ChaseDream

标题: 求助4道prep题，如果有时间各位请看一看谢谢！ [打印本页]

作者: aprilsusu 时间: 2013-9-3 14:48
标题: 求助4道prep题，如果有时间各位请看一看谢谢！
prep每一道不会的题我都会先搜索，这四道是因为看了一些解释后还是不太能够理解QAQ 所以麻烦大家了
prep 11
Mourdet Winery:  Danville Winery's new wine was introduced to compete with our most popular wine, which is sold in a distinctive tall, black bottle.  Danville uses a similar bottle.  Thus, it is likely that many customers intending to buy our wine will mistakenly buy theirs instead.

Danville Winery:  Not so.  The two bottles can be readily distinguished:  the label on ours, but not on theirs, is gold colored.

Which of the following, if true, most undermines Danville Winery's response?

(A) Gold is the background color on the label of many of the wines produced by Danville Winery.
(B) When the bottles are viewed side by side, Danville Winery's bottle is perceptibly taller than Mourdet Winery's.
(C) Danville Winery, unlike Mourdet Winery, displays its wine's label prominently in advertisements.
(D) It is common for occasional purchasers to buy a bottle of wine on the basis of a general impression of the most obvious feature of the bottle.
(E) Many popular wines are sold in bottles of a standard design.

答案D 不知道为什么A不对。第一个人说他们厂的酒和Danville酒用了similar bottle，所以人们可能会买错。Danville反驳说两种酒外观不一样，Danville的酒有金色的标志。A说Danville的酒标志背景也是金色的，所以我觉得因为背景也是同样的金色，这样人们就看不清Danville的标志了。那么Danville的酒的特色也就不明显了。反驳了Danville的说法。正确答案D说人们买酒是因为"a general impression of the most obvious feature of the bottle”，那为什么obvious feature就是similar bottle呢？
44.(33799-!-item-!-188;#058&007092)

In countries in which new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding manufacturers from competitors.  These facts show that future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents on newly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) In countries in which life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, their manufacture is nevertheless a profitable enterprise.
(B) Countries that do not currently grant patents on life-sustaining drugs are, for the most part, countries with large populations.
(C) In some countries specific processes for the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs can be patented even in cases in which the drugs themselves cannot be patented.
(D) Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that goes into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits.
(E) Countries that grant patents on life-sustaining drugs almost always ban their importation from countries that do not grant such patents.

答案是D 但不明白为什么C不行原文是一旦药品申请了专利就会变得昂贵，人们消费不起。所以让人们能够用药的办法就是不允许药物申请专利。问削弱
C是即使药物不申请专利，有些生产过程也会有专利，那这样不是最终药品价钱还是会昂贵导致人们不能用药吗？
81.(29110-!-item-!-188;#058&003820)

Environmentalist:  Snowmobiles in the park north of Milville create unacceptable levels of air pollution and should be banned.
Milville Business Spokesperson:  Snowmobiling brings many out-of-towners to Milville in the winter months, to the great direct financial benefit of many local residents.  In addition, the money the town collects in fees for the recreational use of the park indirectly benefits all Milville residents.  So, it is basic economics for us to put up with the pollution.
Which of the following, if true, could best be used by the environmentalist to counter the business spokesperson’s argument?
A. A great many cross-country skiers are now kept from visiting Milville by the noise and pollution that snowmobiles generate.
B. Not all of the people who go snowmobiling in the vicinity of Milville are from out of town.
C. Snowmobiles, because they run on two-cycle engines, emit greater amounts of hydrocarbons and particulate matter than cars do.
D. Industrial pollution in Milville has been significantly reduced in the past few years without any adverse effect on the town’s economy.
E. Many Milville residents object to having to pay fees for recreational use of the park in the winter.
这道选A 但我不知道D为什么不对。第一个人说滑雪车在M城制造了污染应该禁止；第二个人说滑雪车给M城居民带来了经济上的利益，所以从经济方面考虑我们应该忍受污染。D说M城的工业污染已经被制止了也没有影响经济。
58.(33711-!-item-!-188;#058&007588)

The proposal to hire ten new police officers in Middletown is quite foolish.  There is sufficient funding to pay the salaries of the new officers, but not the salaries of additional court and prison employees to process the increased caseload of arrests and convictions that new officers usually generate.

