一道XDF讲师讲的水平很菜的题，大家讨论一下，谢谢。

寂寞的自由 · 发表于 2003-11-14 04:19:00

14. Industrialists from the country Distopia were
accused of promoting the Distopian intervention in
the Arcadian civil war merely to insure that the
industrialists' facilities in Arcadia made substantial
profits during the war. Yet this cannot be the motive
since, as the Distopians foresaw, Distopia's federal
expenses for the intervention were eight billion
dollars, whereas, during the war, profits from the
Distopian industrialists' facilities in Arcadia totaled
only four billion dollars.

Which of the following, if true, exposes a serious
flaw in the argument made in the second sentence
above?

(A) During the Arcadian war, many Distopian
industrialists with facilities located in Arcadia
experienced a significant rise in productivity
in their facilities located in Distopia
(B) The largest proportion of Distopia's federal
expenses is borne by those who receive no
significant industrial profits.
(C) Most Distopian industrialists' facilities located
in Arcadia are expected to maintain the level
of profits they achieved during the war.
(D) Distopian industrialists' facilities in Arcadia
made substantial profits before the events
that triggered the civil war.
(E) Many Distopians expressed concern over the
suffering that Arcadians underwent during
the civil war.

这道题，我觉得新东方的思路简直就是在误导新人哦！！！居然说D选项是过去和原文的现在状态时间不符合！！！而原文摆明就是在讲一种过去的时间状态啊！！！另外，这个题，大家都是什么解题思路呢？我想听听各位NN的意见，开阔一下思路。谢谢大家。

xiang_y · 发表于 2003-11-14 06:41:00

Here is my 2 cents.

The line of reasoning in the passage:
Conclusion: The purpose that industialists promoted Distopian intervention in the Arcadian civil war is NOT making substantial profits during the war.

Because (Evidences)
1: During the war, profits from the Distopian industrialists' facilities in Arcadia totaled only four billion dollars.
2: During the war, Distopia's federal expenses for the interention were eight billion dollars.
8 billion>4 billion, input>output. The industialists's purpose must be something else, because this looks like a bad deal for businessmen.

Question asks to find the flaw in this line of reasoning with the information answers provided. Now let's look at the answers.

A: kind of convincing, however pay attention to the word "productivity". It is the "prodictivity" that increased during the war, not the "profit". I remember, ETS uses this trick very often. There are several problems in OG using the same trick.

C: Whether the facilities can maintain the level of profits in the future has nothing to do with making big profit during the war.

D: What happened before the war has nothing to do with industialists's purpose to make profit during the war.

E: totally out of scope.

B: I believe there is a hidden assumption in the argument, which is all the federal expense is used to generate the profit. However, if what B said is ture most expense is borne by those industries received no significant profit, it means that only a small propotion of 8 billion expense is used to generate the 4 billion profit(now it looks like a good deal). This make the assumption no longer hold. So I think B is the right answer, hope I am right:-).

Wish this help.

寂寞的自由 · 发表于 2003-11-14 09:24:00

谢谢2楼的朋友，高手，英语水平真牛，都是英语讲解哦~~~~~~~~~~~，我好好研究一下您的解释，如果还有不懂，再继续提问，谢谢您

一道XDF讲师讲的水平很菜的题，大家讨论一下，谢谢。

一道XDF讲师讲的水平很菜的题，大家讨论一下，谢谢。

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块