OG 2020 571

FrancesF · 发表于 2019-10-10 16:08:53

There are recent reports of apparently drastic declines in amphibian populations and of extinctions of a number of the world’s endangered amphibian species. These declines, if real, may be signs of a general trend toward extinction, and many environmentalists have claimed that immediate environmental action is necessary to remedy this “amphibian crisis,” which, in their view, is an indicator of general and catastrophic environmental degradation due to human activity.
It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following to be true of the environmentalists mentioned in highlight lines ?
A. They have wrongly chosen to focus on anecdotal reports rather than on the long-term data that are currently available concerning amphibians.
B. Their recommendations are flawed because their research focuses too narrowly on a single category of animal species.
C. Their certainty that population declines in general are caused by environmental degradation is not warranted.
D. They have drawn premature conclusions concerning a crisis in amphibian populations from recent reports of declines.
E. They have overestimated the effects of chance events on trends in amphibian populations.

原文太长了，就放了关键的第一段，我的问题是：为啥不选C，C项说这些环境学家对于(population declines 是由environmental degradation）的确定性是无法保证的。不是与原文第一段相对应吗。。。

peion · 发表于 2019-10-13 23:33:12

many environmentalists have claimed that immediate environmental action is necessary to remedy this “amphibian crisis,” which, in their view, is an indicator of general and catastrophic environmental degradation due to human activity.
这句话只是说environmentalist claim了一个结论，而从这句话里不能得出C选项的内容

FrancesF · 发表于 2019-10-14 20:41:06

peion 发表于 2019-10-13 23:33
many environmentalists have claimed that immediate environmental action is necessary to remedy this ...

不好意思啊，我还是有些不明白，这里environmentalists claim...就是说环境学家声称必须要采取行动来解决这个危机，（这个危机）在他们看来是人类活动导致的degration的一个指标/信号。而下文作者就开始evaluate了，就说什么濒危动物本来数量就少啊，chance events啥的，就不一定是environmental degration造成的。所以不能warranted。请指教！

FrancesF · 发表于 2019-10-14 20:41:46

刚才多发了一条！抱歉

千禧虫虫 · 发表于 2019-10-16 05:17:32

刚刚做了这道题..我知道楼主的问题了,因为我觉得我也犯过类似的错误.
楼主,我觉得你应该去从新理解一下题目.尤其是C的选项
Their certainty that population declines in general are caused by environmental degradation is not warranted.
==> their certainty is not warranted.

即环境学家的对于xxx的certainty 是无法保证的...但是,后文并没有说任何环境学家对于这件事certainty的看法呀..

后面全文都在说,他们的claim是错的,但并没有对他们对这件事的肯定性发表意见.
所以这个选项就是个无关选项呀

FrancesF · 发表于 2019-10-16 15:03:52

千禧虫虫发表于 2019-10-16 05:17
刚刚做了这道题..我知道楼主的问题了,因为我觉得我也犯过类似的错误.
楼主,我觉得你应该去从新理解一下题目 ...

同意！我刚才又梳理了一下全文脉络，豁然开朗！我之前就盯着那句句子看了。谢谢！

deadandgone · 发表于 2020-5-21 17:08:04

千禧虫虫发表于 2019-10-16 05:17
刚刚做了这道题..我知道楼主的问题了,因为我觉得我也犯过类似的错误.
楼主,我觉得你应该去从新理解一下题目 ...

我还是不太明白，这是个被动啊
是说environmentalist的这个certainty是没有被证实的啊
作者好像也没有完全否认环境学家的断言吧，只是说有很多原因导致，所以是certainty未被证实的呀

千禧虫虫 · 发表于 2020-5-26 00:55:51

deadandgone 发表于 2020-5-21 17:08
我还是不太明白，这是个被动啊
是说environmentalist的这个certainty是没有被证实的啊
作者好像也没有完 ...

就是我可以说一个现象是不确定性的,但是至于这个现象的不确定性是否可靠,其实是在两件事情

原文说的是"现象不确定性",并没有提到这个"不确定性是否可靠",所以这个就变成了一个无关选项了

OG 2020 571

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()