Partly because of bad weather, but also partly beacuse some major pepper growers have switeched to high-priced cocoa, world production of pepper has been running well below worldwide sales for three years. Pepper is consequently in relatively short supply. The price of pepper has soared in response: it now equals that of cocoa.
Some observers have concluded that the rise in the price of pepper means that the switch by some growers from pepper to cocoa left those growers no better off than if none of them had switched; this conclusion, however, is unwarranted because it can be inferred to be likely that
A) those growers could not have foreseen how high the price of pepper would go
B) the initial cost involved in switching from pepper to cocoa is substantial
C) supperlies of pepper would not be as low as they are if those growers had not switched crops
D) cocoa crops are as susceptible to being reduced by bad weather as are pepper crops
E) as more growers turn to growing cocoa, cocoa supplies will increase and the price of cocoa will fall precipitously.
请问"the switch by some growers from pepper to cocoa left those growers no better off than if none of them had switched"应该作何理解？
简化后应该是the switch left those growers no better off than if none of them had switched
就是说这种变换不会让更换作物种植者比不更换过得好
意思就是不提倡更换是吧
然后说这个conclusion是unwarranted
那么就是提倡更换了
那么……大家选的是什么啊
d不是正确答案啊
原文结论：那些人SWITCH从pepper到cocoa不好（不如不要switch）。
问题：weaken
A。无关，那些人的预测和实际好坏无关
B。 支持。switch费用高，说明switch不好。
C。WEAKEN。注意是虚拟语气。如果那些人不switch。pepper的供应不会这麽低。pepper价格有可能不会这麽高。switch好。
D。无关。既然两者都一样，就没有switch好坏
E。支持。Cocoa价格低，说明switch不好。
另外说明一下，费费是135道，都来源于LSAT。我不知什麽绿皮书，但不是费费搞的都是统称的feifei。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |