ChaseDream

标题: 天山-4-32 [打印本页]

作者: anitahsu 时间: 2004-12-9 08:28
标题: 天山-4-32

Delta products, Inc., has recently switch at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity. The question has been raised whether it can be concluded that for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly. The answer, clearly, is yes, since the smount of fossil fuel used to generate the electricity needed to power the new technologies is less than the amount needed to power the older technologies, provided that the level of output is held constant.

In the argument given, the two boldface portions play which of the following roles?

A. The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.

B. The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion.

C. The first states the position that the argement opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument.

D. Each provides evidence that calls the conclusion of the argument into question.

E. Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.

Answer: E, why not A?

作者: erfan 时间: 2004-12-9 08:39
第一个BF也是一个原因。这里面的conclusion 是说“for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly.”

作者: anitahsu 时间: 2004-12-9 15:22

以下是引用erfan在2004-12-9 8:39:00的发言：第一个BF也是一个原因。这里面的conclusion 是说“for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly.”

So, doesn't it help to indentify the content of the conclusion? Because Delta switch to new technologies ==> therefore, “for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly.”

I still don't understand the reason why A is worng....

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-12-9 15:22:59编辑过]

作者: 似水年华 时间: 2004-12-9 15:33

the content of the conclusion of the argument is :for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly, the first is not the content of the conclusion, so A is wrong.

I don't think E is perfect, either, but I can't find anything better.

作者: anitahsu 时间: 2004-12-9 17:47
Thank you...I'll try to understand...

作者: Springfield 时间: 2004-12-9 18:10

(1,2)->clearly;

没有1, 仅有2, 无法得到结论;

有1, 而没有2, 一样得不到结论;

作者: joe11 时间: 2004-12-9 23:47

欧认为是A, content 是上下文的意思，第一个 BF 只是说明情况，没有它不影响结论的推导。

作者: erfan 时间: 2004-12-10 03:02

以下是引用anitahsu在2004-12-9 15:22:00的发言：

I still don't understand the reason why A is worng....

Yes, it helps, but only "HELPS". Because it HELPS, it supports the conclusion!

作者: JerryGuan 时间: 2004-12-10 15:31

以下是引用joe11在2004-12-9 23:47:00的发言：

欧认为是A, content 是上下文的意思，第一个 BF 只是说明情况，没有它不影响结论的推导。

content 是内容 context 是上下文

结论是中间的两句话。第一句话引出结论；最后一句支持结论。

我选E。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-12-10 16:23:08编辑过]

作者: leeon 时间: 2004-12-10 15:42

比较confused一个问题，个人支持A。认为A的 identify 这个词用的很好。不过GWD中以前讨论过的一道题刚开始由一个fact引导出结论，答案是支持。这里个人感觉A更好。

iden*ti*fy
      identify  identifies  identifying  identified
1    If you can identify someone or something, you are able to recognize them or distinguish them from others.
  There are a number of distinguishing characteristics by which you can identify a Hollywood epic...
   VERB: V n

2    If you identify someone or something, you name them or say who or what they are.
  olice have already identified around 10 murder suspects...
  The reporters identified one of the six Americans as an Army Specialist...
   VERB: V n, V n as n/-ing
   = name
3    If you identify something, you discover or notice its existence.
  Scientists claim to have identified natural substances with cancer-combating properties...
   VERB: V n
   = discover
4    If a particular thing identifies someone or something, it makes them easy to recognize, by making them different in some way.
  She wore a little nurse's hat on her head to identify her...
  His boots and purple beret identify him as commanding the Scottish Paratroops.
   VERB: V n, V n as -ing/n
   = distinguish
5    If you identify with someone or something, you feel that you understand them or their feelings and ideas.
  She would only play a role if she could identify with the character...
   VERB: V with n

6    If you identify one person or thing with another, you think that they are closely associated or involved in some way.
  She hates playing the sweet, passive women that audiences identify her with...
  The candidates all want to identify themselves with reform.
   VERB: V n with n, V pron-refl with n
   = associate
(c) HarperCollins Publishers.

作者: joe11 时间: 2004-12-11 00:13

oh... 搞清楚了，content 是内容，context 是上下文，看错了。呵呵~

排除A, 那就只能选E 了。虽然欧认为第一个BF几乎没有什么支持的道理。

作者: leeon 时间: 2004-12-11 02:22

Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen.

In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question.

[C]把那道GWD翻出来了。这道题的答案要友好一些。

看样子还是E正确一些。

作者: lanslot 时间: 2004-12-23 00:57

我认为是A对，第一句话是“最后的结果”，也是题目主题所确认的“正确的事件”。

题目的逻辑顺序是：（公司打算这么做），有人问了你这样做能（在一定前提下）成立吗？然后因为什么因为什么，然后公司最后这么做了。

倒叙手法。

按照ETS的逻辑，能用结果支持结果自己吗？我觉得不能，所以E不可能对。第一个BF不是evidence而是result，result自身是不能支持result的。

作者: hpp920 时间: 2004-12-23 13:07

看看哪个答案都不象. 这题的主结论是这个吗?The answer, clearly, is yes.

请NN指点!

作者: windweed 时间: 2005-1-8 22:19

content 是内容, 所以A 一定是错的. 第一句是个事实, 不是结论

E 对!

作者: helenefz 时间: 2005-1-15 11:00
如果A中的contend是context，支持选A。

作者: legendbird 时间: 2005-2-13 05:17

虽然A中的content用的有点诡异,但是E实在是无法让人信服.应该是由conclusion导致BF1才对,而不是BF1支持了conclusion. E不对.

作者: Pudding 时间: 2005-2-26 01:23
其實我覺得BF1更像是個premise, 因為沒有這個答案選項, 我覺得最接近的應該是E了...

作者: rainow 时间: 2005-2-26 08:59
支持E,
第一句是facts，不是结论，它是由结论导致的事实，反过来，这个事实从另一个侧面support了结论

作者: lurenjia 时间: 2005-3-22 23:33
第一眼看到A就到后面找‘Another Error by ETS!', 可惜没找到。。

如果是context的话， A is the best. (content??? 诡异的词）
如果不是的话。。。 hm。。。还是选A.....

作者: anyname 时间: 2005-3-23 07:45
标题: identify不等于is！

我的观点：如果这道题不是垃圾题，我会选A。

1. BF1是陈述一个事实或者是argument背景，不是结论，但和结论关系密切。文章结论是新技术减少了矿物油的消耗。BF2是支持结论的论据。

2. E的致命点是BF1是否能逻辑上支持结论？套套看：因为Delta用了新技术，所以新技术减少了矿物油的消耗，胡说。倒不如说，文章结论支持了BF1：因为新技术减少了矿物油的消耗，所以Delta用新技术。当然文章没明说，胡猜而已。但是，BF1的背景描述的确明确了文章结论的内容。

3. 再看A：第二句话没问题，关键是第一句话：The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument。朋友们都把identifies等同于is，我觉得不对，字典里identifies并没有is的意思。如果identify解成make...easy to recognize，是不是好理解点？BF1的背景描述的确使结论的内容清晰了。如果没有BF1，读者就很难recongize what the conclusion is talking about。一家之言，请指正。

附Longman:

3 if a particular thing identifies someone or something, it makes them easy to recognize

His accent identified him as a Frenchman.

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-3-23 7:46:58编辑过]

作者: scorpio0001 时间: 2005-3-30 17:35

一直以来对identify总是觉得很抽象，能感觉出意思，但是很难表述出来，这下通过anyname 和leeon的解释总算明白了。

同意anyname

BF1这里只是谈论一个事件的背景，是一个客观事实。是中性的成分，并不是为了支持结论而出现的。同意anyname ，的推测。

打个比方：我们去沃尔玛购物而不去燕莎。到底沃尔玛的商品价格比燕莎贵还是便宜呢？我们把买回来的物品相比较。

我们去沃尔玛购物的行为不是为了证明沃尔玛比燕莎商品价格便宜。而是恰恰是比较的结果促使我们去沃尔玛购物。

所以此题应该选A。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-3-30 17:39:29编辑过]

作者: autumn_leaves 时间: 2005-4-13 23:50

支持A,当时也是犹豫了半天,结果告诉自己IDENTIFY是界定的意思....

看来思路和各位还是一样的

作者: bestseason 时间: 2005-4-25 12:33

anyname 解释的非常好！

作者: ah_eric 时间: 2005-4-30 23:18

支持A

在我看来identify the content = provide the background information for the argument

作者: ring_cheng 时间: 2005-5-4 15:07

天山和GWD中时常会有typo错误，所以我觉得A中content其实是context的笔误。

选A，identify是“指明，指出、表明”的意思，anyname解释得非常好！同意！！

作者: TakeItEasy1 时间: 2005-5-18 15:43

支持A

一．

In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question.

做的时候也想到了这题,犹豫要不要选E,但后来还是觉得A好

这题看似BF1也只是罗列fact，但注意红字部分，其实是有加强的．

再看我们现在讨论的３２题，ＢＦ１纯粹就是一个fact，所以两者的类比不成立

二．

个人也觉得Ａ中的content要是改成context会更好一点，但看了anyname对于identifies的理解，觉得content也可以勉强接受

请各位指正｀｀｀（不过现在我倒是比较怀疑那个content是打错了）

作者: onebowl 时间: 2005-5-26 00:34

晕，读的时候就在想，这不是在介绍背景吗？所以看见Content，就以为是context，然后就选A了。

严肃同意anyname的看法，估计是context 误打成content了，这样A就是一个perfect的答案了。

这两天做天山，GWD，感觉有很多题目都会有异议，参与讨论就是为了理清思路，而不是为了证明某个答案是正确的，或者某个答案是错误的。因为只有思路才是你可以真正仰仗着上考场的东西。

作者: melodyji 时间: 2005-6-23 06:18

以下是引用onebowl在2005-5-26 0:34:00的发言：

晕，读的时候就在想，这不是在介绍背景吗？所以看见Content，就以为是context，然后就选A了。

严肃同意anyname的看法，估计是context 误打成content了，这样A就是一个perfect的答案了。

totally agree

作者: remona9t 时间: 2005-7-7 11:28

开始选了A，现在看了大家的讨论，觉得肯定是E

1. BF1是陈述一个事实或者是argument背景，不是结论，但和结论关系密切。文章结论是新技术减少了矿物油的消耗。BF2是支持结论的论据。

我觉得文章的结论不是新技术减少了矿物油的消耗，而是for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly.文章的结论是在一个给定的产量下，delta现在所消耗的能源比以前要少。

第一个boldface是说delta现在应用了新的技术；第二个boldface是说，新的技术让公司消耗跟少的能源

第二个boldface不能单独作为支持结论的论点，如果没有第一个evidence,第二个boldface其实与结论毫无关系；

discussion is more than welcome

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-7-7 11:32:19编辑过]

作者: lele19832002 时间: 2005-7-21 11:45

啊？NN再来确认一下吧~~

我觉得boldface1就是一个事实啊~~

作者: ningning6000 时间: 2005-7-25 11:31

but the fact that " Delta products, Inc., has recently switch at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity" can be cite as evidence to support the conslusion " for.." , is e is ok?

where is NN can help?

作者: joeysue 时间: 2005-7-29 10:15

这题很tricky，

e 是对的，结论只说公司耗油比以前少了，没说新技术问题。所以 bf1说部分采用了新技术，bf2说新技术蚝油少。两个一起才是充分条件。

作者: Lucky0506 时间: 2005-8-17 17:26

仔细想了想，其实这道题不难。

有点tricky是因为它用了倒着写了。如果这样子写的：

The question has been raised whether it can be concluded that for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly. The answer, clearly, is yes,

since the smount of fossil fuel used to generate the electricity needed to power the new technologies is less than the amount needed to power the older technologies, provided that the level of output is held constant.

（and since）Delta products, Inc., has recently switch at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity.

那么答案则非常明显。（E）

作者: vivinzone 时间: 2005-9-8 09:55
支持E!

作者: babydevil 时间: 2005-9-8 12:54

天山题目都是考生考后背出来的，很可能这道题背错了。

我觉得A选项中的content应该是context,这样A就是正确选项了。否则5个选项没一个贴切的。

作者: wennier 时间: 2005-9-17 02:38

以下是引用Lucky0506在2005-8-17 17:26:00的发言：

仔细想了想，其实这道题不难。

有点tricky是因为它用了倒着写了。如果这样子写的：

（and since）Delta products, Inc., has recently switch at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity.

