ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Critics of certain pollution-control regulations have claimed that the money spent over the last decade in order to reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and of volatile organic compounds has been wasted. The evidence they offer in support of this claim might appear compelling: despite the money spent, annual emissions of these pollutants have been increasing steadily. This evidence is far from adequate, however, since over the last decade a substantial number of new industrial facilities that emit these pollutants have been built.

In the reasoning given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

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: 4036|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

觉得好有难度,求各位帮忙

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2011-6-18 14:31:16 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
Critics of certain pollution-control regulations have claimed that the money spent over the last decade in order to reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and of volatile organic compounds has been wasted.The evidence they offer in support of this claim might appear compelling:despite the money spent, annual emissions of these pollutants have been increasing steadily.This evidence is far from adequate, however, since over the last decade a substantial number of new industrial facilities that emit these pollutants have been built.

compelling=强制性的,令人信服的

In the reasoning given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A.The first identifies a claim that the reasoning seeks to show is false; the second is evidence that has been cited by others in support of that claim.

B.The first identifies a claim that the reasoning seeks to show is false; the second is a position for which the reasoning seeks to provide support.

C.The first is a position that the reasoning contends is inadequately supported by the evidence; the second is a position for which the reasoning seeks to provide support.

D.The first is a position that the reasoning contends is inadequately supported by the evidence; the second is evidence used to support the reasoning’s contention.contention=争论,论战,论点

E.The first is a position that the reasoning contends is inadequately supported by the evidence; the second is evidence that has been used to support that position.
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2011-6-19 01:23:10 | 只看该作者
是没看懂段落还是没看动选项?我帮你拆分一下段落

Critics of certain pollution-control regulations have claimed that the money spent over the last decade in order to reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and of volatile organic compounds has been wasted.(某些critics的观点:钱浪费了)

The evidence they offer in support of this claim might appear compelling:despite the money spent, annual emissions of these pollutants have been increasing steadily.(critics的观点的理由)

This evidence is far from adequate,(作者的观点:critics的观点证据不足的) however, since over the last decade a substantial number of new industrial facilities that emit these pollutants have been built(作者的观点的理由).


D说:
第一句提出一个作者认为证据不足的观点;第二句支持作者的观点(critics的观点证据不足)的证据
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2011-6-19 09:41:51 | 只看该作者
,谢谢阿,我是觉得最后一个选项很绕
地板
发表于 2011-9-9 09:51:31 | 只看该作者
是没看懂段落还是没看动选项?我帮你拆分一下段落

Critics of certain pollution-control regulations have claimed that the money spent over the last decade in order to reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and of volatile organic compounds has been wasted.(某些critics的观点:钱浪费了)

The evidence they offer in support of this claim might appear compelling:despite the money spent, annual emissions of these pollutants have been increasing steadily.(critics的观点的理由)

This evidence is far from adequate,(作者的观点:critics的观点证据不足的) however, since over the last decade a substantial number of new industrial facilities that emit these pollutants have been built(作者的观点的理由).


D说:
第一句提出一个作者认为证据不足的观点;第二句支持作者的观点(critics的观点证据不足)的证据
-- by 会员 colasama (2011/6/19 1:23:10)

是这个选项的表达很绕,我到现在还很糊涂。
D.The first is a position that the reasoning contends is inadequately supported by the evidence; the second is evidence used to support the reasoning’s contention.
that...by the evidence是这个position的内容吗?但是这个position的内容不是说reasoning contends支持不足,而是这个position本身支持不足呀。
如果去掉 the reasoning contends 我会更好理解,变成定语从句The first is a position that is inadequately supported by the evidence
能不能帮我解释一下呢,谢谢!!
5#
发表于 2013-7-7 22:17:38 | 只看该作者
立场与立场内的内容不同,BF2 对应立场内容,不是立场本身
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, 2024-11-24 02:31
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