ChaseDream
搜索
123下一页
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Debater: The average amount of overtime per month worked by an employee in the manufacturing division of the Haglut Corporation is 14 hours. Most employees of the Haglut Corporation work in the manufacturing division. Furthermore, the average amount of overtime per month worked by any employee in the company generally does not fluctuate much from month to month. Therefore, each month, most employees of the Haglut Corporation almost certainly work at least some overtime.

The debater's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of these grounds?

正确答案: D

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: 15995|回复: 22
打印 上一主题 下一主题

og13th 100题 选项看不懂求解释

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2013-5-14 20:51:09 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
Debater: The average amount of overtime per month worked by an employee in the manufacturing division of the Haglut Corporation is 14 hours. Most employees of the Haglut Corporation work in the manufacturing division. Furthermore, the average amount of overtime per month worked by any employee in the company generally does not fluctuate much from month to month. Therefore, each month, most employees of the Haglut Corporation almost certainly work at least some overtime.

The debater's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of these grounds?

(A) It takes for granted that the manufacturing division is a typical division of the corporation with regard to the average amount of overtime its employees work each month.

(B) It takes for granted that if a certain average of amount of overtime is worked each month by each employee of the Haglut Corporation, then approximately the same amount of overtime must be worked each month by each employee of the manufacturing division.

(C) It confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument's conclusion only with a high degree of probability.

(D) It overlooks the possibility that even if, on average, a certain amount of overtime is worked by the members of some group, many members of that group may work no overtime at all.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that even if most employees of the corporation work some overtime each month, anyone corporate employee may, in some months, work no overtime.

求解选项 BC的意思。。。感觉说的好绕啊
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2013-5-14 22:29:15 | 只看该作者
我的理解是,B的意思应该是反着的,,如果公司职员平均每一个职员的每个月有加班,就能近似的认为制造区也有相应的加班时间。。。
                  C表达的是 它认为这个关于公司的观点的结论必须由一个结论(而这个结论只是根据一个高度可能性而推断出来的,即本身就是不正确的推论)
得出。
我不太理解这里的most。表达的是什么,不知道LZ怎么看


板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2013-5-14 22:44:14 | 只看该作者
olivia瓜瓜 发表于 2013-5-14 22:29
我的理解是,B的意思应该是反着的,,如果公司职员平均每一个职员的每个月有加班,就能近似的认为制造区也 ...

感觉most是谨慎性的一个表现吧,比如因为most E选项久必错了
地板
发表于 2013-5-14 23:02:09 | 只看该作者
Debater: The average amount of overtime per month worked by an employee in the manufacturing division of the Haglut Corporation is 14 hours. Most employees of the Haglut Corporation work in the manufacturing division. Furthermore, the average amount of overtime per month worked by any employee in the company generally does not fluctuate much from month to month. Therefore, each month, most employees of the Haglut Corporation almost certainly work at least some overtime. 楼主体会一下这两个most 。。。
5#
发表于 2013-5-14 23:35:43 | 只看该作者
考的是削弱
原文逻辑结构是:
R1 HC平均manufacturing dvision(生产部门)平均工作14hrs  R2 公司的大部分人在manufacturing dvision工作 R3 这个公司的工作时间不怎么变动

这三个原因推导出 大部分manufacturing dvision员工工作超时

部门平均工作时间超时不代表大部分人工作时间超时,类似的:班级的平均分数高 不等于 班上大部分人分数高(也有可能有几个满分来拉高平均分)

这样你找GAP 就好找了 主要分清 员工平均工作时间和大部分人得工作时间之间不存在必然关系
6#
发表于 2013-10-9 12:38:36 | 只看该作者
试着解释一下C选项吧。
It confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument's conclusion only with a high degree of probability.
紫色部分是修饰成分。
修饰成分1:那个被结论紧跟着的claim,即premise
修饰成分1:那个紧跟着结论的可能性很大的claim,即mid-conclusion后的main conclusion
总的来说:作者混淆了the line of reasoning中conclusion前面的claim和conclusion后面的claim。
所以这句话的意思,可以抽象地理解为:作者混淆了一个premise和并不肯定但可能性很大的推论。
7#
发表于 2013-10-9 21:43:24 | 只看该作者
楼上的分析很好。在这里我给出更直接的翻译:
It confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion about the Haglut Corporation would necessarily follow with a claim that would follow from the argument's conclusion only with a high degree of probability.
它把 可以得出结论的断言 和 从结论中有可能得出的断言 混淆了。
即 前面的断言是结论的原因,后面的断言是结论可能推出的结果。
8#
发表于 2013-11-6 03:56:23 | 只看该作者
boboduaner 发表于 2013-10-9 21:43
楼上的分析很好。在这里我给出更直接的翻译:
It confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion  ...

弱弱的问句 第一个claim 后面是定从么  “关于H的结论一定由claim产生” would跟的是conclusion还是H?
9#
发表于 2013-11-6 04:01:34 | 只看该作者
boboduaner 发表于 2013-10-9 21:43
楼上的分析很好。在这里我给出更直接的翻译:
It confuses a claim from which the argument's conclusion  ...

还有个which 前面的from 是跟着follow的么
10#
发表于 2013-11-18 20:16:08 | 只看该作者
ljwqlcl881703 发表于 2013-11-6 03:56
弱弱的问句 第一个claim 后面是定从么  “关于H的结论一定由claim产生” would跟的是conclusion还是H? ...

第一个claim后是定语从句, “关于H的结论一定由claim产生” ,你这么理解是对的。
would跟的是conclusion,这个定语从句正常语序是,
(the argument's conclusion 主语)(about the Haglut Corporation )(would necessarily follow谓语 )from a claim,
a claim用关系代词which代替,介词+关系代词which提前。
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, 2024-11-22 08:17
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