标题: best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism是支持criticism的论点的吗？ [打印本页] 作者: kelly1987 时间: 2011-9-2 02:32 标题: best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism是支持criticism的论点的吗？ WD-3-Q17: Brochure: Help conserve our city’s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.
Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion would save less than twenty dollars on a homeowner’s yearly water bills.
Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism?
A. Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve water by installing water-saving devices in their homes. B. A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape. C. A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards. D. It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional landscaping. E. Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other purposes combined.
best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism是支持criticism的论点还是支持反对criticism的论点的？晕了作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2011-9-2 02:42
No. Check the meaning of rebuttal.作者: kelly1987 时间: 2011-9-2 04:45
No. Check the meaning of rebuttal.
-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/9/2 2:42:37)
反驳criticism的，就是说立场和第一个一样是吗？作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2011-9-2 06:29
You have to find an answer choice, which is against the conclusion of "the savings from converting to a water-conserving landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping."作者: kelly1987 时间: 2011-9-2 07:38
got it, thanks a lot