《费费逻辑宝典》中的一题

22. In 1992, a major newspaper circulated throughout North American paid its reporters an average salary paid by its principle competitors to their reporters. An executive of the newspaper argued that this practice was justified, since any shortfall that might exist in the reporters’ salaries is fully compensated by the valuable training they receive through their assignments.

Which one of the following, if true about the newspaper in 1992, most seriously undermines the justification offered by the executive?

A.        Senior reporters at the newspaper earned as much as reporters of similar stature who worked for the newspaper’s principle competitors.

B.        Most of the newspaper’s reporters had worked there for more than ten years.

C.        The circulation of the newspaper had recently reached a plateau, after it had increased steadily throughout the 1980s.

D.       The union that represented reporters at the newspaper was different from the union that represented reporters at the newspaper’s competitors.

E.        The newspaper was widely read throughout continental Europe and Great Britain as well as North America.

参考答案：B

思路：否定low salaries is fully compensated by training

A：与结论无关

B：10年工作经验表示training的作用不大。

C：与结论无关。

D：与结论无关。

E：与结论无关。

评论：此题较难，只能用排除法作。正确选项也比较含糊，需要推理，这种题在gmat中出现的不多。

B的解释还是不懂，哪位NN可以解释一下？

谢谢

Here is the way I think about this question:

The justification is that the salary payment is reasonable.And the premise is that the training will conpensate the shortfall in the saraly.

In fact, the premise only applies to reporters without working experience (who had not taken the training), instead of those experienced reporters.

Therefore,choice B provides a "weaken" by pointing out an exceptiona status for the plremise.