GWD-1-Q35

subaru6385

Q35:
Which of the following best describes the relation of the second paragraph to the first?
        
A.    The second paragraph offers proof of an assertion made in the first paragraph.
B.    The second paragraph provides an explanation for the occurrence of a situation described in the first paragraph.
C.    The second paragraph discusses the application of a strategy proposed in the first paragraph.
D.    The second paragraph examines the scope of a problem presented in the first paragraph.
E.    The second paragraph discusses the contradictions inherent in a relationship described in the first paragraph.
为什么不能选B呢？这几个答案有什么区别啊？

hughlv

先帮lzmm贴题目

GWD1-Q35 to Q37:
      In corporate purchasing, competitive scrutiny is typically limited to suppliers of items that are directly related to end products. With “indirect” purchases (such as computers, advertising, and legal services), which are not directly related to production, corporations often favor “supplier partnerships” (arrangements in which the purchaser forgoes the right to pursue alternative suppliers), which can inappropriately shelter suppliers from rigorous competitive scrutiny that might afford the purchaser economic leverage.  There are two independent variables—availability of alternatives and ease of changing suppliers—that companies should use to evaluate the feasibility of subjecting suppliers of indirect purchases to competitive scrutiny. This can create four possible situations.
     In Type 1 situations, there are many alternatives and change is relatively easy.  Open pursuit of alternatives—by frequent competitive bidding, if possible—will likely yield the best results.  In Type 2 situations, where there are many alternatives but change is difficult—as for providers of employee health-care benefits—it is important to continuously test the market and use the results to secure concessions from existing suppliers.  Alternatives provide a credible threat to suppliers, even if the ability to switch is constrained. In Type 3 situations, there are few alternatives, but the ability to switch without difficulty creates a threat that companies can use to negotiate concessions from existing suppliers. In Type 4 situations, where there are few alternatives and change is difficult, partnerships may be unavoidable

hughlv

AE可以首先被排除，因为第一段中既没有assertion也没有contradiction。作者只是客观描述了两种合作方式，然后提出两个影响因素，之后在第二段讨论这两个影响因素下的决策分析过程。

B之后被排除，因为第二段不是针对某个situation进行分析，而是列举了四个situation。

C的意思是如何根据第一段的基本原则进行理解和应用，D则是停留在分析举证阶段。相比之下还是C更合理些。

mycontrol01

接着问问 36题为什么是选B?/

原文根本推不出啊

我选的D 认为还可以推出呢

subaru6385

谢谢hughlv，还那么细心把题目也贴出来了~

subaru6385

对啊对啊 36我也选的是D

hughlv

我就好事做到底再帮忙帖一次，mm们下次不要再偷懒了。

GWD1-Q36:
Which of the following can be inferred about supplier partnerships, as they are described in the passage?
A.They cannot be sustained unless the goods or services provided are available from a large number of suppliers.
B.They can result in purchasers paying more for goods and services than they would in a competitive-bidding situation.
C.They typically are instituted at the urging of the supplier rather than the purchaser.
D.They are not feasible when the goods or services provided are directly related to the purchasers’ end products.
E.They are least appropriate when the purchasers’ ability to change suppliers is limited.

从下面这半句话就可以推导出B来：supplier partner不需要经历严格的竞争程序，which可以帮助purchaser省钱。
... which can inappropriately shelter suppliers from rigorous competitive scrutiny that might afford the purchaser economic leverage.

D从原文并无法推导得出。第一句用的是"typically limited to ..."只能表示competitive scrutiny通常只用于direct purchase中，但没有说direct purchase只采用competitive scrutiny；同理，第二句中companies often favor "supplier partnerships" 也不表示supplier partnership只适用于indirect purchase。所以，文章并没有地方表示supplier partnerships不适合于direct purchase。我想ls两位有些推导过度了。

subaru6385

感谢感谢，明白了，下次不会偷懒了

狸奴

抱歉把这个贴顶了上来！关于B选项我还是不太明白
我理解的situation described in the first paragraph是With "indirect" purchases corporations often favor "supplier partnerships"，explanation是Type 4 situations, where there are few alternatives and change is difficult, partnerships may be unavoidable.
还请各位大牛帮忙指点我的理解哪里错了！谢谢！