标题: OG12-82题求解答 [打印本页] 作者: konglxd 时间: 2012-11-6 12:11 标题: OG12-82题求解答 Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?
A.Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published. B.The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years. C.The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years. D.Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year. E.Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particleaccelerator research will be accepted for publication.
问题2：D选项，OG Reasoning 给出的解释是：if the accelerators can be used for multiple experiments ,then it is reasonable to expect more articles related to them, not fewer. 文章论证的重点是加速器不够导致试验减少，文章数量减少，D指出加速器数量减少完全不妨碍实验数量，因而也不会必然导致文章减少，这难道不是削弱吗？求解作者: Yingmillie 时间: 2012-11-6 12:21
削弱的目的是使文中的所说的话的可能性降低。而不是彻底排除、彻底否定文中所说，尤其是这题，不是说，我引入他因来削弱文中的结论，就是为了证明或者说就能证明原文100%不对。作者: Yingmillie 时间: 2012-11-6 12:24
"the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years."这句话是原文给的事实。 进行削弱时是不削弱事实，只削弱观点的，事实一般默认是对的，或者你把它当成这道题的background也行。 我们应该削弱的是导致数量变少的原因。而是把“数量变少”这个事实给否定了。 D选项就在偷偷地做否认事实的事。。作者: konglxd 时间: 2012-11-6 12:26
多谢。问题二呢？作者: konglxd 时间: 2012-11-6 12:27
感谢！作者: Yingmillie 时间: 2012-11-6 12:39