求助 OG12 -86

hmvoice · 发表于 2010-9-23 09:44:25

keith：compliance with new government regulations requiring the installation of smoke alarms and sprinkler systems in all the theaters and arenas will cost the entertainment industry $25 billion annually. consequently, jobs will be lost and profits diminished. therefore, these regulations will harm the country's economy.

laura: the $25 billion spend by some businesses will be revenue for others. jobs and profits will be gained as well as lost.

Q: laura responds to keith by:

答案是： C suggesting that K‘s argument overlooks a mitigating consequence

B： challenging the plausibility of the evidence that serves as the basis of K's argument.

请问B 为什么不对？

我的理解是， K 的结论是 regulation will be harmful. 论据是： 25 billion 的 expense will cause unemploymeny and diminished profits. 而 L 说 25 billion 不会造成这个结果。所以L是 challenging the plausibility of k's evidence。

为什么不对？是哪里理解错了？

谢谢

sunshengkun666 · 发表于 2010-9-23 09:50:15

evidence指的是论据，L 说 25 billion 不会造成这个结果，所以l否定的是结论，并没有否认k的这个论据，只不过是提出了另外一个论据，即一个后果来支持他的否定??

hmvoice · 发表于 2010-10-4 12:18:48

原来这样啊~~ 谢谢哈~~~

求助 OG12 -86

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块