[求助]LAST-9-4-11

G-CRACKER · 发表于 2004-10-21 20:39:00

做了两遍，没有看出选项中有和原文相关的，更不要说加强了。。。。郁闷ING.. 参考答案选A.

A distemper virus has caused two-thirds of the seal population in the North Sea to die since May 1988. The explanation for the deaths cannot rest here, however. There must be a reason the normally latent virus could prevail so suddenly: clearly the severe pollution of the North Sea waters must have weakened the immune system of the seals so that they could no longer withstand the virus.

11. Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the explanation given in the argument?

(A) At various times during the last ten years, several species of shellfish and seabirds in the North Sea have experienced unprecedented steep drops in population.

(B) By reducing pollution at its source, Northern Europe and Scandinavia have been taking the lead in preventing pollution from reaching the waters of the North Sea.

(C) For many years, fish for human consumption have been taken from the waters of the North Sea.

(D) There are two species of seal found throughout the North Sea area, the common seal and the gray seal.

(E) The distemper caused by the virus was a disease that was new to the population of North Sea seals in May 1988, and so the seals’ immune systems were unprepared to counter it.

robertchu · 发表于 2004-10-22 09:01:00

You can easily eliminate B, C, D, and E.

B: weakens the argument. C: not relevant or weakens. D: not relevant. E: weakens.

Now let's look at A: "At various times during the last ten years, several species of shellfish and seabirds in the North Sea have experienced unprecedented steep drops in population."

If A is true, in the last ten years or so (since 1988), not only seal, but also other species, have experienced steep population drop. So, there must be some connections, or common causes. I.e., the population drop of seal is not simply caused by the virus -- the original argument is strengthened.

paopao · 发表于 2004-10-22 09:11:00

robert, 这种选项读起来象无关

A排除了病毒的原因

G-CRACKER · 发表于 2004-10-22 20:53:00

以下是引用robertchu在2004-10-22 9:01:00的发言：

You can easily eliminate B, C, D, and E.

B: weakens the argument. C: not relevant or weakens. D: not relevant. E: weakens.

Now let's look at A: "At various times during the last ten years, several species of shellfish and seabirds in the North Sea have experienced unprecedented steep drops in population."

If A is true, in the last ten years or so (since 1988), not only seal, but also other species, have experienced steep population drop. So, there must be some connections, or common causes. I.e., the population drop of seal is not simply caused by the virus -- the original argument is strengthened.

Agree that B & E weaken the argument, 藕没有细看，乱说。但Ａ没有几层假设，是不太可能把海豹死亡与pollution & immune system 联系起来的。。。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-10-22 20:53:48编辑过]

lawyer_1 · 发表于 2004-10-22 21:01:00

从做题角度，BCDE较易排除（和结论没相关性），A有点含糊，说不清，故选A。

原文的推理：现象：病毒引起SEAL的大量死亡。结论性原因：不仅仅是病毒（让步，防止观点受攻击），污染使免疫能力下降导致了SEAL的大量死亡。（因果型结论）

答案：有五种方法可以SUPPORT结论（见置顶的“考试时如何做逻辑题”）。A 用的是第五种方法：用于推出因果关系结论的资料是对的。A说不仅仅是SEAL出现这种现象，同期的其它动物也出现这种现象。从而证明这种现象是对的。当然A的支持是很弱的，可以找出TONS OF REASONS去否定它。

G-CRACKER · 发表于 2004-10-23 00:54:00

晓得了。。。THX.

[求助]LAST-9-4-11

[求助]LAST-9-4-11

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块