ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2518|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

LSAT-21-2-18

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-12-9 14:05:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-21-2-18

Questions 17-18
The widespread staff reductions in a certain
region's economy are said to be causing people
who still have their jobs to cut back on new
purchases as though they, too, had become
economically distressed. Clearly, however, actual
spending by such people is undiminished, because
there has been no unusual increase in the amount
of money held by those people in savings
accounts.

18. Which one of the following is an assumption
on which the argument relies?
(A) If people in the region who continue to be
employed have debts, they are not now paying them
off at an accelerated rate
(B) People in the region who continue to be
employed and who have relatives who have lost
their jobs commonly assist those relatives
financially
(C) If people in the region who have lost jobs
get new jobs, the new jobs generally pay less
well than the ones they lost
(D) People in the region who continue to be
employed are pessimistic about their prospects
for increasing their incomes
(E) There exist no statistics about sales of goods in the region as a whole


答案A。

我觉得不对,上面根本没提到什么debts的问题。看来看去,一个答案都不像。

怀疑如果答案没错的话,就是问题错了。估计是问 infer correctly 之类的。

请教NN的高见。

沙发
发表于 2003-12-9 14:15:00 | 只看该作者
咳呀,我觉得有问题的是17题啊
呵呵,这个没错了
因为收入可以被用在三个地方,一是增加存款,而是多买东西,三是拿去还债,排除了前面两个,当然第三个可以很好的解释原文了
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2003-12-9 14:40:00 | 只看该作者
这里问的是assumption 呀。assumption 是结论成立的必要条件。这里结论是

这些人的实际消费并没有减少。原因是他们的存款没特别多起来。

要得出实际消费并没有减少的结论 需要 “假如这些人有欠款,并没有加速还款”这个假设成立吗?

我觉得假设应该是,发给他们的工资没降低才对。假如他们工资降了,即使存款没多,也不能说明消费没低呀。

地板
发表于 2003-12-9 14:48:00 | 只看该作者
原文的逻辑是
因为存款没有增加,所以人们的purchase没有减少
可是这个逻辑是有问题的,人们赚了钱可以拿去还贷款,这样以上的这个推理就不对了
那作为原文的假设呢,就是要把还贷款的这种情况给排除出去
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2003-12-9 14:57:00 | 只看该作者
明白了。17题的思路很清晰呀。你想明白没?
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-10-20 03:05
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部