Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council’s equipment-storage building collapsed under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how even a single, apparently insignificant, departure from safety standards can have severe consequences. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the editorial’s argument? - The only other buildings whose roofs collapsed from the weight of the snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting standards than those in the safety codes.
- Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.
- Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it.
- The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.
- Because the equipment-storage building was where the council kept snow-removal equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.
我当初选的D,现在想到D项说的是building-safety codes,而结论说的是departure from safety standard,所以D错;A当初我排除是看到了The only other buildings ,认为是无关项,但是现在明白结论是泛谈,所以用other building无可厚非,且有less exacting standards than those in the safety codes,不知道我这样想是否正确,望高手点墨赐教,不胜感激 |