ChaseDream

标题: perp逻辑求翻译求解释~！ [打印本页]

作者: shunliqumeiguo 时间: 2010-11-14 12:28
标题: perp逻辑求翻译求解释~！

17.(26864-!-item-!-188;#058&003368)

At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height tables.However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities.Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables.Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

(A) some celebrities come to the Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available

(B) the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the Hollywood compensates for the longer time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals

(C) a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering

(D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer

(E) with enough tall tables to accommodate all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables

答案C

看不懂这道题目啊~~~！求翻译~！求解释~！

作者: winzero 时间: 2010-11-14 17:36
题目应该挺好懂的，就是C有点难懂。就是说高脚凳能给人VIEW,所以餐厅如果增设这些高脚凳就会增加revenue。C的意思就是，选择高脚凳的人客人并不是那些会逗留很久的人。
此题A是无关选项，B中讲的是名人会点更多贵的东西来补偿他们在这里逗留这么长时间，也是无关的。跟高脚凳没有任何关系。而D也是一样。a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer说的是，花更少时间在MEAL上的顾客基本上都会点一些不怎么贵的食物。跟题目没什么关系。
E中，如果有足够的高脚凳去给那些有兴趣坐这些凳子的客人，其他顾客就不能看了。讲的顾客有没有风景问题。。也跟原文无关。就C中沾了点关系，所以我选择选C。至于其中的逻辑关系。学老管的话，考场那么短的时间肯定想不了的。找相关选项就好

作者: eshopaholic 时间: 2010-11-15 14:25
C 理解不了. 选择高脚凳的人客人并不是那些会逗留很久的人。并没有指出逗留时间长短与收入的关系.

我选D.

原文diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables.
(D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer

把时间短和花钱少,联系起来了, 从而削弱了argument

作者: winzero 时间: 2010-11-15 17:00
...D怎么削弱啊。。ARGUMENT只是说if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.
是讲高脚凳的增设和利润。。你这里只是说花更少时间在MEAL上的顾客基本上都会点一些不怎么贵的食物。这必须建立在一个前提是坐高脚凳的人都是逗留时间短的人。但是题目中没有提到啊。。。
本人一点愚见。

作者: shunliqumeiguo 时间: 2010-11-15 19:26
嗯！！！我觉得逻辑相关性的把握对高效解决问题是很重要的。大家说是不是？？？

作者: eshopaholic 时间: 2010-11-15 23:33

...D怎么削弱啊。。ARGUMENT只是说if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.
是讲高脚凳的增设和利润。。你这里只是说花更少时间在MEAL上的顾客基本上都会点一些不怎么贵的食物。这必须建立在一个前提是坐高脚凳的人都是逗留时间短的人。但是题目中没有提到啊。。。
本人一点愚见。

-- by 会员 winzero (2010/11/15 17:00:03)

原文中 diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables

作者: eshopaholic 时间: 2010-11-15 23:51
当然，在没能建立清晰逻辑链条的情况下，用“相关性”的策略猜，命中率会高一些。但这只是考试的技巧，且看似相关，很有可能是“高度迷惑”。

请高人出山，指点迷津；希望能学得扎实一点。

作者: winzero 时间: 2010-11-16 10:23
啊，是我疏忽了。不过，顾客点不贵的菜，也不就是说PROFIT不高啊，因为顾客逗留时间不长，那么就可以使更多顾客来光顾啊，那样利润也会高的。再者，点贵的菜也不见得利润就一定会高。。

作者: eshopaholic 时间: 2010-11-16 11:07
哪位高人,能解释一下C的思路,如果C正确的话

作者: eshopaholic 时间: 2010-11-18 22:22
没人讨论，

拜请高人出山，讲解

谢谢

作者: jake1 时间: 2010-11-18 23:12
1，because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities.
2Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables
这个就是结论的依据，只要削弱其中任何一个就都能削弱结论了。c削弱了2。我倒是误选了e，以为是对1的削弱。except of也没见过这么用的，谁能把e项翻译一下呵呵前面winzero翻译的没看明白..

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