GWD-2-11

Question 11:

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are

commonly added to wine as preservatives.  However, since there are several wine

makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to

drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers

without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.  Which of the following is an assumption

on which the argument depends?

A.      These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced

by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic

substances to their wine.

B.      Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reactions.

C.      Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.

D.     Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give

rise to an allergic reaction.

E.      Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in

amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.

Why the answer is D, not A

A sounds like a strengthen answer, just duplicated what have mentioned in the passage

D plays a role as an assumption.  Not + weaken

Why D is correct? One simple example: There is no wolf in the woods. So it should be safe for kids to play there. Assumption: there is no other wild animals such as tiger or snake that pose dange to kid.

Why A is incorrect? The question does not say whether the wine has the same preservative effect. It simply tells you that no sulfite is added. The wine might be very bad because of that. We just do not care. It is out of scope unless you are given additional information in that regard.

我也觉得D无关阿。题目说Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives。

就是说，很多人只是对certain sulfites过敏，而并不是对所有可以引起过敏的物质都会过敏。这里可能用到一个common sense,大家应该都知道，对某种物品过敏的人，并不一定对其他物品过敏，每个人都有特定的过敏品种。

D：Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. 并没有说是针对sulfites的allergic.因此无关

E:Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.说sulfites并不是天然存在于wines里面的，因此，只要wine makers不主动添加这种成份，那么这些wine就对那些allergy to sulfites的人是安全的。

就好像说，小明很怕蟑螂，因为小芳家有蟑螂，所以小明不敢去玩。然后说，小芳家没有蟑螂，只有苍蝇和蚊子。那小明为什么还不敢去呢？

makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce,

原因

people who would like to

drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers

without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites

结论

assumption 就是在结论和原因之间架桥，A很好的做到了这一点，措施可以达到目的，不改变其他，无副作用。

D out of scope, 结论之针对allergic to sulfites ，与其他allergic无关。

继续讨论。

E是错的，因为文中已经明确告诉你

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are

commonly added to wine as preservatives.. 就不应该再assume sulfites是否是天然形成产生足够量引起过敏了，因为这已经是事实了？

我觉得A很符合ETS的逻辑思路，题目结论是people can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites，前提是替代物不会引起副作用。类似于引进非洲大黄蜂不会伤害有益昆虫的题目。

我觉得Ｄ是排除他因，更象支持的答案，好像也可以作为假设？迷惑！！

但是阅读全文理解，感觉更倾向于Ａ．

请ＮＮ指点迷津

      E

ADDING NOT TO E CAN MAKE THIS ARTICLE MEANINGLESS