20. Legal rules are expressed in general terms. They concern classification of persons and actions and they prescribe legal consequences for persons and actions falling into the relevant categories. The application of a rule to a particular case, therefore, involves a decision on whether the facts of that case fall within the categories mentioned in the rule. This decision establishes the legal effect of what happened rather than any matter of fact.
The passage provides the most support for which one of the following?
(A) Legal rules, like matters of fact, are concerned with classifications of things such as actions.
(B) Matters of fact, like legal rules, can sometimes be expressed in general terms.
(C) Making a legal decision does not involve matters of fact.
(D) The application of a rule to a particular case need not be left to a judge.
(E) Whether the facts of a case fall into a relevant category is not itself a matter of fact.
key's E.
C为什么不对呢？最后一句This decision establishes the legal effect of what happened rather than any matter of fact. 说decision确定的是effect而不是matter of fact，这不就排除了matter of fact吗？
是不是可以这样理解：
前面说involves a decision on [whether the facts fall within the categories.【Z】]
后面紧接着说this decision establishes..【X】..rather than..【Y】..
所以可以判断出Y和Z是不同的
但是还是不懂C为什么不对。
This is an interesting one.
IMO, the last sentence should read "This decision establishes the legal effect of what happened rather than any matter of fact [does]." In other words, decision on category, rather than matter of fact, establishes the legal effect. (I know that people will argue that from pure syntactic point-of-view, "matter of fact" should be object of the verb "establish". But I believe my interpretation of the sentence makes more logical sense.)
Why C is not correct? C is wrong because its claim is too extreme. One can rightfully argue that this sentence, "decision on whether the facts of that case fall within the categories", tells us that making a legal decision does involve facts (or, matter of facts).
That leave us with E. You can try deny test on E. Deny E, we get "Whether the facts of a case fall into a relevant category is itself a matter of fact." If so, the last sentence of the paragraph (according to my interpretation) will fall apart. This indicates that E is a inference of the passage.
Open to discussion.
Your reasoning make much sense to me!
I agree with you.There in the lsat sentence should have been a "does" omitted.
thank you robert!
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |