[求助]大全-III-18

Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporation’s profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporation’s profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.

On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?

(A) The increase in the pharmaceutical division’s contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.

(B) In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporation’s profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.

(C) The percentage of the corporation’s profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that division’s performance had not improved.

(D) The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.（C）

(E) The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.

答案是C，我选了E；但我不明白原文哪里提到performance的问题了？我不解。还请nn能够解释一下。多谢了！

偶想是指这句话吧：the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger:

原文说：化学部门以前一直贡献了公司利润的60％，医药部门贡献的利润从去年的20％上升到45％，很明显这时候化学部门贡献的利润低于55％，所以化学部门增长强劲，因此嘉奖！

E是无关选项，C说医药部门的利润增长和医药部门的表现没有关系。所以原文的嘉奖医药部门就被削弱了！

谢谢大家。觉得读原文要再仔细些。但不知道有何方法可以改善，现在终于觉得“无论如何强调阅读都是不够的”这句话的意思了。

楼上解题不明确.

百分比的问题.C的含意是H部门利润在公司的百分比可以上升,即使部门没有改善表现.(因为CH的百分比下降了.所以有可能)

补问一句：我觉得B项也可以起到削弱的目的。

通常multidivisional corporations有50％以上的利润来自pharmaceuticals，所以削弱原文。

哪位大侠指点指点！

同6楼的gg问

有点道理。但我觉得题干中说了chemical一般为利润的60%，E说phar占超过一半的利润。这不是削弱结论，而是反对前提。典型错误。

我觉得这个与文章联系不紧，与文中要削弱的evidence中医药部门贡献的上升没有任何联系