？
frxiao是否应该再仔细读读题目中的每个词？
frxiao是否应该再仔细读读题目中的每个词？
我觉得frxiao说得没有错！题目中没有说asthma和increase in population有关系，原文中只是提出两种解释1，可能因为死亡率纪录比以前准确，2，可能因为城市污染严重。然后举了一个例子说有些地方纪录一直很准确，而且城市污染也不严重的地方，asthma引起的死亡率还是很高，所以说是因为asthma病人使用了bronchial inhalers造成的。题目没有在死亡率增加和人口增加建立任何关系，也没有说人口增加就污染增加。
仔细看了一下，这道题目是问以下哪一个statement没有support这个结论，其他几个选项多多少少有点支持原文中的结论或者削弱其他两个解释，只有A和结论（其实和整个原文）都毫不相关，所以在这种情况下只有选A, 但不是因为它削弱原文结论，而是因为其他的都有支持只有他无关。
大家觉得呢？
我觉得frxiao说得没有错！题目中没有说asthma和increase in population有关系，原文中只是提出两种解释1，可能因为死亡率纪录比以前准确，2，可能因为城市污染严重。然后举了一个例子说有些地方纪录一直很准确，而且城市污染也不严重的地方，asthma引起的死亡率还是很高，所以说是因为asthma病人使用了bronchial inhalers造成的。题目没有在死亡率增加和人口增加建立任何关系，也没有说人口增加就污染增加。
仔细看了一下，这道题目是问以下哪一个statement没有support这个结论，其他几个选项多多少少有点支持原文中的结论或者削弱其他两个解释，只有A和结论（其实和整个原文）都毫不相关，所以在这种情况下只有选A, 但不是因为它削弱原文结论，而是因为其他的都有支持只有他无关。
大家觉得呢？
the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms
版主认为结论中的increased deaths是死亡率，如果是，则答案a中的人口增加是无关选项；如果是死亡数，我认为，人口增加可作为他因削弱。
请版主再次指点。谢谢！
逻辑区好像人气不旺呀，一个问题提出来，响应速度似乎很慢的。
看来，需要斑竹、nn和同志们一起努力，让逻辑区旺起来！
嗯，小小说明一下：逻辑区的版主全部都在抓紧备考，有的是托福，有的是GMAT，时间也都很紧了。。。太不凑巧了，给大家造成这么多不便，多多体谅。
也希望大家都热心起来，看到问题积极参与讨论
理解理解。大家一起努力。等nn门考完了，肯定有好的心得与大家分享的。
期待中......
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |