Prep2-17

At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height tables.  However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities.  Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables.  Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

(A) some celebrities come to the Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available

(B) the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the Hollywood compensates for the longer time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals

(C) a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering

(D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer

(E) with enough tall tables to accommodate all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall table

It should be C? What about A and D?

这题我也错了，把几个nn得解释贴上来，楼主也可以搜索一下，以前有讨论

文章说：做高脚桌的人做的时间没有座标准桌的人的时间长，就认为都换成高脚的，能增加流动性，增加收入

但是问题在于，座高脚凳看热闹的人时不时和真正坐在标准桌上安心吃饭的人是一类人，能花足够多的钱来点东西吃的人呢？

如果不是，换完高脚凳，都是看热闹的，没有一门心思吃饭的人了，怎么能使得profit增加呢？

C is the answer。C说他们不是那些在餐厅吃饭呆着不走的人

D价格低不代表profit低

答案D说了“a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals ”，但这个customer并不等于选择高桌子的customer，所以是错的

(C) a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering

好莱坞的顾客选择高脚桌是个特例，他们通常仅仅逗留。（不消费，虽然走得快，但是饭馆没有利润）

再顶一下，先不说D中的价格低是不是Profit低

不能理解这句话，选择高桌子的人明显包括在逗留时间短的人中，所以根据文中所说自然消费少，难道问题就出在消费少不等于利润少吗？

谢谢！！！

我觉得CED都有道理

这里只说E，换掉一部分就被迫换掉其他，导致在没有演出的时候有很多空闲，长久的看利润下降，也可以啊

以前对C的解释好像有误解导致思路错误

would be an exception(例外) to the generalization (一般情况) about lingering (逗留)

原题:

       许多顾客到Hollywood餐厅来看名人，而这些顾客偏好高脚桌因为其提供了较佳的视野来看名人。

       此外，坐在高脚桌的用餐者通常待的时间不如坐一般桌仔的用餐者的时间一样长。(generalization)

       因此，如果Hollywood餐厅将一些桌子换成高脚桌和高脚椅，它的利润会提高。

问:  The argument is vulnerable (脆弱的) to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that (所给的

理由的弱点)

C选项: 一般情况而言坐高脚椅的用餐者待的时间较短，但是来看Hollywood名人的用餐者却可能是例外à为了看名人而一直逗留不走。

要根据原题所给的理由的弱点来回答，所以D选项花在食物上的钱的比较就是无关比较了。