ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2592|回复: 5
打印 上一主题 下一主题

LSAT-21-3-23

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-8-18 04:04:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-21-3-23

23.   Historians of North American architecture who have studied early nineteenth-century houses with wooden floors have observed that the boards used on the floors of bigger houses were generally much narrower than those used on the floors of smaller houses. These historians have argued that, since the people for whom the bigger houses were built were generally richer than the people for whom the smaller houses were built, floors made out of narrow floorboards were probably once a status symbol, designed to proclaim the owner’s wealth.



Which one of the following, if true, most helps to strengthen the historians’ argument?


(A) More original floorboards have survived from big early nineteenth-century houses than from small early nineteenth-century houses.


(B) In the early nineteenth century, a piece of narrow floorboard was not significantly less expensive than a piece of wide floorboard of the same length.


(C) In the early nineteenth century, smaller houses generally had fewer rooms than did bigger houses.


(D) Some early nineteenth-century houses had wide floorboards near the walls of each room and narrower floorboards in the center, where the floors were usually carpeted.B


(E) Many of the biggest early nineteenth-century houses but very few small houses from that period had some floors that were made of materials that were considerably more expensive than wood, such as marble.



How come B can be the answer? If, as said in B,  the narrow floorboard "was not significantly less expensive", meaning it's almost as expensive as the wide board and it's a symbol of wealth, then the poor people who built smaller house would use the narrow board as well.



I chose D even though D is not a 100% good answer but seems better than B.


Any thoughts?



沙发
发表于 2004-8-18 04:41:00 | 只看该作者

1。B为假设型支持。将B取非,narrow floorboards比wide floorboard 明显便宜。 则结论narrow floorboards were probably once a status symbol, designed to proclaim the owner’s wealth。不能成立。

2。同个HOUSE中的floorboards有宽有窄,什麽问题也说明不了。原文给的证据是bigger houses, much narrower floorboards。

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-8-18 11:39:00 | 只看该作者
你说的有一定道理,但是我觉得好像有点勉强。if you say " A is not significantly less expensive than B", usually you mean A is not more expensive than B. So it can't strengthen. Also 取非到底是不是放之四海皆准的准则呢?取非到底是什么意思?
地板
发表于 2004-8-18 19:15:00 | 只看该作者
假设是支持的子集,而假设中,选项是结论的必要条件。我以前论述过取非的问题,你自己搜索一下。
5#
发表于 2004-8-18 19:18:00 | 只看该作者
6#
发表于 2019-7-31 16:58:53 | 只看该作者
lawyer_1 发表于 2004-8-18 19:15
假设是支持的子集,而假设中,选项是结论的必要条件。我以前论述过取非的问题,你自己搜索一下。 ...

完全正確!

Is not significantly less expansive 的取非 = Is " significantly "  less expansive
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

所属分类: 法学院申请

近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-23 13:37
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部