一个老的逻辑JJ难题，大家选什么？

Although the discount stores in Goreville's central shopping district are expected to close within

five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store that just opened,

those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the opening of Colson's, a

nondiscount store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district

that closed because it could not compete with Colson's.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A.  Many customers of Colson's are expected to do less shopping there than they did before

the spendless store opened

B.  Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since Colson's

opened have been discount stores.

C.  At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it ever had

D.  Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville's population will grow

at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.

E.  Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not

available at either SpendLess or Colson's

这题目出的够模糊的。。。。根本想不出COLSON在这里有什么用处。

ABC应该无关，D的意思也比较含糊。我选E。

我觉得应该选B

结论应该是those locations will not stay vacant for long

ESeraph你好！好久不见！

我觉得如果结论是those locations will not stay vacant for long。E是支持，而B是削弱阿。

因为 since Colson's opened have been discount stores.那么，就无法与 SpendLess 竞争了。所以，those locations will  stay vacant for long。

大家讨论讨论！>>

我觉得你我二人对这道题因果关系的理解不一样，导致你我最后的结果是相反的。最后我最终觉得你是对的，B是削弱，E是支持。

我认为原文是在说those locations will not stay vacant for long，要反对就是要有stay vacant for long。E是在说一部分店卖的东西和SpendLess or Colson's卖的不一样，（可能）没有竞争关系，所以不受他们的影响。这样可预计的一部分店由于SpendLess or Colson's的原因退出后，所留下的location并不会vacant，因为这部分店会填补这些vacancy。

而B应该是在说不管任意一家店是discount store 还是nondiscount store，都会受到SpendLess or Colson's这两个巨头的冲击，所以会造成一些店的退出而形成vacancy。

我9月底就考完了，所以现在不经常来了。我的成绩是750，我想以你的实力你一定能够取得更好的分数，加油吧！