ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 5978|回复: 14
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[求助]OG11-101(看不懂OG解释)

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2008-3-2 11:37:00 | 只看该作者

[求助]OG11-101(看不懂OG解释)

OG11-101

For a trade embargo against a particular country to succeed,a high degree of both international accord and ability  to prevent goods from entering or leaving that country must be sustained . a total blockade of Patria’s ports is necessary to an embargo,but such an action would be likely to cause international discord over the embargo

Most strongly support which of the following conclusions.

A the balance of opinion is likely to favor Patria in the event of a blockade

B as long as international opinion is unanimously against patria, a trade embargo is likely to succeed.

C a naval blockade of patria’s port would ensure that no goods enter or leave patria.

D
    
any trade embargo against patria would be likely to fail at some time   (答案)

E for a blockade of patia’s port to be successful,international opinion must be unanimous

我怎么也看不明白在OGBE的解释中, 那个contradicts分别指什么?!(OG解释如下)

B This conclusion contradicts the given information.

E This statement contradicts the given information and cannot be a justifiable conclustion.


[此贴子已经被作者于2008-3-2 11:49:22编辑过]
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2008-3-4 22:31:00 | 只看该作者
UPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPPUPUPUP!
板凳
发表于 2008-3-5 01:29:00 | 只看该作者
I think, contradicts in B means the logic got reversed. Since the statement says Embargo -> International Accordance + Blockade, but B says IA -> Embargo.

contradicts in E probably means: it contradicts the premise (which can't be broken ------ a
total blockade of Patria’s ports is necessary to an embargo,but such an
action would be likely to cause international discord over the embargo ------this indicates Embargo->Blockade->Inverse(International Accordance) while E says, Blockade -> IA which contradicts Blockade->Inverse(IA).
地板
发表于 2008-3-5 01:32:00 | 只看该作者
or B could mean, as premise states that Embargo -> blockade-> Inverse(IA) then  IA-> inverse(blockade)->inverse(Embargo), contradicts B which says IA->Embargo.
5#
发表于 2008-3-6 15:39:00 | 只看该作者
unanimous跟文中的discord矛盾
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2008-3-7 19:56:00 | 只看该作者
多谢二位的支持,觉得gillfiese的推理很严谨,THX!
7#
发表于 2008-3-15 19:41:00 | 只看该作者

果真如大家所讲吗?

我持反对意见:

文中给出的信息为禁运的两个条件:

A high degree of both......

而B和D都用了过于绝对化的词汇unanimous ( complete accord )

所以本人认为BD的错误在此,而并不是和文中discord这个层面上的矛盾。如若不信,请将unanimous换成a high degree accord 您试一下,错吗?

另外,B=D,所以都错!呵呵!词汇和阅读能力才是王道啊!(本人最缺乏的东东)

8#
发表于 2008-7-5 11:15:00 | 只看该作者
因为blockade of P's ports 和international accord本身就是矛盾的两个条件,两个条件对于P国根本不可能同时达到。所以contradict.
9#
发表于 2008-7-14 08:23:00 | 只看该作者

我赞成waterteller的说法

10#
发表于 2008-8-16 21:36:00 | 只看该作者
``mingbaile
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, 2024-9-20 07:05
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