ChaseDream

标题: GWD-5-38 [打印本页]

作者: springappleleaf    时间: 2004-7-3 11:20
标题: GWD-5-38

38. Nitrogen dioxide is a pollutant emitted by automobiles. Catalytic converters, devices designed to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, have been required in all new cars in Donia since 1993, and as a result, nitrogen dioxide emissions have been significantly reduced throughout most of the country. Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high, nitrogen dioxide emissions there have showed only an insignificant decline since 1993.


Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the insignificant decline in nitrogen dioxide emissions in Donia’s capital city?



  1. More of the cars in Donia’s capital city were made before 1993 than after 1993.

  2. The number of new cars sold per year in Donia has declined slightly since 1993.

  3. Pollutants other than nitrogen dioxide that are emitted by automobiles have also been significantly reduced in Donia since 1993.

  4. Many Donians who own cars made before 1993 have had catalytic converters installed in their cars.

  5. Most car trips in Donia’s capital city are too short for the catalytic converter to reach its effective working temperature.

The answer is E.  But can someone tell me why not A?




作者: groundkeeper    时间: 2004-7-3 19:07

I think A{More of the cars in Donia’s capital city were made before 1993 than after 1993} violates the premise {the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high}, so how does it help to explain the insignificant decline in nitrogen dioxide emissions in Donia’s capital city?

个人意见。呵呵,请各位指点


作者: lawyer_1    时间: 2004-7-3 20:18
The conclusion means the Nitrogen Dioxide emissions almost do not change. If the emission in the city is small in the past, currently it is small also. Choice A just says the emissions in the capital is small. It does not provide the reason why the emission almost do not change
[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-3 20:18:59编辑过]

作者: liu_9000    时间: 2004-8-8 01:21

为什么我的答案是D?

E否定了catalytic converter 的作用,与题干insignificant decline 不符合。D说明原来的排放级别就低,当然减少的程度也就小。


作者: liu_9000    时间: 2004-8-8 14:08
up
作者: philikittist    时间: 2004-8-8 23:28
D讲的是Dinoa,问题讲的是Dinao's capital
作者: liu_9000    时间: 2004-8-9 01:04

philikittist MM, thanks


作者: 流沙    时间: 2004-9-19 19:19

请教这个题目的意思

Nitrogen dioxide is a pollutant emitted by automobiles. Catalytic converters, devices designed to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, have been required in all new cars in Donia since 1993, and as a result, nitrogen dioxide emissions have been significantly reduced throughout most of the country. Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high, nitrogen dioxide emissions there have showed only an insignificant decline since 1993.

红线部分前面的是假设,后面的是实际结果?我怎么看不出来呀。。。


作者: rhod    时间: 2004-10-2 13:56

and as a result, nitrogen dioxide emissions have been significantly reduced throughout most of the country.

这句是全国范围内的结果.

nitrogen dioxide emissions there have showed only an insignificant decline since 1993.

这句是首都的结果.

两者之间有差异, 题目要求给出一个解释. E explains it.


作者: blur    时间: 2004-10-11 02:36

E对,没问题,还是想再把A讨论清楚。

A. More of the cars in Donia’s capital city were made before 1993 than after 1993.

如果把这里所说的cars理解为那些新车,

这样理解的话,就算是Catalytic converters在全国普及开了,但在Donia’s capital,因为新车是made before 1993, 所以不用安装Catalytic converters。也是能说明an insignificant decline since 1993。

还请大家指点。


作者: tinawg    时间: 2004-11-22 19:27

E

我觉得关键在于comparatively,Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high

即指新车的比例在1993年后是上升了的,不论这后来的比例是否只占总数的少部分(比如哪怕只从1%增加到10%,它也是上升了的。因此A不能合理解释

既然比例上升,污染就应该相应减少。所以E更能解释。


作者: xionghuixh    时间: 2005-1-18 13:17
why D 不好
作者: stillwater    时间: 2005-2-10 00:32

an insignificant deline.     = almost no deline

Buddy, Be Careful:    " insignificant "  and  "significant"

So D not key.

D support " a significant decline"


作者: guhuo    时间: 2005-2-23 17:48
Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high
不能解釋為新車在這Donia's capital city與在其它地市相比的比例高嗎?一定是新車與舊車的比例嗎?如果按照與其它城市相比的話,(A)應該是對的吧…
作者: ethyl    时间: 2005-5-18 07:05


Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high
不能解釋為新車在這Donia's capital city與在其它地市相比的比例高嗎?一定是新車與舊車的比例嗎?如果按照與其它城市相比的話,(A)應該是對的吧…

按照你的理解,1)首都比其他地区新车比例高;2)A说首都老车比新车多。那么,可以推出来其他地区老车比新车多得更多;又因为新车比例越高,排放物应该越少,也即decline应该越显著。

结论:首都deline更显著。


作者: aurorazhou    时间: 2005-6-16 06:31

Since we cannot counter the fact which is the premise here.


The statement already states that "the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high", therefore, we cannot counter that claim.



作者: jerry1121    时间: 2005-7-4 06:02
有个问题,如果车的数量在增加,不管它的排污两多大.总的排污量也会增加啊.B说每年买车还是没有减少,说明车子的总数在增加.即使增加每一个的车子比93年前的车子少排污,但是因为城市的车数在不断增加,所以排污也不会有明显下降啊?为什么B不对.请指教
作者: kangshifu    时间: 2005-9-3 22:43
以下是引用xionghuixh在2005-1-18 13:17:00的发言:
why D 不好


在GMAT逻辑题中,many不能说明任何问题,一般都错。因为many只表示数量,不表示比例,比如说总数是100万,1%1万也可以算many吧,但有用吗?没有。


以上观点可商榷。


作者: angelovevil    时间: 2005-9-12 01:44
以下是引用ethyl在2005-5-18 7:05:00的发言:




按照你的理解,1)首都比其他地区新车比例高;2)A说首都老车比新车多。那么,可以推出来其他地区老车比新车多得更多;又因为新车比例越高,排放物应该越少,也即decline应该越显著。


结论:首都deline更显著。


不知道这个思维过程在考试的时候是否奏效。。


作者: LunarLin    时间: 2005-9-23 14:28

我觉得A对。


说新车比例高,可是新车也可以是93年前制造的呀,不是非得93年之后的车才算新车;所以A比较能合理解释为什么新车比例高了,可是污染还是没改善,因为用的车还都是没有新功能的车。




作者: oceanalma    时间: 2005-10-4 18:36

E是说这个设备不能达到工作状态是吧?所以减少污染的效果不明显。


但是为什么说too short,感觉车子的设备应该不是靠形势距离长短来决定作用的发挥吧


是不是有点有背常识,还是我理解错了?



作者: cdsteven517    时间: 2006-3-29 20:52
选 E 麻
作者: 哈哈镜小小    时间: 2006-3-30 10:41

我是菜鸟啊,我试着解释一下我的理解


题目讲的是 Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high


A选项的描述与这句话矛盾了,所以A不选


而且选项只是写cars,而不是 new cars,所以不能想楼上那样想那么多吧...



说得不好,希望各位大牛们指点。。。


作者: wingkim    时间: 2006-8-12 18:02
以下是引用jerry1121在2005-7-4 6:02:00的发言:
有个问题,如果车的数量在增加,不管它的排污两多大.总的排污量也会增加啊.B说每年买车还是没有减少,说明车子的总数在增加.即使增加每一个的车子比93年前的车子少排污,但是因为城市的车数在不断增加,所以排污也不会有明显下降啊?为什么B不对.请指教

确实有这个问题,就像现在国内都要求新汽车满足欧II排放标准,但是国内的汽车排放总量还是不断增加,因为汽车总量在迅猛增长。

不过我找到一个说服自己的理由:

原文说的是only an insignificant decline,也就是说排污量有decline,既然这样,要么就是说肯定汽车总量没有增加,因为汽车总量增加是导致排污量increase的充分条件;要么就是说原文的排污量是在说相对排污量,譬如车均排污量而不是排污总量。

那么基于这个理解,如果是A项more是old car,comparatively high new car减少排污量,相对来说结果就不只是insignificant的decline,而是significant decline。

如果是是E的话,most car 不起作用,most car的排污量不变,言下之意是剩下a few car起作用减少排污量,那么总的排污量相对以前就只是insignificant decline。

所以,个人倾向E,虽然原来也选A。


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-8-12 18:05:07编辑过]

作者: maydaythekid    时间: 2006-8-19 14:47

支持E

始终觉得原文说:Coveter内置--------》但是,没有达到 significant的emission decline

措施达目的,觉得E项的探讨主题比较靠谱


作者: soloenti    时间: 2006-8-19 16:37
Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high  表示新車跟新車比 污染還是比較高     因此應該是E 轉換器未發生功效
作者: linda816    时间: 2006-10-5 06:40

D是无关项,因为是说明首都情况特殊,D说的是全国

A也不对,题目明确新车比例首都比其他地方还高,所以不管旧车的多少,减少污染的效果首都没有理由比全国其他地方差。显然A是无关的


作者: sunchshwill    时间: 2006-10-5 07:10

作者: Gavin_win    时间: 2006-10-28 20:40

发表一下个人见解:

题目问:解释没有显著下降的原因。

       A 即使在这种情况下,总排放也会下降的。因为,毕竟93年以后的车排放要少。

       D.因为装置不起作用,所以排放不下降。即使所有的车都装了转换装置。

本人做第一遍的时候,因为时间关系,看到A比较象就选了。回头看看,还是D跟贴切。

请执教!


