ChaseDream

标题: 请教一个想不通的逻辑题 [打印本页]

作者: nyan58258 时间: 2013-4-27 07:53
标题: 请教一个想不通的逻辑题
题目陈述：
The candy manufacturer's claim that employee "theft" costs the company thousands of dollars a year in potential sales is greatly overstated. Most of the candy eaten on the job and not paid for is eaten one piece at a time, by workers who would not be willing to buy an entire box of it anyway.
问：
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the arguments above?
A. The workers eat only defective candies that could not be sold. （我选的）
B. Candy eaten by the employees represents losts potential sales to nonemployees. （实际正确的）
C. A few workers account for most of the candy that is eaten but not paid for.
D. Most of the candies eaten by employees are sonsumed suring the holiday season, when production outputs are at the highest.
E. The amount of candy eaten by employees is only a small fraction of the candy sold by the company.

前天做了这个题，硬是没想通为什么选B。还请高人指点...
先谢谢了！

作者: 258828632 时间: 2013-4-27 09:17
weaken的话要反对第一句里的overstated
那就是B了选A的话没有weaken

作者: zxppx 时间: 2013-4-27 12:38
原文的意思是：否定被员工偷掉的糖给这个公司造成了很大损失（overstated）.如果选A，表明被员工吃掉的糖实际上卖不出去，即使没有被他们吃掉，这部分糖也不会产生很多利润，所以A选项是支持原文，而不是削弱。B选项：如果被员工吃掉的糖能够卖给别人，那么这部分糖就会产生利润，因此该公司因员工偷吃糖而遭受了损失，所以削弱原文。

作者: nyan58258 时间: 2013-4-28 07:31

zxppx 发表于 2013-4-27 12:38
原文的意思是：否定被员工偷掉的糖给这个公司造成了很大损失（overstated）.如果选A，表明被员工吃掉的糖实 ...

好的明白了谢谢哦！

作者: nyan58258 时间: 2013-4-28 07:32

258828632 发表于 2013-4-27 09:17
weaken的话要反对第一句里的overstated
那就是B了选A的话没有weaken

谢谢！

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