。请xdjm指正Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are
commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several wine
makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to
drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers
without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. Which of the following is an assumption
on which the argument depends?
A. These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced
by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic
substances to their wine.
B. Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reactions.
C. Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.
D. Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give
rise to an allergic reaction.
E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in
amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines
这T 做的时候选了B ！之后看大家的帖子讨论集中在ADE 上面！看到LAWYER 选E ， MINDFREE 开始看错了选了D ，看清楚后马上选了E ！
感觉这T 的迷惑性怎么这么大啊！无关选择也很难排除啊！我想了很长时间！感觉A ，D 无关是因为文章一直在说对S 的过敏，而AD 都说了对其他东西的过敏就错了！
B 呢 我仔细看才看出来他说的是FORMS ，其实也是无关吧！文章没有说S 有什么FORM 只类的！
所以选E了就是S 的量上的问题，因为无论如何都得加这个S ！不知道思路对不对，LAWYER 帮助看看吧！
但是MINDFREE 举了个例子，
Why D is correct? One simple example: There is no wolf in the woods. So it should be safe for kids to play there. Assumption: there is no other wild animals such as tiger or snake that pose dange to kid.
如果他说的这个对，那D 就不无关了啊！
严厉支持XY JJ 题目标准化！！（方便所有人的查找）
格式以改，多多注意！
题目很清楚地写到“。。。。those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives.”
所以再讨论naturally presented问题是无意义的（选项E)，文章已经通过common added 告诉我们是后来添加的。同时as preservatives告诉我们sulfites是用来做防腐剂的。所以如果那些葡萄酒制造商不添加sulfites的话，他们必须有别的方法来防腐。
所以选A.
还是有些不明白选E, 因为提干中已指出不加S, 所以似乎不用在讨论S的多少"However, since there are several wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce"
而D恰好是一个排除它因的选项. 望赐教.
可能是因为制酒的原料里面就含有sufities，D肯定不对，你看最后一句是
people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites
也就是说它对别的过敏和题目没有关系
感觉应该选E。如果E的Assumption 不成立。Wine中有Sulfites，则直接推翻了题干的结论。
非常典型的一道GMAT逻辑题，着实体现出ETS逻辑题的狡猾。ETS没有说让你挑正确的答案，而是让你挑最好的答案。所以答案一定是比出来的。这道题ADE都是符合逻辑的答案，但是E比D好，D比A好。判断的标准是哪个和题干的结论关系更直接。
题干的结论是：
people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
主旨是：过敏人群可以去喝特制的酒。隐含一个限定范围，只提到了对sulfites的过敏。
A.实际是假设：人们会去喝特制的酒（因为它的味道和普通酒没差别）。应该算是相关选项。如果题干的结论是特制酒能获得商业的成果，那毫无疑问这个是很好的答案。但和本题的题干结论的主旨有差异。
B.C.明显无关
D.实际是假设：人们可以去喝特制的酒，（因为它不含任何过敏物质）。相关选项。符合本题题干的主旨，但范畴比题干更广，不限于sulfites。
E.实际是假设：人们可以去喝特制的酒，（因为它确实不会造成对sulfites的过敏）。符合题干的主旨，也符合题干的限制，是最基本的假设。The best answer!!!
罗嗦这么多，是给自己总结一下解题的思路。请xdjm指正
我先选的是D,后来觉得E更有道理，但是，最终发现还是应该选A。 理由如下：
1、D被排除是因为超过了SULFITE的过敏范围，所以，不符合美国人一贯LIMITED的思想。
2、E似乎最有说服力，但我发现E项有两个问题：（1），假设不能与题干中的事实矛盾，没有添加就是没有添加，“NONE”就意味着不能添加，并非意味着添加的程度不同；（2）E项 Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.
注意最后这个黄色加深部分，这里将过敏反应扩大了，不再是针对题干中所说的那些易于过敏的人，因此，也不符合美国人一贯的LIMITED思维。
3）为什么我最终又回归A项呢？两个理由：（1）结论中强调了两点：people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. 所以，我们的假设要满足这两点；（2）A的确可以满足这两点：These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. 既保证这些人喜欢喝，又保证他们不过敏，这样才能得出他们会乐意喝这种酒而不冒过敏的风险！
请大家讨论
reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives：不仅仅是添加剂的s会过敏，其他成分的s还是会过敏，所以a)虽然制造商没有用s做添加剂且效果一样，但不排除仍然有自然s的情况，只解决了部分过敏源。e)就在承认某些制造商做法的前提下排除了wine中除了添加剂外的其他过敏源s.
