亲哪，求教~~大全B-2，看了看多贴，可是仍不能理解！

lovepunch · 发表于 2011-4-13 15:51:15

2. In the years since the city of London imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry, the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similar air-pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) In most major cities, air-pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local industry.
(B) Air-pollution regulations on industry have a significant impact on the quality of the air.
(C) The air-pollution problems of other major cities are basically similar to those once suffered by London.
(D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
(E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual increase in the number of species in the area.

BCDE都懂，就是不知道A错在哪里？~

有哪位亲能解答一下？~谢谢啦

寻沫访华 · 发表于 2011-4-13 19:02:52

他只是说这个禁令会产生鸟增加，但是并没有说什么引起的空气污染。文中的逻辑只是禁令会产生好的影响，所以应该推行

horsecc · 发表于 2011-4-13 19:20:27

almost entirely 没有体现

dengts · 发表于 2011-4-14 11:09:44

I really think you don't understand the nature of assumption.Remember:An assumption is simply an unstated premise of the argument.Because the assumption is an integral component of the argument,a piece that must be true in order to make the argument true,assumption is necessary!!!That is,If you negate it,you can't establish the argument.

lovepunch · 发表于 2011-4-14 13:35:54

谢谢大家，总结一下，我的一开始理解是：如果other major cities的air-pollution不是由 local industry造成的，那么即使执行Similar air-pollution rules （imposed strict air-pollution regulations on local industry）也不能解决air-pollution problems，从而the number of bird species 不会上升。这么看来，我错在擅自推出了解决环境问题就能推出鸟类上升，事实上文中并未直接说air-pollution problems，只是说实行了regulation，鸟类上升，因此A选项无关，不能够成假设。

不知道这样理解对否？

dengts · 发表于 2011-4-14 15:41:03

More precisely,the correct answer to assumption-type question shouldn't too strict especially when stimulus is not strict.We need't know air-polution is caused almost entirely by local industry.For example:if air-polution is caused secondary by local industry,we still impose regulation in other major cities.

lovepunch · 发表于 2011-4-15 14:00:13

Thanks! !

wildmantomba · 发表于 2011-12-27 10:55:04

2。A错在almost entirely 。只要是主要就可以推出结论。D对是因为原文结论说should be ，是建议性的，如果鸟类增加不好，就不能这样建议。E是因为原文的seen in and around 。看到的不一定就是实际。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-15 0:31:58编辑过]
-- by 会员 lawyer_1 (2004/7/15 0:31:00)

这道题是ASSUMPTION题。ASSUMPTION是必要条件。A选项的意思是空气污染几乎都是地方工业造成的。言下之意是没有其他因素造成空气污染。这个假设太过头。如果有其他造成空气污染的因素存在一样可使结论推出。比如，空气污染60%是地方工业造成的，40%是外地飘来的。假如政府的规定将地方工业造成的污染减少一半就已使鸟类大幅度增加，如果是这样，根本不需假设空气污染完全是地方工业造成的。其实原文只要本地的工业造成的空气污染大到足以使鸟类大幅度减少就行，至于空气污染有多大比例由地方工业造成，并没关系。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-15 7:09:51编辑过]
-- by 会员 lawyer_1 (2004/7/15 7:08:00)

lawyer言简意赅短短语句让人豁然开朗

亲哪，求教~~大全B-2，看了看多贴，可是仍不能理解！

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()