ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1988|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请问费费NO.71

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-11-9 22:03:00 | 只看该作者

请问费费NO.71

71. More than a year ago, the city announced that police would crack down on illegally parked cars and that resources would be diverted from writing speeding tickets to ticketing illegally parked cars. But no crackdown has taken place. The police chief claims that resources have had to be diverted from writing speeding tickets to combating the city’s staggering drug problem. Yet the police are still writing as many speeding tickets as ever. Therefore, the excuse about resources being tied up in fighting drug-related crime simply is not true.
The conclusion in the passage depends on the assumption that
(A) ever member of the police force is qualified to work on combating the city’s drug problem
(B) drug-related crime is not as serious a problem for the city as the police chief claims it is
(C) writing speeding tickets should be as important a priority for the city as combating drug-related crime
(D) the police could be cracking down on illegally parked cars and combating the drug problem without having to reduce writing speeding tickets
(E) the police cannot continue writing as many speeding tickets as ever while diverting resources to combating drug-related crime
这道题的混淆项也太混淆啦。我在E和D之间比较了半天,最后还是错选了D,答案是E.
实在看不出他们的分别,请指点。
沙发
发表于 2003-11-10 00:02:00 | 只看该作者
文章是从一种现象推出一个结论. 现象是开超速罚单的数量没有减少. 结论是警察人手并未用于打击贩毒.

假设就是要从中搭桥, 找出使结论成立的hiden premise.

将E取非, 如果警察人手减少仍能开出一样多数量的罚单, 说明人手确实有可能被抽调去打击贩毒了, 削弱了原文结论, 因此是假设.

D说警察不减少开罚单的数量, 同时又可以打击非法泊车和贩毒. 我觉得这是个无关选项, 因为它没有说到 diverting resourse 的问题.

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2003-11-10 00:34:00 | 只看该作者
IC
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, 2024-11-30 13:39
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