ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3205|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

lsat test13/S1/Q24及cranberry解答

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-6-6 22:23:00 | 只看该作者

lsat test13/S1/Q24及cranberry解答

Test13/S1/Q 24. Until recently it was thought that ink used before the sixteenth century did not contain titanium. However, a new type of analysis detected titanium in the ink of the famous Bible printed by Johannes Gutenberg and in that of another fifteenth-century Bible known as B-36, though not in the ink of any of numerous other fifteenth-century books analyzed. This finding is of great significance, since it not only strongly supports the hypothesis that B-36 was printed by Gutenberg but also shows that the presence of titanium in the ink of the purportedly fifteenth century Vinland Map can no longer be regarded as a reason for doubting the map’s authenticity.

The reasoning in the passage is vulnerable to criticism on the ground that

(A) the results of the analysis are interpreted as indicating that the use of titanium as an ingredient in fifteenth-century ink both was, and was not, extremely restricted

(B) if the technology that makes it possible to detect titanium in printing ink has only recently become available, it is unlikely that printers ore artists in the fifteenth century would know whether their ink contained titanium or not

(C) it is unreasonable to suppose that determination of the date and location of a document’s printing or drawing can be made solely on the basis of the presence or absence of a single element in the ink used in the document.

(D) both the B-36 Bible and the Binland Map are objects that can be appreciated on their own merits whether or not the precise date of their creation or the identity of the person who made them is known.

(E) the discovery of titanium in the ink of the Vinland Map must have occurred before titanium was discovered in the ink of the Gutenberg Bible and the B-36 Bible

The answer is A, 我认为C好一些。
选A的not extremely restricted 是否指the famous bible printed by Johannes, 而extremely restricted 是否指not in the ink of any numerous…books.

但是看完提干后的第一感觉是怎么能因为一种墨水出现在JG印的famous bible 和另一种bible – B36, 就推论B36是JG印的?C说出了这一点,不能仅凭是否出现某一种元素来判断书和画的印刷时间和地点。C唯一的不足是他又一个Location, 在文中没有出现。但是总体感觉比A好。

不知道是我没发现更重要的东西还是什么别的原因, 请指教, 谢谢。

Cranberry 解答向下翻...

[此贴子已经被作者于2003-6-9 19:22:38编辑过]
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2003-6-7 20:29:00 | 只看该作者
劳驾那位高手能指点一下,要掉下去了。
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2003-6-9 03:01:00 | 只看该作者
up one more time!

Please any big brother...
地板
发表于 2003-6-9 12:13:00 | 只看该作者
这个问题已经有人问过了,好象有牛牛解答过的,你可以去找找前面的贴子.
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2003-6-9 19:03:00 | 只看该作者
我花了2小时向遣返终于找到这个这个提的解释,为了方便版主将他收到提问总结版,我现在将他贴出来,回答问题的人好像是Cranberry, 谢谢了。

看文中的结论,一是用墨水来判定古登堡印了那个圣经(理由就是墨水一样),然后又根据墨水,推断一种地图也是这个时代的产物。既然墨水被认为是判定古登堡的“标志”,就是“restrictly”,如何又可以泛泛地判定地图的年份呢?

谢谢cranberry!但小生还有一疑问,如大虾赏脸,能否再次指点:
cranberry的回答是直接反对结论。墨水被认为是判定古登堡的“标志”,是“restrictly”;结论根据墨水推断一种地图是这个时代的产物,因此墨水也可以被认为是判定某时代产物的标志,即用来判定地图的年份,也应该是“restrictly”,不知当否?

我考虑反对前提和结论之间的推理:即一个著名的圣经是古登堡印的,不一定能推出B-36也是由古登堡印的(理由就是墨水一样),象C说的那样。

小子试着说说,c的意思是说不能单凭墨水中有否某种物质就判定什么东东,这个不是文章的flaw,因为通过墨水判定这种方法是否科学合理,文中你看不出,所以它的弱点不在于此,而接着看文章,古登堡的圣经证明15世纪墨水就有钛,但15世纪的墨水有钛不能证明所有用有钛墨水印制的圣经就是古登堡的“作品”,如果认为这是古登堡的专有(理由是十五世纪其他的印刷品的墨水里没有钛),那么除非这个地图也是古登堡的作品,否则就出现了专有和泛泛的矛盾。


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, 2025-4-24 16:49
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