那么答案则非常明显。（E）

lucky MM这么着解释也太牵强了了吧。

让我们再来整理一下思路。

D P Inc.将部分使用燃油的老技术转为用电的新技术（BF1）。就此有人提出了疑问，是否由此（技术的变更）就能得出结论说一定量产出的油耗就较以前为少呢？答案毫无疑问是肯定的。。。(BF2)

注意：question的内容是whether it can be concluded。。。说明“油耗是否减少”这个问题的提出是基于“技术的变更这个措施的实施”。即先有技术变更，再有人提出了疑问，再有文章肯定的结论。

因此，答案只能是A， E是无论如何不成立的。

作者: sammaijgd 时间: 2005-9-19 22:12

选A,BF1就是一个fact,中立色彩,根本谈不上支持结论

A中identify词用的很好,怎么看都象ETS喜欢的说法

作者: foreinter 时间: 2005-10-4 14:25
是不是印刷错了？A中的content是context,第一句话只说明了一个事实，并未支持结论

作者: amacd 时间: 2005-10-4 15:03

以下是引用foreinter在2005-10-4 14:25:00的发言：
是不是印刷错了？A中的content是context,第一句话只说明了一个事实，并未支持结论

我想如果照Ａ的写法　(content of the conclusion)只是依種很繞口的方式來說１）bold face = conclusion..

作者: mmfoolish 时间: 2005-10-4 16:10
同意36楼，可能是印刷错误：A中content 应该改为context---上下文

作者: 大牛查理 时间: 2005-10-17 15:09

选E: 大家注意，涂黄部分如果替换为minor part, " Delta products, Inc., has recently switch at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity" ,这句话的感觉就是加强的反面－－削弱了。

ETS的每个字看来都是“用心良苦”啊！

作者: philipsnf 时间: 2005-10-26 00:19

B1就是陈述一个事实，要说它是背景（context）也没错，但是这样说来B2同样也是背景……

所以我觉得把问题归结于content和context的区别是行不通的

作者: Princessie 时间: 2005-10-29 13:13

这道题到底是A还是E阿。。。nn们给个准吧。。

今天做到这题……AE好像都有理。。。

作者: z520m 时间: 2005-10-29 19:53

支持A,E中的bold 1是support不对，bold1仅仅是一个实际plan的陈述，没有support的作用。就像很多人喜欢吃肉能不能support肉食很有营养的食物？

作者: bonniexq 时间: 2005-10-30 16:04

支持A

觉得这段话就是由bf1阐述的这个事实中引出的一个问题的讨论，所以bf1不是support的作用而是引子一样的东西

作者: evan5294 时间: 2005-11-12 11:42

凑一下热闹,

我支持A

理由: 如果事实是对结论的支持,那么无论结论是什么, BF1都是支持. 接下来的推理就是: BF1既是对肯定答案的支持,也是对否定的支持. 这可能不会是ETS出题的初衷.

所以,事实应该是中性的.

但是,大家还是忘了这题为好,因为的确有输入错误的可能.不过楼上各位的精彩推理,极大的体现了辩性思维,佩服!

作者: aph7 时间: 2005-12-3 01:49
答案E，偶当时错选A。看完反思，觉得死得其所，是共军太狡猾！BF1确认DELTA个别性——采用新技术，BF2确认普遍性——新技术比旧的省油；而结论在中间：Delta’s operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly.

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-12-3 17:48:09编辑过]

作者: justintime 时间: 2005-12-9 07:57

aph7, today I have done this question. I agree A :

BF1 is the phenomena and topic which the debate is based on ,so it is impossible to support any of the sides. Suppose that the conclusion is opposite ,Can u say BF1 supports it.No way.

There is no matter with 普遍性 adn 个别性.

作者: steveyangxt 时间: 2005-12-11 15:50

以下是引用似水年华在2004-12-9 15:33:00的发言：

I don't think E is perfect, either, but I can't find anything better.

统一同意

作者: icare1 时间: 2006-1-15 18:36
应该是context, 估计是抄题的人抄错了

作者: caterpillarcn 时间: 2006-8-21 20:38

就算在A中是context，那A还是错。

结论是Delta’s operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly
所以要证明以上论点，必须两个条件，1）Delta换了新技术--BF1， 2）新技术确实可以省能量--BF2。
只凭BF2可以推出new tech causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than the old one，但不可以说明Delta是不是这样，所以BF1是必须的条件。

作者: roric 时间: 2006-9-7 23:19
顶一下

作者: yangxuemei0111 时间: 2006-10-13 10:15

我觉得也是A

A不是结论谁是结论呢？？？虽然A以事实来陈述！

作者: 晴天小狗 时间: 2006-11-3 15:55

中间是结论。但是我觉得第一句只是引文，或者一个事实。

牵强

作者: ptr07 时间: 2006-12-29 03:25
the answer is suspicious,
the first provides a context for the conclusion, the second supports the conclusion

作者: leehushan 时间: 2007-1-3 02:30

我选A.

除了anyname 的"identifies"不等于is外

BF1是事实，如果是支持结论的话（同时结论又是支持BF1），不就成了循环论证？

ETS会这样吗？

作者: windspeaker 时间: 2007-1-6 16:27

以下是引用Springfield在2004-12-9 18:10:00的发言：

(1,2)->clearly;

没有1, 仅有2, 无法得到结论;

有1, 而没有2, 一样得不到结论;

顿悟

作者: tonyyuan 时间: 2007-2-14 23:46

还是不知道选A or E，如果有选项说BF1 is only a fact的话，无疑是对的！

作者: 天天灿烂 时间: 2007-2-16 11:57

以下是引用caterpillarcn在2006-8-21 20:38:00的发言：

就算在A中是context，那A还是错。

同意。一开始也选了A，现在vote for E。原先结论没有读透。我觉得不能把推理建立在typo上面。E的逻辑其实是对的。

作者: 就醉一生 时间: 2007-4-7 17:10

无论怎么说第一个BF肯定不是支持conclution,只是一个阐述一个事件.

E不会是正确答案.

作者: ssl507 时间: 2007-7-20 21:42

啥也不说了，支持E吧

A的content无论如何都不对

作者: mimixiaxia 时间: 2007-9-4 14:14
up

作者: mky1986 时间: 2007-10-8 16:54

看了anyname的帖,决定你就是my idol!!!

作者: qianrene 时间: 2007-10-11 17:57

以下是引用remona9t在2005-7-7 11:28:00的发言：

开始选了A，现在看了大家的讨论，觉得肯定是E

1. BF1是陈述一个事实或者是argument背景，不是结论，但和结论关系密切。文章结论是新技术减少了矿物油的消耗。BF2是支持结论的论据。

第一个boldface是说delta现在应用了新的技术；第二个boldface是说，新的技术让公司消耗跟少的能源

第二个boldface不能单独作为支持结论的论点，如果没有第一个evidence,第二个boldface其实与结论毫无关系；

discussion is more than welcome

支持E

文中的结论应该是“The answer, clearly , is yes”

作者: fiddler 时间: 2007-11-9 23:34

照你这么说，应该选B啊

作者: 糯米团 时间: 2008-1-26 19:44
我喜欢JerryGuan的解释！

作者: phenomena 时间: 2008-5-10 13:55
开始也想选A，不过看到第一个BF的下一句“The question has been raised whether it can be concluded that for a given level of output, Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly. ”就可以了解结论应该是“Delta's operation causes less fossil fuel to be consumed”. “context”的意思是“上下文”，也就是结论的背景，而BF1显然也不在此列。BF1说Delta采用新技术的事实支持结论，只不过需要进一步讨论，所以也就有了BF2的进一步支持。

作者: leo-liu 时间: 2008-7-26 11:52

一道争议题

我认为选E

A无论如何也是不对的，因为第一个BF明显不是conclusion。

本文的结论是“The answer, clearly, is yes”

作者: SuccessMBA08 时间: 2008-9-8 22:00
顶！anyname解释的好啊！

作者: financelse 时间: 2009-4-21 19:02
看完帖子，觉得AE都可以解释，怎么办？

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