ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2067|回复: 6
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[求助]og-183

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-10-26 17:10:00 | 只看该作者

[求助]og-183

Og-183


Editorial:


Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets. Clearly, therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at


diminished levels.


Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument in the editorial?


(A) The need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.


(B) The proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.


(C) Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.


(D) By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia’s manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.


(E) The stockholders of most Risemia’s manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.


OG的解释说C是支持。有没有人可以指教,C应该如何翻译?感谢!
沙发
发表于 2004-10-26 17:27:00 | 只看该作者

维系该控制污染设备的费用要高于该设备回收利用的化学品的价值。它的含义是维持该设备对企业是一个成本增加,所以支持了结论。

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-10-27 08:37:00 | 只看该作者
啊!这翻译和解说真是太清楚了!谢谢cranberry兄
地板
发表于 2005-7-13 02:33:00 | 只看该作者
我有个问题如果C改成“SAVINGS WIIL  FAR ABOVE THE COST OF MAITAINING”是不是就是 WEAKEN 了,??

多谢!

5#
发表于 2006-7-23 14:52:00 | 只看该作者
小虾在这里有个疑问:
有些削弱题可以直接削弱条件,有些则因为前提是客观事实不可削弱,如68题的E选项,
那么在183这题中,更新了regulation则必然要用新的防污制污设备是题中的不可置疑的客观事实么?
如果可置疑的话,直接指出更新政策,设备不一定更贵或者不一定通过更新设备来遵守政策(比如工艺流程改变等等),可以weaken结论么?
怎么判断题干信息是否可置疑呢?
请大家指教谢谢!
6#
发表于 2006-7-23 17:50:00 | 只看该作者
up up
7#
发表于 2006-7-25 02:10:00 | 只看该作者
没有理我。。。
up up
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, 2024-11-27 18:09
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