ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3975|回复: 10
打印 上一主题 下一主题

LSAT-20-1-15

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-12-8 22:38:00 | 只看该作者

LSAT-20-1-15

Questions 14-15
In most corporations the salaries of executives
are set by a group from the corporation's board
of directors. Since the board's primary mission
is to safeguard the economic health of the
corporation rather than to make its executives
rich, this way of setting executives salaries is
expected to prevent excessively large salaries.
But, clearly, this expectation is based on poor
reasoning After all, most members of a
corporation's board are themselves executives of
some corporation and can expect to benefit from
setting generous benchmarks for executives
salaries.

15. Which one of the following practices is
vulnerable to a line of criticism most parallel
to that used in the argument in the passage?
(A) in medical malpractice suits giving
physicians not directly involved in a suit a
major role in determining the damages due to
successful plaintiffs
(B) in a legislature, allowing the legislators to
increase their own salaries only if at least twothirds
of them vote in favor of an increase
(C) to work both fast an accurately by paying
them by the piece but counting only pieces of
acceptable quality
(D) in a sports competition decided by judges
scores selecting the judges from among people
retired from that sport after successful careers
(E) in a business organization distributing a
group bonus among the members of a task force on
the basis of a confidential evaluation by each
member of the contribution made by each of the
others.

答案A。 我觉得B更好。
沙发
发表于 2003-12-9 00:10:00 | 只看该作者
a很好的吻合了原文的逻辑
因为无论是懂事会的还是调超医疗事故的,他们在这次的事情处理完以后都有可能还会要碰到现在的被他们所处理的人而要他们的帮忙,所以看上去他们的利益和那些总经理或是犯了错的医生无关,可实际上还是一路货的。
板凳
发表于 2004-5-30 22:21:00 | 只看该作者

After all, most members of a corporation’s board are themselves executives of some corporation and can expect to benefit from setting generous benchmarks for executives salaries.

some corporation is not equal to the same corporation

地板
发表于 2004-5-31 00:51:00 | 只看该作者

alexmuir is right.

they set BENCHMARKS, not their own salaries, confused by B too.

5#
发表于 2004-6-22 02:40:00 | 只看该作者
这题还是没明白。我知道B和原题的区别在于,原题是工资的benchmarks,而B是他们自己个人的工资。但是为什么选A呢?好象这些physician并不能从中得到什么好处啊?
6#
发表于 2004-6-22 04:17:00 | 只看该作者
这些physician以后说不定哪天也会成malpractice suit 的被告.
7#
发表于 2004-6-22 09:19:00 | 只看该作者

但是(A) in medical malpractice suits giving
physicians not directly involved in a suit a
major role in determining the damages due to
successful plaintiffs
好象是说的具体个案,而不是定出一个通例吧?对一个具体案子就算定为非医疗事故,对这些physician今后自己可能卷入的案子也没有用啊?

8#
发表于 2004-6-22 12:59:00 | 只看该作者
这些physician 是去定量 -- "determining the damages".  定轻点, 以后可以作为precedence 援用.
9#
发表于 2004-6-22 21:50:00 | 只看该作者
明白了,美国是有这么一说:在判案的时候会参照和援引前面的类似案例。多谢!
10#
发表于 2004-8-16 23:25:00 | 只看该作者

"due to successful plaintiffs" 是什么意思?

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 05:14
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