没看明白题

lisiberry

The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an organization was circulated to its members for comment.
When more than one nominee is to be named for an office, prospective nominees must consent to nomination and before giving such consent must be told who the other nominees will be.

Which of the following comments concerning the logic of the proposal is accurate if it cannot be known who the actual nominees are until prospective nominees have given their consent to be nominated?

(A) The proposal would make it possible for each of several nominees for an office to be aware of who all of the other nominees are.
(B) The proposal would widen the choice available to those choosing among the nominees.
(C) If there are several prospective nominees, the proposal would deny the last nominee equal treatment with the first.
(D) The proposal would enable a prospective nominee to withdraw from competition with a specific person without making that withdrawal known.
(E) If there is more than one prospective nominee, the proposal would make it impossible for anyone to become a nominee.

OA：E
题读了3遍没看明白。

lisiberry

RRZZR 发表于 2017-3-8 10:35
Ron的解释很好：

There are lots and lots of words in this problem. The first thing to do"”as in all ...

谢谢RRZZR的搬运工作，没想到这道题本质是这么简单的。

感觉逻辑和英语阅读的训练都很重要。

lisiberry

alzn2765 发表于 2017-3-8 09:18
When more than one nominee is to be named for an office, prospective nominees must consent to nomina ...

明白了，再一次开森ing。十分感谢Alzn

我觉得问题本身倒不是非常非常难，但就像Ron说的这道题说的是比较绕的。
感觉您已经对驾驭英语没啥问题了，考虑问题时也是英语思路。

但我翻译这个问题这一句话就翻译老长时间了。

Which of the following comments concerning the logic of the proposal is accurate if it cannot be known who the actual nominees are until prospective nominees have given their consent to be nominated?

如果直到候选人同意参选，也不知道其他候选人名单，哪个选项正确。

估计除了多读多想，没啥速成的方法。

RRZZR

Ron的解释很好：

There are lots and lots of words in this problem. The first thing to do"”as in all CR problems"”is to simplify the situation into terms that a 10-year-old could follow.

Let's say there are two nominees, Darlene and Marlene.
According to these rules:
* Before Darlene can become a nominee, she has to be told that Marlene is a nominee.
* Before Marlene can become a nominee, she has to be told that Darlene is a nominee.

You can see why this is problematic. It's impossible.

So, C is also impossible, because you can't even have more than 1 nominee. If you are limited to 1 nominee, then "first" and "last" nominees have no meaning.

alzn2765

When more than one nominee is to be named for an office, prospective nominees must consent to nomination and before giving such consent must be told who the other nominees will be
more than one nominee is to be named for an office--->prospective nominees must consent--->nominees must be told who the other nominees will be

Which of the following comments concerning the logic of the proposal is accurate if it cannot be known who the actual nominees are until prospective nominees have given their consent to be nominated?
非nominees must be told who the other nominees will be--->prospective nominees must consent

把两个逻辑关系用prospective nominees must consent做桥：
非nominees must be told who the other nominees will be--->prospective nominees must consent--->nominees must be told who the other nominees will be
即
非nominees must be told who the other nominees will be--->nominees must be told who the other nominees will be 矛盾出现

(E) If there is more than one prospective nominee, the proposal would make it impossible for anyone to become a nominee

RRZZR

还是看Ron大神的解释把。。
cannot就是不能的意思。