ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1688|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

大全section2-7

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2005-12-3 22:02:00 | 只看该作者

大全section2-7

Throughout the 1950’s, there were increases in the numbers of dead birds found in agricultural areas after pesticide sprayings. Pesticide manufacturers claimed that the publicity given to bird deaths stimulated volunteers to look for dead birds, and that the increase in numbers reported was attributable to the increase in the number of people looking.


Which of the following statements, if true, would help to refute the claim of the pesticide manufacturers?


(A) The publicity given to bird deaths was largely regional and never reached national proportions.


(B) Pesticide sprayings were timed to coincide with various phases of the life cycles of the insects they destroyed.


(C) No provision was made to ensure that a dead bird would not be reported by more than one observer.


(D) Initial increases in bird deaths had been noticed by agricultural workers long before any publicity had been given to the matter.D


(E) Dead birds of the same species as those found in agricultural areas had been found along coastal areas where no farming took place.



答案D.


虽然做对了,但是完全凭感觉。


题目本身的逻辑关系不是很理解。


杀虫剂生产商说的是什么呢?


死鸟数目的公开引起了更多的志愿者来寻找死鸟。报告的死鸟数目的增加归因于来寻找死鸟的人数的增加。


这是什么逻辑啊?死鸟数目的公开并不是引起更多志愿者来杀鸟啊!


生产商的言下之意,不就是,死鸟数目本来就挺多,只是以前没有发现而已,现在找死鸟的人多了,所以发现的多了。那D不是一个意思了吗?变成支持了。晕啊~

沙发
发表于 2005-12-4 15:06:00 | 只看该作者

d.Initial increases in bird deaths had been noticed by agricultural workers long before any publicity had been given to the matter.


最初死鸟的增加是被农民注意到的,不是志愿者,时间是:距离公开这件事情很久以前


说明在志愿者/找鸟的人增加之前,这个现象就有了,反驳了厂商的结论

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2005-12-5 16:46:00 | 只看该作者

楼上JJ


我想问,厂商的结论究竟是什么呢?


Pesticide manufacturers claimed that the publicity given to bird deaths stimulated volunteers to look for dead birds, and that the increase in numbers reported was attributable to the increase in the number of people looking.


报告的死鸟数目的增加归因于来寻找死鸟的人数的增加。言下之意,厂商承认在志愿者增加之前,死鸟现象已经存在,只不过志愿者的增加使死鸟现象被report了(虽然这么说,对厂商没有任何好处,但是按照句子,应该是这个意思)。那选项D不是正好支持吗?


晕晕晕~

地板
发表于 2005-12-5 21:31:00 | 只看该作者

Pesticide manufacturers 的结论是the increase in numbers reported was attributable to the increase in the number of people looking,即报告的死鸟数的增多是因为找的人多了,而找的人增多是因为公众注意了。


而D说在公众注意之前死鸟数就已经增多了,所以并不是因为找的人多的原因,从而削弱原题结论。

5#
发表于 2005-12-7 00:32:00 | 只看该作者

厂商是承认了“死鸟现象已经存在”


但现在要讨论的是:是否因为它使死鸟增加


重点应该在 the increase in numbers 吧

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, 2025-10-10 14:58
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