作者: cxvv    时间: 2006-11-22 00:40

冒个泡泡

首先原文里说了yet although the proportion of new cars in D's capital city has always been comparatively high.

这个new cars显然指向前面的"have been required in all new cars since 1993"

所以,所有new cars 应是装了防污染装置的

所以排除D

E中提到了"temperature",但是原文中没有定位.某种程度上是臆测.排除

 

D对.因为新车本来就少污染,老车本来也不怎么污染,自然污染数据没有多大下降


作者: ana9    时间: 2006-11-29 14:21
D中是指Donia整个国家的人,而题目要求解释的对象是Donia首都的人
E: note--effective working

作者: snowofjune    时间: 2007-8-18 12:44
A为什么不对,不好?
作者: simple_dream    时间: 2008-1-7 23:46

Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high,

文中以提及,新车的比例大幅提高.那么A与此事实不符合.定要排除.

本人一直迷惑的是 D.


作者: happycg    时间: 2008-5-30 09:35

ddddddddddddddddddddd


作者: 五月十三    时间: 2008-5-30 10:39
以下是引用springappleleaf在2004-7-3 11:20:00的发言:

38. Nitrogen dioxide is a pollutant emitted by automobiles. Catalytic converters, devices designed to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, have been required in all new cars in Donia since 1993, and as a result, nitrogen dioxide emissions have been significantly reduced throughout most of the country. Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high, nitrogen dioxide emissions there have showed only an insignificant decline since 1993.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the insignificant decline in nitrogen dioxide emissions in Donia’s capital city?

  1. More of the cars in Donia’s capital city were made before 1993 than after 1993.
  2. The number of new cars sold per year in Donia has declined slightly since 1993.
  3. Pollutants other than nitrogen dioxide that are emitted by automobiles have also been significantly reduced in Donia since 1993.
  4. Many Donians who own cars made before 1993 have had catalytic converters installed in their cars.
  5. Most car trips in Donia’s capital city are too short for the catalytic converter to reach its effective working temperature.

The answer is E.  But can someone tell me why not A?



 题干大意:

1、Nitrogen dioxide是由汽车排放出来的一种污染物。(限定了Nitrogen dioxide的来源,只由汽车排放,不用考虑其他的来源问题)
2、Catalytic converter是设计用来减少Nitrogen dioxide的排放的,并且从1993年起,在所以的新车上都必须安装。
3、(随着这个政策的执行)结果,Nitrogen dioxide在全国的排放量显著的减少了。(有个地方除外,从下文可以得出是首都,排放量并没有显著减少)
4、尽管首都的新车比例一直以来都是相当的高(注意always 和现在完成时态)(这是前提,并且是事实的前提,不是假设的),但是Nitrogen dioxide的排放量,从1993年开始只有一个不明显的降低。(这是事实,不是假设)

Question:要求对这个看似矛盾的事实进行解释,并且是most help。
A、1993年前产的车比1993年后产的车多,在首都。题干中有说道,首都新车的比例一直以来相当的高,如果A说的是true的,那么因为题干的暗示,可以得出,即使旧车数量比新车多,但是比例并不会高多少。(因为多一辆,也就可以用more than。)而这部分comparatively high proportion的新车使用Catalytic converter,那么nitrogen dioxide emissions是不是也应该是significantly reduced的呢?因此,A is out。

B、问题只问关于Donia’s capital city的情况,B把范围扩大到Donia,可以排除。并且从1993起,新车销售的数量下降,但是新车与旧车的比例是越来越大。等等原因,B直接 cancel

C、不用解释了吧。

D、与B同样的错误,扩大了范围,从首都扩大到整个Donia。题目只设计到,为什么首都是这样的。

E、说的意思是,首都大部分车开的路程太短,Catalytic converter无法发挥作用。换句话说,装了Catalytic converter和没装差不多。most help 地解释了题干中出现的现象。

E is the best.


[此贴子已经被作者于2008-5-30 10:40:39编辑过]

作者: batmanhm    时间: 2008-6-4 17:11
以下是引用simple_dream在2008-1-7 23:46:00的发言:

Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high,

文中以提及,新车的比例大幅提高.那么A与此事实不符合.定要排除.

本人一直迷惑的是 D.

    文中说的是比例大幅提高,但是不代表绝对数量

   很有可能大幅提高之后,现在新车的数量还是少于1993年以前的旧车啊


作者: bigzigzag    时间: 2008-6-17 05:38
those questions suck
作者: dawei904    时间: 2008-8-25 17:00

给大家一个背景知识,也许就好理解了。catalytic converter是三元催化,是安装在汽车排气管中部的一个device,工作温度是800度以上,短距离行车,排气管温度不够,三元催化不起作用。


作者: geminisky    时间: 2008-11-18 13:26

一开始 也选的是A,因为这个很直接,做题时间有限就选了,后来分析,A(  More of the cars in Donia’s capital city were made before 1993 than after 1993.)与the proportion of new cars in Donia’s capital city has always been comparatively high很矛盾,就排除掉。

也许会有人说,cars made before 1993也可以是new cars但是没安装 Catalytic converters,这样就解释decline了。     但我感觉,做题要宏观微观一起看,宏观上就是大体上地要承认文章给出的内容,不要自己做多的联想,比如说文章中出现的new cars就是cars made after 1993; 微观上是看细节了,比如出现的comparatively high,指的是新旧车的对比,新车(made after 1993) 要比旧车(cars made before 1993)多。由此,因为A与原文矛盾,排除。

D错在讨论Donians,而文中key point 是 讨论 capital 的。或许有人说,那也不是没关啊--做了过多的联想了。。。

答案是E,我想是因为  1.就事论事,有key words--Donia’s capital city, the catalytic converter.

                           2.比较直接,不需要我自己再凭空地加上什么假设去联想

对原文给出的某一点的承认与质疑。。。有时通过抽象词可以判定,比如FACT,但是大多时候,还真是头疼。。。

由此,想到:对于各类型逻辑题   选项 的判断是不是有这么一个规律呢--

解释,支持,假设---选项a :key word + 比较直接+态度或中心思想与原文一致

                                          优先于选项b :好像有点道理,但是需要再加上点联想

削弱---选项a型,选项b型,看似无关型,平行关系无优先级


作者: sunny11wing    时间: 2008-11-28 13:55

不知道是不是我捕风捉影呢?

觉得题干里那个always是有来头的。就是因为这个always使得选项A在时间的维度上和原文矛盾。

另外,只要新车比例和其他城市比,comparatively high。不管新车多还是老车多(选项A就是说老车比新车多),reduction就应该比其他城市显著。因此,从空间的维度上,A也不对。

想到GWD5-8题里,另一个小词only也暗示了些什么。

When a new restaurant, Martin’s Cafe, opened in Riverville last year, many people predicted that business at the Wildflower Inn, Riverville’s only other restaurant, would suffer from the competition.  Surprisingly, however, in the year since Martin’s Cafe opened, the average number of meals per night served at the Wildflower Inn has increased significantly.

 

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase?

 

  1. Unlike the Wildflower Inn, Martin’s Cafe serves considerably more meals on weekends than it does on weekdays.
  2. Most of the customers of Martin’s Cafe had never dined in Riverville before this restaurant opened, and on most days Martin’s Cafe attracts more customers than it can seat.
  3. The profit per meal is higher, on average, for meals served at Martin’s Cafe than for those served at the Wildflower Inn.
  4. The Wildflower Inn is not open on Sundays, and therefore Riverville residents who choose to dine out on that day must either eat at Martin’s Cafe or go to neighboring towns to eat.
  5. A significant proportion of the staff at Martin’s Cafe are people who formerly worked at the Wildflower Inn and were hired away by the owner of Martin’s Cafe.

答案是B。正是因为除了M以外,只有W一家,所以M没位了以后,才会有一个比较大的可能性回去W吃。(当然也可能继续等M的位,也可能回家吃。不过只要存在可能性-去W这个唯一可以选择的餐馆吃,就explain了。不用充分。)

所以这些小词,可能是出题点,也可能是帮助解题的重要信息。出题的思路似乎是认为这些小词带有一定的态度,可能infer出一些东西而不认为是做题人自己的主观臆断。


作者: lyyjane    时间: 2009-9-3 08:49

一开始也选A,看了答案觉得E是对的,A错误,因为即使D首都1993年产的旧车多,其实也不能说明排污量减少不多,因为根据前面提示,只要有新车,那么排污量肯定下降,A不能说明任何问题。


作者: adai    时间: 2009-10-10 04:30

我觉得答案E正确的最关键点是car的定语“trips in Donia’s capital city

不管新车多旧车多,车如果不开(trip),就不会排放Nitrogen dioxide 从而产生污染。个人觉得就凭这一点E感觉上就比A,B好了

另外:对一个地方的污染不一定只是本地车造成的,外地车外国车常到capital city转悠的数量也不会少,也许它们是造成污染的决定性力量...


[此贴子已经被作者于2009/10/10 4:34:15编辑过]

作者: gumoc    时间: 2013-5-11 15:03
所有的车在1993年换上减排装置后起到了减排的作用,那么E选项说的由于TRIP不够导致无法发挥效果显然是不成立的。为什么1993年时候可以减排(1993年的平均TRIp达到了有效值吗?文中也没有讲清楚啊),而过了1993年就不能减排了?




欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3