ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2535|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请教两道题

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2010-10-25 00:46:45 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
XDF张广同学给的逻辑补充讲义里面的

Film Director: it is true that certain characters and plot twists in my newly released film The Big Heist are strikingly similar to characters and plot twists in Thieves, a movie that came out last year. Based on these similarities, the film studio tha tproduced Thieves is now accusing me of taking ideas from that film. The accusation is clearly without merit. All production work on the Big Heist was actually completed months before Thieves was released.

问support for the director's rejection of the accusation的选项。

A. Before Thieves began production, its script had been circulating for several years among various film studios, including the studio that produced the Big Heist

B The characters and plot twists that are most similar in the two films have close parallels in earlier films of the same genre.

我选的A。但答案是B。很纠结啊 不懂B为什么就support了。


Herbicides allow cereal crops to be grown very efficiently, with virtually no competition from weeds. In Britain, partridge populations have been steadily decreasing since herbicide use became widespread. Some environmentalists claim that these birds, which live in and around cereal crop fields, are being poisoned by the herbicides. However, tests show no more than trace quantities of herbicides in responsible for the population decrease.
问weaken

A the elimination of weeds from cereal crop fields has reduced the population of the small insects that live on those weeds and that form a major part of partridge chicks' diet

B. Since partridges are valued as game birds, records of their population are more carefully kept than those for many other birds.

为什么A就对呢?题目的结论是有其他原因导致数量下降。可是A正好说明了有一个其他原因,是support呀,怎么就weaken了...
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-25 11:00:25 | 只看该作者
为啥米有人回答 T_T
板凳
发表于 2010-10-25 23:34:13 | 只看该作者
第一题A是直接针对导演反驳的明显削弱啊,B是通过给出其他可能的原因加强导演的结论,但其实没有加强导演得出结论的原因。
第二题可能是题意没理解,答案A说“因为WEED减少,所以P的数量减少,但因为正是H导致的W减少,所以答案A推出是H导致P减少,与结论正好相反。
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-26 21:34:36 | 只看该作者
第一题A是直接针对导演反驳的明显削弱啊,B是通过给出其他可能的原因加强导演的结论,但其实没有加强导演得出结论的原因。
第二题可能是题意没理解,答案A说“因为WEED减少,所以P的数量减少,但因为正是H导致的W减少,所以答案A推出是H导致P减少,与结论正好相反。
-- by 会员 zlk (2010/10/25 23:34:13)



呃...怎么就对导演的反驳削弱了?导演不是说其实他的片子比那个人的拍的早,而且在那个人拍片子的时候还跑到他这里来看过么?不是正好就支持了导演的反驳了么?

第二题也没看懂你的解释...是说要weaken的是最后那句however开头的么?不是前面那个结论说鸟是被H毒死的?
5#
发表于 2010-10-28 01:27:57 | 只看该作者
第一题,导演是H的导演,他认为自己的片子比T杀青早,就没有抄袭的可能。A说的是:“‘T’的脚本在‘T’开拍前可能就已经被‘H’的导演看过了”。H导演只抓住上映先后来论证,而上映早不一定就没有从T处take idea啊。。。
第二题。。。看题目了,不过LSAT一般都是削弱最后一句的,我就默认那一句了。。。
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, 2024-12-3 02:34
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