OG 11-9 提问

9        Mayor: In each of the past five years, the city has cut school funding and each time school officials complained that the cuts would force them to reduce expenditures for essential services. But each time, only expenditures for nonessential services were actually reduced. So school officials can implement further cuts without reducing any expenditures for essential services.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the mayor's conclusion?

(A)           The city's schools have always provided essential services as efficiently as they have provided nonessential services.

(B)           Sufficient funds are currently available to allow the city's schools to provide some nonessential services.

答案是B , 但是我实在不明白为什么. 原文的意思: 在前5年里,市里削减了学校的基金, 每次,学校都会抱怨说削减使他们被迫削减了很多主要的服务, 但是实际上每次, 只有非主要的服务的基金在减少,因此,学校可以实施以后的削减而不要减少任何主要主要的服务开支

不知道我翻译的对不对, 但是答案B 我实在想不通,请各位指点

你翻译的是对的. B是在说现在的学校的基金足够容许学校还能提供那些非主要的服务的开支.如果这样的话,我们就能得出假如

学校削减了基金的供给,那么现在那些非主要的服务的开支就会最先被减掉,如果够的话,可能就不动那些主要的服务的开支.

这是在support原文.

o  ,原来是这样啊,多谢了