OG 第89题

virgmat

哪位大侠能帮忙解释下OG第89题？

89.Since it has become known that several of a bank’s top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank’s depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved.
They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank’s financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false.
They might well be overoptimistic, however since corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company’s health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the followng roles?

A. The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
B. The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
C. The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
E. The first describes the circumstance that the arument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
怎么理解都觉得D是对的，但答案是A.

jennychiu

enkyklios 发表于 2013-9-3 14:37
因为我没有做过一方面的训练，不会专业术语。

我只能按汉语理解；  

啊啊啊啊啊，看懂了诶~~~~~··豁然开朗。谢谢啦

virgmat

云游 发表于 2013-9-4 16:50
Hey there,

Please kindly read answer choice D closely.

Yes, I agree, now I am well noted about the error of the first sentence in option D.
Nevertheless, what make me confused is the answer explanation of option D in OG, that never mentions the fault of first sentence, but just criticize the second sentence, here I quote the original text for your reference~

"The second statement is not itself offered as an explanation of why these bank executives are investing in the bank; if it were, that would mean that the bank executives are doing so because corporate executives are known to do such things in a calculated effort to dispel worries. Furthermore the argument does not conclude that this other explanation(which the boldfaced portion points to) is correct, only that the one inferred by depositors may not be."

Personally think the explanation above doesn't hit the mark, because the second sentence of D is "gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish",not gives the explanation of the reason of investment, and what argument seeks to establish is main conclusion, right?

I shouldn't have doubted the authority of the OG but it's indeed illogical for me.

云游

virgmat 发表于 2013-9-3 18:59
Thanks for you detailed reply, actually,  I never think that the second BF has explained " why t ...

Hey there,

Please kindly read answer choice D closely.

If I got it correctly, it states that the first sentence describe a circumstance which is in need of an explanation and the second sentence is that explanation. So, as is also noticed by you, the second sentence has not explained this circumstance--several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank.

I thought I might be wrong in citing the property of "explanation" as evidence.So please neglect it for the time being.  

virgmat

云游 发表于 2013-9-3 14:12
Personal POV:

Pay close attention to the diction adopted before and in the B.F. portion--it says t ...

  Thanks for you detailed reply, actually,  I never think that the second BF has explained " why those bank top executives' buying of their own banks' share", however it is just a PREMISE of main conclusion" Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic", so it should be an explanation for main conclusion.
  You mentioned that the explanation should be 100% to prove the accuracy of something, I'm afraid I can't fully agree, as "explanation" is not "evidence", it can be stated subjectively. Although there is a MIGHT, but author's opnion is clearly confirmed.
  Look forward to your further advise if it is not too dizzy for you

virgmat

vertex顶点 发表于 2013-9-3 13:58
D看起来很像对的，但是文章理解一下就明白为什么错了。 第一个黑体：“因为好多银行高管买自己的股票”， ...

明白,现在理解为什么D中关于第一个BF是错的,谢谢

virgmat

vertex顶点 发表于 2013-9-3 13:47
那这道题你不该有问题的since开始到他们的担心relieve了都是back ground information。
they reason that ...

请看我***后的回复.

那这道题你不该有问题的since开始到他们的担心relieve了都是back ground information。
they reason that。。。是premis来推出opposite 观点：rumors are false
文章的主观点是（main conclusion）：rumors没错***你是指main conclusion是"Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic"吗?如果是的,那我同意.
最后一句话since。。。是证明文章主观点的P
这样分析下来，第一个黑体在背景知识里，第二个黑体在文章主观点的premis里，有什么难的呢？
所以第一个是一个evidence，是depositor用来证明他们观点的。第二个是P，来解释文章的主观点，而主观点和depositor的观点相左，所以证明主观点就是question前面的opposite观点。所以选A***我highlight出红色的部分不是正好是选项D中的"the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish."吗? the argument seeks to establish的就是main conclusion啊? 我不否认选项A, 只是对于选项D,不明白为什么第二段BF不能作为explanation.
你还是要好好研究一下SDCAR大神的东西，弄懂了真心不会有问题

enkyklios

云游 发表于 2013-9-3 16:19
哈哈，术业有专攻，enkyklios能把语法解释的出神入化已经造福多少CDer了~

云游兄謬赞，兄弟愧不敢当

云游

enkyklios 发表于 2013-9-3 14:37
因为我没有做过一方面的训练，不会专业术语。

我只能按汉语理解；  

哈哈，术业有专攻，enkyklios能把语法解释的出神入化已经造福多少CDer了~

enkyklios

云游 发表于 2013-9-3 13:54
有看到你啦，留言也不给解释啊~哈哈~

因为我没有做过一方面的训练，不会专业术语。

我只能按汉语理解；  
文中说因为大家看到公司的大股东都在买自己的股票，所以投资者认为“公司要破产的传闻“是假的。
他们是这样想的，公司业绩好坏大股东肯定知道，如果公司要破产那么他们肯定不会自己把自己套进去，
second指出但是这样想是有问题的，因为很多时候公司高管们出于策略即使公司业绩不好，他们反而大量买进自己的股票，让人误以为公司业绩不错。
大概意思就是这样，可能翻译不准确

所以我觉得选A挺合理啊
第一个是他们这样做的根据，第二个证明这个根据本身就有问题