ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer's argument?

正确答案: D

相关帖子

更多...

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 8813|回复: 8
打印 上一主题 下一主题

I have visited hotels throughout 求解

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2011-2-6 04:15:28 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
答案选D,但不知道为什么,求解。谢谢了
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2011-2-6 04:35:59 | 只看该作者
DDDDDDDDDDDDDd

If D is true, then what the author observed was simply the consequence of "whatever is the best would survive!"  So the reason to see better carpentry in old hotels is that old hotels with bad carpentry no longer exist. If this is true, the author's argument falls apart.
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2011-2-6 04:58:25 | 只看该作者
为什么要用英文啊?!中文好吗?英文看的我好累啊。谢谢了
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2011-2-6 05:03:02 | 只看该作者
不好意思啊,其实我还没看懂。你是说用他因法吗?就是说其他原因是质量,不是人的原因。还是晕晕的,谢谢了
5#
发表于 2011-6-17 16:26:22 | 只看该作者
这是OG12-CR114题,答案的确是D而且也解释得通:D说的是有好质量的carpentry的building不容易被拆毁,也就是说那些有差质量carpentry的building就会容易被拆毁,所以导致越老留下来的building中的carpentry质量越高,削弱了题目的结论。   但是我认为在D选项这个解释比较牵强,不像别的题目的解释非常有说服力。
6#
发表于 2012-10-13 23:01:24 | 只看该作者
7#
发表于 2016-10-31 01:01:56 | 只看该作者
sdcar2010 发表于 2011-2-6 04:35
DDDDDDDDDDDDDdIf D is true, then what the author observed was simply the consequence of "whatever is ...

同意!               
8#
发表于 2016-10-31 01:04:19 | 只看该作者
sdcar2010 发表于 2011-2-6 04:35
DDDDDDDDDDDDDdIf D is true, then what the author observed was simply the consequence of "whatever is ...

thanks for this clear explanation!      
9#
发表于 2017-7-17 17:18:40 | 只看该作者
C 为什么错了?
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:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-4 19:16
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