ChaseDream

标题: [求助]GWD-5-40 [打印本页]

作者: amyhsiao 时间: 2004-11-2 03:10
标题: [求助]GWD-5-40

Q40:

Community activist: If Morganville wants to keep its central shopping district healthy, it should prevent the opening of a huge SaveAll discount department store on the outskirts of Morganville. Records from other small towns show that whenever SaveAll has opened a store outside the central shopping district of a small town, within five years the town has experienced the bankruptcies of more than a quarter of the stores in the shopping district.

The answer to which of the following would be most useful for evaluating the community activist’s reasoning?

Have community activists in other towns successfully campaigned against the opening of a SaveAll store on the outskirts of their towns?
Do a large percentage of the residents of Morganville currently do almost all of their shopping at stores in Morganville?
In towns with healthy central shopping districts, what proportion of the stores in those districts suffer bankruptcy during a typical five-year period?
What proportion of the employees at the SaveAll store on the outskirts of Morganville will be drawn form Morganville?
Do newly opened SaveAll stores ever lose money during their first five years of operation?

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-11-2 03:34

答案为C。

对于EVALUATION题，判断答案标准是：对答案的不同回答可以SUPPORT和WEAKEN原文结论

对于C的不同回答：

WEAKEN结论：如果通常破产率高于A QUARTER，则原文说的这个破产率是正常的，并非是建 SaveAll discount department store 的原因。

SUPPORT结论：如果通常破产率低于A QUARTER，则原文说的这个破产率是不正常的，可能是建 SaveAll discount department store 的原因。

作者: paopao 时间: 2004-11-2 04:51

lawyer:这题你是不是说反了

WEAKEN结论：如果通常破产率低于A QUARTER，则原文说的这个破产率是正常的，并非是建 SaveAll discount department store 的原因。

SUPPORT结论：如果通常破产率高于A QUARTER，则原文说的这个破产率是不正常的，可能是建 SaveAll discount department store 的原因。

另外前提中讲到within five years the town has experienced the bankruptcies of more than a quarter of the stores in the shopping district.

说到1/4以上的商店倒闭为什么要评价结论仍要用C呢

这不是重复了吗

谢谢

作者: 音乐咖啡猫 时间: 2004-12-17 00:03

paopao今天我才看这道题目，不知道你明白了没有

其实C的意思就是在question文章中所说到的a quarter的概念。文章又一个孤立的数字，来推导出一个倾向性的结论，而当中没有任何比较。C就是在问，在一般的五年中，正常的破产率是怎么样的？

不知道这样说你是不是好理解一些了。

作者: dan_box 时间: 2004-12-28 04:31
好像有些懂了，谢谢楼上各位。

作者: ah_eric 时间: 2005-4-20 17:32

如果结论是高于A QUARTER 那么本来没有SAVEALL就有这么高，则有了它也不是太大影响

但如果低于，则有了SAVEALL达到了比正常破产率高的情况，则受到了影响

作者: ethyl 时间: 2005-5-18 07:17

注意问的是推导过程

A：不能有效评价；A可以评价这个建议的可行性，而不能评价论证本身

B：currently do almost all of their shopping at stores in Morganville，仅仅知道现在的情况，缺乏未来的数据，无法断定结果如何

C：注意typical

D：假设SA的雇员没有一个是从M城聘用的，好像对论证没有什么影响，该倒闭还倒闭吧

作者: cdsteven517 时间: 2006-3-29 20:59
LAWYER 讲的很有道理，UP

作者: chamcham 时间: 2007-5-27 17:57

Re Paopao:

Such information in C is necessary since the question only states the fact about other small town having central shopping district suffer from SaveAll (Note there is NO “healthy” here so it is not fully convincing). So the information in C is needed and not reduplicated with the question.

作者: bonbonhu 时间: 2008-3-5 06:16
赞！感谢各位的精彩讨论

作者: hanxiao513 时间: 2009-6-24 10:56

lawyer的解释很到位！一下子明白了！

主要是typical一开始没理解对。

作者: xfyyds 时间: 2009-12-9 16:54
layer果然nb啊这解释用的一下子就明白了

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)