[求助]GWD23-32

Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species:  a hare, a partridge, and various Mediterranean fish.  Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created.  Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in other Roman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

1. The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in the Sepphoris area.

2. There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native.

3. No motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.

4. All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosaics are readily identifiable as representations of known species.

5. There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman Empire were familiar.

the anwser if E. Why?

There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman Empire were familiar.

就是说大家都在用一个通用的格式来做mosaic， 就是说虽然你亲眼见过某个东西，但你还是知道它。

文中说了不同地方的设计都是不同的了么？

我怎么觉得E无关啊！

I think the answer should be E.

In the arg ,it is said that the animal which were depicted in mosaic had never been live when the mosaic was created.So author think it was created by someone came from another place.

If there is a place where most of artists in different areas could saw and share the information.or there was a common design everybody was familar.Then the artists who live in S could make the motifs ,too.Then the conclusion would be weaken. 

解释很好.足够清晰了.