ChaseDream

标题: gwd-1-14 [打印本页]
作者: paopao    时间: 2004-11-1 10:24
标题: gwd-1-14

GWD-1-Q14:



That the application of new technology can increase the productivity of existing coal mines is demonstrated by the case of Tribnia’s coal industry.  Coal output per miner in Tribnia is double what it was five years ago, even though no new mines have opened.



Which of the following can be properly concluded from the statement about coal output per miner in the passage?




  • If the number of miners working in Tribnian coal mines has remained constant in the past five years, Tribnia’s total coal production has doubled in that period of time.


  • Any individual Tribnian coal mine that achieved an increase in overall output in the past five years has also experienced an increase in output per miner.


  • If any new coal mines had opened in Tribnia in the past five years, then the increase in output per miner would have been even greater than it actually was.


  • If any individual Tribnian coal mine has not increased its output per miner in the past five years, then that mine’s overall output has declined or remained constant.


    • In Tribnia the cost of producing a given quantity of coal has declined over the past five years.无关[


    答案为A 没有疑问


    我想请大家看看 我做这个归纳题其它选项的排除对不对  谢谢


    B没有提到Any individual Tribnian coal mine that achieved an increase in overall output in the past five years 无关


    CIf any new coal mines had opened in Tribnia in the past five years,与原文矛盾 错 而且从原文得不出开新矿 工人的生产率提高


    D从原文得不出if ..then的关系


    E无关概念

    作者: lawyer_1    时间: 2004-11-1 10:46

    B意思原文没有：个体和总体关系

    C的actually是新内容

    D个体和总体关系。原文没有

    E同意

    作者: paopao    时间: 2004-11-6 05:47

    lawyer 你说的C: actually是新概念 然道不是原文提到的内容吗 C的错是不是与原文相反 因为原文讲没开新矿


    谢谢

    作者: lawyer_1    时间: 2004-11-6 06:19
    当然没茅盾，因为C是假设的情况
    作者: paopao    时间: 2004-11-6 06:57

    lawyer: 我归纳题的思路还是有问题


    请问在归纳中if,不用管与原文是否矛盾 对吗 我糊涂了


    我认为C的错误不在于actually是新概念,而在于原文中推不出the increase in output per miner would have been even greater than it actually was.


    谢谢

    作者: lawyer_1    时间: 2004-11-6 09:07

    1。假设的情况，当然不需原文出现，只要后面（假设后的情况）在该假设情况下能从原文推出就行

    2。错误的选项有很多个错误的理由，不是只有一个。最对的一句话就是它从原文推不出。这是放之四海皆准的话。

    3。ACTUALLY的意思是实际，既然有实际，就有虚假。有实际和虚假的差别。这些都是原文没有的内容。原文不涉及到这方面的内容

    作者: paopao    时间: 2004-11-6 12:57
    谢谢lawyer 我明白了



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