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作者: camelo777 时间: 2011-6-20 00:34
这道题的措辞确实非常恶心，注意结论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. 因为坐stools的人通常stay的时间比较短，（可理解为有更多的时间接待新客人），所以建议全都换成stools，这样大家stay的时间短了，就能接待更多的客人，因此可以提升profit。
问题是削弱，那如果坐stool的人stay的时间并没有那么短，也是很长呢？那不就达不到餐厅想要的效果了。 这就是C选项， a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to （the generalization about lingering） 注意这里这个the generalization about lingering说的就是普遍认为的idea，也就是题目里说的坐stool的人会stay的短一点，但是C支出选择来坐tall table也就是stool的人是一个例外，那么也就是说这些人不会stay很短时间，那么也就削弱了原文的结论。作者: lllmmm 时间: 2011-6-20 13:49
牛，谢谢了！