不知道怎么帖过来.就是两个石油公司的题.答案是E我选的是D.D是说一个关掉,一个扩张,关掉的公司的工人可以去扩张的那个
我开始也选了D, 看到了E才觉得E 更好.
E 是绝对的weaken(他因所致)
D 用了would, if 等词, 虽然能weaken但是不如E 好.
你觉得呢?
u r right~~
when u said "ta yin", I suddenly realized!!Thanks a lots!!!
D is not very decisive....
方便后人讨论，帖一下题：
Q21:
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining
costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg
refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of
about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people
would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to
keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire
for higher profits.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg
refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing
so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with
respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the Grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery
expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with
people formerly employed at Grenville.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with
demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
Answer: E
C为什么不对？我觉得C更好啊。。。
搬走是因为搬到新的地方更省钱啊。。。
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the
respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost,
demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
E里面说这个法规是cleanup 过多的工业站点。但是OLEX能同意搬走也至少能说明OLEX能顾全大局，还是social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits。
偶觉得C好，直接说OLEX搬走就是为了省钱，因为新的地方更符合供油得线路。。。
NN们现身啊！！！再过两天就考了。。。
Ｃ的语序可以调整为The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.than the Grenville refinery ．Ｔ比Ｇ在原油供应路线上有经济优势．还是因为钱
Agree with XiaMai. E is the best.
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining
costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg
refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of
about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people
would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to
keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire
for higher profits.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg
refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing
so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with
respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the Grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery
expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with
people formerly employed at Grenville.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with
demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
E一直说的就是cost，没有提到social concerns 和higher profits.
而A，则说profits 会有很多，所以这题应该是A吧？？？
A跟文章也没有关系啊
我觉得是D
顿悟！！！绝对是E!
原文结论是说social concerns overweifht profit
E at enormace cost-------profit
local code regulating...-----social concerns
D also undermines the conclusion ,but not mostly!
同意楼上的, 支持E.
Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
關閉Grenville refinery 又代表著, 會花很多錢, 要順從地方政府的法規- 規定關閉的工廠必須清理善後.
但是再文章的最後一句中提到OLEX 決定不關廠, 也為了表態OLEX 重視social conern 多於自己的利益.
Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to
keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire
for higher profits.
選項E, 是說關工廠會花更多錢. 所以可以證明OLEX 還是以自己的荷包著想.
所以E 是正確的.
看完一头污水：
结论：开，是因为考虑社会因素而非利润
e。关是因为很大成本上符合社会因素
怎么削弱啊？
E is the right answer.
The author argues that the company eventually decided not to close the Grenville plant. The reason for this decision is out of its concern that 1,200 people will lose jobs in Grenville.The company made the decision not because of its concern about profitability. Answer E says that the company finally decided to keep the Grenville plan open because the cleanup cost would be too high, not because of its concern about people losing jobs. Therefore, E weakens the arthor's argument.
我做这道题的基本方法，如果该问题论证结构是前提结论分别为原因结果，则找其他原因证明该结果不成立。原文的结论是 OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits，证明其不成立的方法就是找出其他理由说明OLEX并不是因为关心社会才不进行consolidation的，所以选E
我做这道题的基本方法，如果该问题论证结构是前提结论分别为原因结果，则找其他原因证明该结果不成立。原文的结论是 OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits，证明其不成立的方法就是找出其他理由说明OLEX并不是因为关心社会才不进行consolidation的，所以选E
支持13楼说法～
用OLEX重视COST－>重视profit 来削弱原文结论：OLEX有时更看重desire，而不看重profit
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,2000 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
在这么寸字寸金的地方，GMAC说了这么多关于雇员生计的话，另外有一个eventuall,,,therefore，为了保持生计，决定不关闭该厂，结论是就是OLEX把社会利益放在最前面，当然就是要否定是把社会利益放在前面的，所以C比E答案好，
C是说工人可以到另外一个厂去工作，不影响就业
E是说不关是因为可以违反当地的规定，从而达到节约开支的目的（如果当地政府强制关闭呢？）
我觉得这里的社会利益与E答案的当地规定没有关系，而是与文中工人的生计有关系
Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
结论：不关闭不是钱的原因（而是担心关闭工厂、裁员带来的工人生计等造成的社会问题）
削弱：直接削弱：不关闭还是钱的原因，（不是因为老板有多么高尚的社会美德）
E：Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
老板还是担心关闭工厂还要出一大笔钱来清理旧厂，那还不如先不关闭呢！至少省了笔额外的清理费，能省先省吧！
老板还是担心关闭工厂还要出一大笔钱来清理旧厂，那还不如先不关闭呢！至少省了笔额外的清理费，能省先省吧！
这年头，省钱就是赚钱呐！
这题简直就是OG141的翻版.改变做法还是跟最初想做的事情的目的挂钩:省钱!
选E
原文说 社会效益大于经济效益
所以 open 是 牺牲经济利益保全社会效益
E说 open是牺牲社会效益
关掉是牺牲经济利益
当然可以削弱了
D说什么工人可以到新的工厂去上班，这是无关
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |