|
大全testB-2
2. In the years since the city of LACE>LondonLACE> imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around LACE>LondonLACE> has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.>> Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:>> (A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.>> (B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air. (C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London. (D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.（A） (E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.
请教:原文结论一定能推出(E)吗?
The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.
不管是不是actual increase in the number of species ,只要有increased sightings of bird species sightings 结论也可以成立吧?也就是说,只要有机会能让我看到更多种类的鸟就行(比如以前因为空气不好,鸟不爱出来活动,活动空间很小,我见着本地全部鸟的种类的机会自然少了),用不着这些鸟的种类真的增多啊!(比如说好空气吸引了外地的鸟的种类过来生活) 对于能看到的鸟的种类增加的途径,原文是不清楚的.
E应该也有个程度的问题吧,我是觉得E是过分了,所以否定了E，结论一样能成立.说到这里,我想起好象有一题CR说的是一个调查,发现鸟的数量变动因此得出一个结论,问weaken,正确选项是指出鸟的数量变动只是人观察的方式不同引起的,也是在鸟的数量上做文章,我觉得跟这题类似的地方都是想说明对于鸟的数量的观察结果不能想当然地认为是鸟本身的原因造成的(种类增多或数量增加),而是有可能是人的观察方式/观察到的机会不同而造成.请指教! | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2006-4-13 16:56:00
楼主
