ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1826|回复: 5
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求助:OG RC 中关系完全推理不出来

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2012-10-29 08:04:19 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
In the 1980s the strategy shifted from this zero-sum gameto one called “high-technology development,” in which local governments competed to attract newlyformed high-technology manufacturing firms. Although this approach waspreferable to victimizing other geographical areas by taking their jobs, italso had its shortcomings: high-tech manufacturing firms employ only a specially trained fraction ofthe manufacturing workforce, and there simply are not enough high-tech firms tosatisfy all geographic areas.
Question:
The author of the passage mentions which of the followingas an advantage of high-technology development?

1.It encourages the modernization of existing manufacturingfacilities.

2.It promotes healthycompetition between rival industries.

3.It encourages the growth ofrelated industries.

4.It takes full advantage ofthe existing workforce.

5.It does not advantage onelocal workforce at the expense of another.

收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2012-10-29 08:11:55 | 只看该作者
这个题就是定位在lz红字部分的句子:
Although this approach was preferable to victimizing other geographical areasby taking their jobs,
be preferable to:优于
就是说,这种方法不会牺牲其他地区的经济来振兴自己的经济
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2012-10-29 08:18:36 | 只看该作者
这是道OG12里的老题,答案是E,但是我觉得选项E 与原文中定位的意思(Although this approach was preferable to victimizing other geographical areas by taking their jobs)完全相悖。
虽然通过排除法可以得到答案e。  
但是仔细看OG解析:
To answer this question, look for an advantage of high-technology development that is explicitly mentioned in the passage. In the second paragraph, the efforts of local governments to attract new high-technology firms are judged preferable to previous efforts to entice established manufacturing industries from another town to their own. Thus, the introduction of high technology made it possible for local governments to stop victimizing other geographical areas by taking their jobs.
总感觉云里雾里,抓不到真意。
求在线的大大帮忙分析一下,感激不尽,好人一生平安
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2012-10-29 08:20:54 | 只看该作者
OG 解析里也是这么说的,但是我看了一百遍也没有分析出   “不会引起” 这个结论是从句子中的哪几个单词推断出来的T.T, 请大大明示
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2012-10-29 08:23:00 | 只看该作者
看懂了,原来是词组: was preferable to

谢谢大大,么么大
6#
发表于 2012-10-29 12:41:21 | 只看该作者
原来是句子理解错了,哈哈哈 随便也解决了我的疑惑  谢谢啦~
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, 2025-9-8 10:07
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部