求教 GWD5-Q33

kelebonnie · 发表于 2011-9-19 11:10:03

GWD5-Q33:

Wolvesgenerally avoid human settlements. Forthis reason, domestic sheep, though essentially easy prey for wolves, are notusually attacked by them. In Hylantiaprior to 1910, farmers nevertheless lost considerable numbers of sheep towolves each year. Attributing this tothe large number for wolves, in 1910 the government began offering rewards tohunters for killing wolves. From 1910 to1915, large numbers of wolves were killed. Yet wolf attacks on sheep increased significantly.

Whichof the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in wolf attackson sheep?

A. Populationsof deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increasedsignificantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915.

B. Priorto 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves.

C. ！After 1910 hunters shot and wounded asubstantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolves’ abilityto prey on wild animals.

D. Domesticsheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselvesagainst wolf attacks.

E. Thesystematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves inHylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans.

A 为什么不对？答案是c

cdwayne · 发表于 2011-9-21 15:45:36

If anything, (A) will deepen the paradox, since the other wild animals were increasing, why did these wolves prefer to the more dangerous choice?

kelebonnie · 发表于 2011-9-21 22:43:11

文中说的是deer and the other wild animals ,我一直把deer看成了sheep。谢谢ls

xumiaoc · 发表于 2012-8-10 21:04:08

我居然也和LZ犯了同样的错误，，

阿ceng · 发表于 2014-10-23 21:09:55

[参考多个解释，得出]

GWD5-Q33:
Wolves generally avoid human settlements. For this reason, domestic sheep, though essentially easy prey for wolves, are not usually attacked by them. In Hylantia prior to 1910, farmers nevertheless lost considerable numbers of sheep to wolves each year. Attributing this to the large number for wolves, in 1910 the government began offering rewards to hunters for killing wolves. From 1910 to 1915, large numbers of wolves were killed. Yet wolf attacks on sheep increased significantly.
【
解释paradox，“因果推理”。问题是explain paradox的关键在于有一个因，却推不出预期的果，且得到相反的果，求出logical gap.

From 1910 to 1915
“因”：hunt wolves
“果”：wolf attacks on sheep
Hunt wolves  (logical gap)  wolf attacks on sheep
CQ1 因果概况问题
CQ2 干扰因素问题
】
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in wolf attacks on sheep?
A. Populations of deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increased significantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915.
B. Prior to 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves.
C. After 1910 hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolves’ ability to prey on wild animals.
D. Domestic sheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselves against wolf attacks.
E. The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans。

Helr的选项分析：

A.在1910年到1915年这段时间，鹿和其他被狼所捕食的动物的数量显著上升了。该选项不是“因”的一个特点，而是“因”的可能会产生的现象，不能评估因果推理。
B.在1910年以前，没有对Hylantia捕猎者捕狼的限制法令。该选项不涉及“因”，因为“因”是1910年以后的情况，也不涉及因果联系。少狼捕食少羊。
C.Correct. 1910年以后，猎手们弄的很多狼都受了伤，因此大幅减少了狼捕食野生动物的能力。该选项提到了因果概括问题。即不是狼少=羊多，而是要根据狼的捕食能力来计算，不是每个狼都要捕食羊的。属于CQ1：因果概括问题。
D.圈养的羊在抵抗狼的攻击方面要远远逊色于野生的动物。该选项没有涉及“因”的特点，且无论羊群抵抗能力如何，都不会影响狼少=羊多这个事实，所以也不涉及因果联系。
E.对狼群系统的捕杀导致狼群大量的迁徙到没有人类居住的山里。该选项不是“因”的一个特点，而是“因”的可能会产生的现象，不能评估因果推理。

晕倒，要看清楚题目啊！不能肯定的答案一般都是干扰项，不该选。
问题要你解释的是1910到1915，很多狼被杀，但是对羊的攻击却明显增加。这是一种看起来奇怪的现象，和原来政府实施这措施的初衷不同。要你解释为何会发生这种情况，为何政府的措施引起相反的后果。其他选项易排除，因解释不了这种“但是”。CD易混。D错在没描述政府采取措施后狼的变化，也没描述羊的变化，都没变，则解释不了狼为何在政府采取政策后变得对羊的攻击却明显增加。原文要你解释的是政府采取措施后的这种奇怪现象。C说得是政府采取的措施让狼没法吃野生动物，所以只能攻击较易攻击的家养的羊。注意，解释题不需要充分，只要说出充分解释的主要信息即可。

cynthialo620 · 发表于 2018-4-15 14:50:16

阿ceng 发表于 2014-10-23 21:09
[参考多个解释，得出]

同意！

本贴相关题目 GMATPrep-2008E1-CR-87 | TN-03-CR-33 (XBCJ)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

求教 GWD5-Q33

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()