Which of the following, if true, will most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Studies have shown that an increase in a city's police force does not necessarily reduce crime.
(B) When one major city increased its police force by 19 percent last year, there were 40 percent more arrests and 13 percent more convictions.
(C) If funding for the new police officers' salaries is approved, support for other city services will have to be reduced during the next fiscal year.
(D) In most United States cities, not all arrests result in convictions, and not all convictions result in prison terms.
(E) Middletown's ratio of police officers to citizens has reached a level at which an increase in the number of officers will have a deterrent effect on crime。
题干说M城雇佣新的警察是十分愚蠢的。因为即使有足够预算支付警察的薪水，也没有钱去支付由此增多的法官和监狱管理人员的薪水。问削弱
D说，在美国大多数城市，不是所有的逮捕都会被庭审，也不是所有的庭审都会导致坐牢。在搜索这道题时，有的人说D之所以不对是因为说了“In most US cities” 与M城无关，我一直很疑惑逻辑削弱题有时候也会举与argument类似的反例来削弱，那什么时候判定为例子无关，什么时候判定为反例削弱呢？

作者: vertex顶点 时间: 2013-9-3 15:52
第一题你粗心了，A选项说的是D酒厂大部分的酒的标志都是金色的，而没说M酒厂什么颜色，所以无关。你理解成了M和D酒厂的标志都是金色的了，仔细看题。排除了A之后，其他只能选D了，D是带来一个新的原因：即偶尔买酒的同学很容易因为酒的普通外表来买。而M说了一句话“which is sold in a distinctive tall, black bottle. Danville uses a similar bottle.” 这就是所谓的外表，所以因为这个才会买。题目很classic，典typical 给出一个它因来削弱结论

作者: vertex顶点 时间: 2013-9-3 15:57
第二题你的理解又有问题了，看到这样怪里怪气的some就要注意了，范围词很重要的！无论是all、some、most、few都十分重要。假设是你的观点C对的，那也只是在some contries，maybe in 99% contries this is not the case。相比之下，D给出了一个它因，即如果不给专利就支付不起研究新药，那大家都不会研究新药了，未来是铁定不可能让同学们更容易access to new drugs了，因为都TM没新药了，每人支付的起新药的研发。
这也是一个classic 它因削弱题目

作者: vertex顶点 时间: 2013-9-3 16:02
第三题，问题问你的是：如下哪一个可以让environmentalist更好的反驳MB的spokeperson。 spokeperson的言论是：经济发展带给我们的好处要多过污染带来的坏处，所以大家忍一忍吧。 A的意思就是说：忍个屁啊！污染都搞得大家不愿意来我们这里玩了，没人来经济就差了，我们不是就没有好处了么
D的意思是：最近几年没有怎么影响经济增长的情况，污染也慢慢减轻了。那如果选D，就是说：污染自己会减少的，不管也行，那就是支持MB spokeperson的观点了。因为如果污染自己可以减还不影响经济增长，那就没有必要banned snowmobiles in the park 了，那不刚好自己打自己脸么，因为environmentalist 的观点是：污染很严重，要banned snowmobiles in the park

作者: vertex顶点 时间: 2013-9-3 16:07
最后一道题，你的答案错了亲爱的，答案是E。即现在M的警力比例到了一个程度，就是增加警察就会will have a deterrent effect on crime，即对犯罪产生一个减轻的影响。这样的话，我们增加警力就会减少犯罪，那么怎么会有additiaonal 的courthe 呢，犯罪减少了，在法庭上的花销一样也会变少。也是一道它因削弱的题目

建议你去看看SDCAR2010的逻辑基础，对你应该点帮助。另外，我发现你的思维比较诡异，即对逻辑问题的思考在根本上就不牢固不扎实。建议把在论坛里找lawyer分类的og12，按照分类去做题，看og的解释，培养一个正确的思路。祝你好运！

作者: aprilsusu 时间: 2013-9-5 14:46
谢谢楼上的回复~我再好好研究一下QAQ

作者: aprilsusu 时间: 2013-9-5 16:56
还有些问题想请教一下大家
第一题 A选项说是酒瓶背景是金色，那这样不就看不见金色商标也就削弱了第二个人的话吗？但A出现了一个“many of the wines produced by Danville Winer” 是这个many错了吗？
第三题和第四题好像都出现了所谓模糊词第三题C是“ In some countries”，第四题D是“In most United States cities”，请问在weaken题中，这是一个标志错误吗？但为什么不是反例削弱呢？

作者: liumengyin 时间: 2013-12-21 09:47

aprilsusu 发表于 2013-9-5 16:56
还有些问题想请教一下大家
第一题 A选项说是酒瓶背景是金色，那这样不就看不见金色商标也就削弱了第二个人 ...

酒瓶那道题，我刚做了这道题，也错了，开始也不懂，就上网搜，结果搜到了你的~我们的想法一模一样~~哈哈~~好有缘！！据你提问都过了三个月了吧，哈哈，回复的是不是有点晚~~我重新读了题，好像又懂了，我不同意上面楼上牛牛说的。
看清楚双方对话的人是谁哦，感觉语言环境是MW这个公司对着DW说你们家的酒瓶跟我们很像，然后是DW反驳说我们家（DW）的酒瓶是金色的。那么A答案又说了一次DW的酒瓶是金色的，所以它只是重述了一下文中信息，没有任何作用。

作者: aprilsusu 时间: 2013-12-21 20:44

liumengyin 发表于 2013-12-21 09:47
酒瓶那道题，我刚做了这道题，也错了，开始也不懂，就上网搜，结果搜到了你的~我们的想法一模一样~~哈哈~ ...

hahaha果真很有缘~我之前还觉得我的脑回路是不是太迥异了QvQ 我已经考完啦~

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