gwd-2-22

Q22:

Astronomer:  Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter’s atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were.  Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere.  After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.  The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.  Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up.

In the astronomer’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

1. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.
2. The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second provides evidence in support of the truth of that claim.
3. The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.
4. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.
5. The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.

   Answer: c

我选的b~~~

in C, The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.

the first boldface sentence not a "consideration" but a fact...

I agree that other answers are wrong. but I cannot accept this "consideration" . Anyone could help? Thanks!

ding

这题我也怎么都想不明白

请NN帮忙解释为什么B错？

boldface题重点在于读题 在所有类型的题中需要花费最长的时间用来读题

先看文章结构 开头提出了一个问题 紧接着用nevertheless转折 转折后面的那句就是文章核心观点（事实上这一句才能称为claim或arguement或statement）

 After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.（论证点1）  The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.  （论证点2）Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,（论证点3） it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter’s outer atmosphere without being burned up. （nevertheless后的结论得到支持）

C指出两个句子的平行论证功能 因而正确

B说第二个是第一个的证据 这个没错 但是前半句说The first is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true 这个有问题 因为让astronomer seek的是nevertheless后面的观点是否可行（既能否推出碎片的size）而不是在ssek是否有硫的痕迹 因此改变了整个句子在原文中的功效

另外 consideration这个词就是表述推理的过程 而claim倾向与表述推理的出发点

祝好运！

听君一席话，省我十本书