实际上ets经常在逻辑上玩弄范畴改变或者集合扩大缩小的小把戏的，原题中的including 就是这么一个陷阱：含义是题中的preservatives的s 是的certain sulfites子集合，但有可能等同于母集合。正确答案就修补了这个问题——certain s没有其他的子集合了，二者就是一码事。所以e。
我先选的是D,后来觉得E更有道理，但是，最终发现还是应该选A。 理由如下：
1、D被排除是因为超过了SULFITE的过敏范围，所以，不符合美国人一贯LIMITED的思想。
2、E似乎最有说服力，但我发现E项有两个问题：（1），假设不能与题干中的事实矛盾，没有添加就是没有添加，“NONE”就意味着不能添加，并非意味着添加的程度不同；但是有可能自然产生的，你注意including了吗?（2）E项 Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.someone here doesn't mean anyone
注意最后这个黄色加深部分，这里将过敏反应扩大了，不再是针对题干中所说的那些易于过敏的人，因此，也不符合美国人一贯的LIMITED思维。
3）为什么我最终又回归A项呢？两个理由：（1）结论中强调了两点：people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. 所以，我们的假设要满足这两点；（2）A的确可以满足这两点：These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. 既保证这些人喜欢喝，又保证他们不过敏，这样才能得出他们会乐意喝这种酒而不冒过敏的风险！其实过敏不过敏是客观的问题，而a选项强调的是没有不同所以大家主观上一样爱喝的问题
请大家讨论
A取非结论仍成立,因为只要ADD其他不ALLER的CONSER
是E
A 根本不可能对，因为ETS的答案99%都是反对结论，只有一道题反对前提，那也是因为前提是一个模糊的答案，can / could be / 反对，设定的前提：there are several wine makers who add sulfites to NONE of the wines they produce，是没有意义的。
所以要选一个选项能起到，即使让argument的前提成立，也得不出结论的选项，一看完这道题干，你首先就能想到的是，材料里面就有sulfites， 那不管加不加sulfites，都不能喝。 这就是E。
唉，能搞得过ETS的人还是太少啊
偶选A
发现不对
A把范围扩大到所有allergenic substances
显然这是不必要的
唉，能搞得过ETS的人还是太少啊
偶选A
发现不对
A把范围扩大到所有allergenic substances
显然这是不必要的
非常同意啊！
答案我认为是E，对A，D取非，结论仍然成立。E与题中说得，并不矛盾，wine中并未添加S，这点可以从Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines看出 ,此句意思是说S在wine中的naturally的量，即本身含有的量没有达到能够引起过敏的量。
小女子非NN，但站在NN的肩膀上看了这么多讨论，我确定是E，
people who would like to
drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
题目结论是喝不加s的酒就不会对s过敏，未言及其他物质，所以D超出范围。E的意思是要假设酒本身含有的s的量不足以使人过敏
Cherry MM的总结应该是一目了然而且准确滴。
为啥GWD总是这样呢
做完一套篇子，对答案的时候，有NN说选A;又有NN说选D，最后我都不知道我错了多少个。而且本来我觉得我看得挺明白的，结果一看大家的讨论，又糊涂了
我狠狠地看了很久。。。每位的观点也都明白了。。。但还是有一个问题。。。
酒厂不再将这种导致过敏的“盐”加入到wine中，因此，这酒又能喝了。。。
看完题后会有两个反应：
1/这wine里可能本来就含有“盐”的成分，所以需要假设一个前提：E
2/这wine里可能本来就含有其他导致过敏的成分，所以需要一个前提：D
A我就不再提了
跪求各位NN，究竟怎么才能一下子就抓住ETS要求的那个反应呢？而且还坚定无比。。。
补充：XDJM们，不带着结论去做演绎题，是失去航标的航行，是及其危险的。
我的一个小窍门（NN们笑话了），就是有APART FROM...（排除关键词）的选项，大部分是错误的干扰选项（估计在99。9999999。。。％以上）
D Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. 就这个点add sulfites to none of the wines来说D没切中要害，说S以外的关我S什么事？所以无关
A 说什么have been able to，感觉时间段都不合啊，曾经怎么样关现在什么事啊，感觉也是无关...anyway，偶也选E...
E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in
amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.
Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives.
题干中一直在讨论的是说SULFITES是加进去的,而E中说SULFITES在酒中自然存在,所以我认为E是无关的.----另外,亚硫酸盐可能在酒中自然存在吗?
我支持d,既然酒中的SULFITES本来就量不致人过敏，那何必再选特制酒呢，岂不多此一举。
E说酒本身有的S并不会引起过敏,所以这是前提,若取非就削弱结论了.
其实我想最大的还是阅读于理解的问题,大家仔细看看选项,理解清楚了自然就会了,不要在没有完全理解题目的基础上盲目讨论,这样大家就不会被错误信息误导了,对吗?
支持E
A的前提范围小一些，不管造酒者是不是找到其他防腐方法，若是酒中自然存在足够大量的sulfites，还是可以造成过敏。
I take E rather than anything else in this question.
支持E，D选项感觉有点像超出范围了。本文提炼中心词后，就是讨论的一个事情，硫磺。过敏也只针对硫磺，其他的物质的过敏不再原文讨论范围内。
可能是因为制酒的原料里面就含有sufities，D肯定不对，你看最后一句是
people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites
也就是说它对别的过敏和题目没有关系
同意D肯定不對，根本不是“不好”，或者“比E不好”。是堅定徹底的不對。
感觉不能把添加certain sulfites的 preservatives目的忽略了！
certain sulfites，including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives.
结论是达到without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. 的目的。
而所谓“过敏”（包括certain sulfites）只要很少计量或一点点就会有反应，否则就叫“吃多了，撑坏了---常人也会”
如果答案是E的话，some wine makers添加了amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. 其目的是为达到防腐的效果和计量的。何况只要添加了sulfites就有 risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
根本无法满足without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. 的目的。
1.多了allergic;
2.少了不防腐---也就是说少了就根本没必要了;
3.other sulfites 根本就不会导致allergic,和多少无关。
所以E不正确
答案应该是A
对certain sulfites会过敏又要喝酒的人，可以喝无sulfites这类可能导致其过敏的酒：
1.不用防腐，不用添加；
2.不添加sulfites潜在过敏源，选用其它方法达到与sulfites防腐相同效果的酒；
直接免避免了allergic to sulfites（不是certain sulfites），实现without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
D选项中的no substances所涉及范围太广，不对。
呵呵，自我反省，想通了。
答案确实应该是E。
道理就是简单的“假设纯粹是因人为添加了足够导致过敏计量的sulfites，而导致过敏，则选酒（制造商）-去处人为因素，对防止sulfites过敏是有用的。”
而A选项虽排除人为致敏因素，却没有排除酒中自然存在足够量的sulfites导致过敏的可能性。
知错就改，还是好孩子。
我不觉得E一定比D好，因为E所谈到的也有超出题目讨论的范围——“in amounts large enough ”——题目只讨论加还是不加，并没有提到加的量导致过敏的问题，如此E也可以认为是无关的阿！
选E
Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are
commonly added to wine as preservatives.
对 sulfites 过敏 包括天然的和添加的都应该考虑。只不过题目大部分说的是添加的，容易忽略天然sulfites。
lawyer and mindfree have give us a clear explaination.Thanks to NN and all the participators
However, since there are several wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce
这句话怎么翻译?特别是to none of the wines they produce,谢谢
TO LS:
然而,有一些造酒的人没有在他们造的任何酒里加入S.即他们酒里全都没有S
LAWYER的发言选E就是E了:如果要选D，文中说不加S，就不过敏，前提应该是酒里没有其他过敏物质是对的，但是注意文中说的是不会对S过敏，所以前提应该是酒里没有自然存在的S了
支持E
A强调有wine maker能用添加其他不造成过敏的substances的方法来复制添加sulfites达到的效果，逻辑上和D很类似，都是在“言他”。而题目的conclusion强调的是without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites，因此A和D都是无关选项
选E
我原来误选了A，因为自己主观臆断，不加防腐剂的酒是不是有问题，这纯粹是自己的判断，脱离了原文的逻辑思路
深刻体会了什么叫有关，什么叫无关
只有和原文推理莲有关的才叫有关
这道题只说对S的过敏，而且说S是add的，所以他因，naturally
排除另有他因的可能,
这道题取非就是另有他因,
必定削弱
这道题的思路真是绕啊，看了半天才反映过来说什么呢：
Ａ群人对Ｓ过敏，对添加在酒里的Ｓ也过敏（不能喝），但是酒厂不往酒里加Ｓ，所以Ａ群人可以喝这个酒
Ｄ：酒里没有其他东西引起过敏
Ｅ．产酒的时候不会产生Ｓ
抛开削弱的方法不说，因为一但削弱立刻发现Ｅ导致题目不成立，光讨论有关无关的问题
题目只讨论了Ａ对Ｓ过敏，ＥＴＳ就非说酒里可能有其他东西也能引起过敏，但是这些东西能不能引起过敏或者Ａ会不会对这些过敏源反映是题目没有交代的，题目只谈了对Ｓ的过敏问题，所以Ｄ是无关，答案是Ｅ
非常狡猾！！！
前提一： However, since there are several wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, （一些厂商的酒, 没有加sulfites）
结论：people can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. (一些人不会过敏, 渴这些厂商的酒)
＝＞ 前提二：没有加sulfites,一些人喝不会过敏,
Ｅ. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. (不是自然存在酒中的S会达到使一些人过敏) 也就是说 (添加在酒中的S会使一些人过敏)
(不是自然存在酒中的S会达到使一些人过敏) 也就是说 (添加在酒中的S会使一些人过敏)
反过来说(没有加sulfites,一些人喝不会过敏)
因此只有E对. .
楼上注意看选项....naturally present...是自然存在, 不是加的...
如果葡萄酒中, 会自然存在S, 就算酒厂的人不加S, 酒一样会造成对S过敏, 答案E
楼上注意看选项....naturally present...是自然存在, 不是加的...
如果葡萄酒中, 会自然存在S, 就算酒厂的人不加S, 酒一样会造成对S过敏, 答案E
费心了 ，同学！
这是一道假设题。假设题可以用无关词排除法、去not则weaken法(否定句)、架桥法（肯定句）来做。这里用的是排除法和去not则weaken法。
Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine.
潜台词：除sulfite之外的其他allergenic substances，题目并未涉及，故排除
B. Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reactions.
潜台词：除sulfite之外的其他allergenic substances，题目并未涉及，故排除
C. Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.
潜台词：其他的饮料没有加sulfites，题目并未讨论其他的饮料，故排除。
D. Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.
潜台词：Apart from是个很可爱的词汇，直接表明D选项是讨论sulfites以外的物质，而题目并未讨论其他物质，故排除。
E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.
就剩下E了。但是，令人困惑的是E读完后感觉与题目的前提冲突，题目的前提已经说 add sulfites to none of the wines－制造商没有添加sulfites,但E好像又说制造商添加了少量的sulfites,与前提矛盾。实际上，E有个词很重要－naturally，意思是sulfites是在wine本身就含有的，而不是厂商作为防腐剂后添加进去的，naturally这个词使得E选项避开了与前提发生矛盾。
E如果先把not去掉的话，读起来会更容易理解：
Sulfites are naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.
Sulfites在厂商制造的酒中自然含有的量（不是作为防腐剂后添加进去的）足够大到使人过敏。
也就是说，Sulfites即使不作为防腐剂添加到酒里，那些过敏的人还是不能喝这酒。
然而题目结论说：厂商不将sulfites作为防腐剂添加到酒里, 那些对sulfites过敏的人就可以喝。
E去掉Not后weaken了结论，故E为正确答案。
people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
First, the cited sentence is the main argument; preservation is mention in the premisis not A
Second, people, who are allergic to S, are not risk to allergic reaction to S by comsuming wines not contain S.
Logic
people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites
condition: S -> (S -> A) , (S -> A) -> S
can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.
Conclusion: ~S -> ~ (S -> A)
proof: ~S -> ~ (S -> A) => (S -> A) -> S 1)
S -> S -> A => S | A -> S 2)
1) =2)
Proof of A -> S is not necessary condistion, as the proof procedure does not requier A -> S, therefore A -> S is not an assumption needed. A -> S means All allergi are attributable to Sulfites, which interm means people are not allergic to other substance other than S. Same logic nor does P (preservative) play a role in th argument.
好帖，每次看到老帖都很多感触，想知道
以前在帖子里留名的人都跑哪读书去了。。。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |