ChaseDream

标题: 求解OG11 CR38 [打印本页]

作者: maydayguan    时间: 2012-11-4 16:41
标题: 求解OG11 CR38
38、Companies O and P each have the same number of employees who work the same number of hours per week. According to records maintained by each company, the employees of Company O had fewer job-related accidents last year than did the employees of Company P. Therefore, employees of Company O are less likely to have job-related accidents than are employees of Company P.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?
(A) The employees of Company P lost more time at work due to job-related accidents than did the employees of Company O.
(B) Company P considered more types of accidents to be job-related than did Company O.
(C) The employees of Company P were sick more often than were the employees of Company O.
(D) Several employees of Company O each had more than one job-related accident.
(E) The majority of job-related accidents at Company O involved a single machine.

答案是B选项。
我想问,这道题是前提结论型文章还是因果结构型文章?文中说公司O比公司P的雇员发生事故更少,因此可能性也更小。我的理解应该是事故解释可能性,因为事故发生用过去式had,而且在去年发生的,结论中的可能性是用现在时are。所以是发生事故是原因,发生事故的可能性是结果。文章就应该是前提结论型。
这样一来的话,B选项说公司P考虑的与工作相关事故的类型比公司O要宽,这说明O对事故的定义比较窄,那么O有更少的事故。这个不就是刚好符合文章的前提吗?没有削弱结论(公司O发生可能性比公司P小)啊。。。
但是狒狒把这道题看成因果结构型,即发生事故的可能性小来解释发生的事故少。则B选项就说明不是因为发生的事故的可能性小来解释发生的事故少,正是他因削弱法。




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