请教OG上的逻辑119和120

yuly

刚刚把OG刷完，逻辑部分有两个题实在是不懂，所以想问一问大家，请大家指教：

第一个是OG的第119题：

119. The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period,

also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements’ designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Ceramic ware is not known to have been used by the Mayan people to make agricultural implements.

(B) Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicates that agriculture began there around 4,500 years ago.

(C) Archaeological evidence indicates that some of the oldest stone implements found at Colha were used to cut away vegetation after controlled burning of trees to open areas of swampland for cultivation.

(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site.

(E) Many religious and social institutions of the Mayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 years ago relied on a highly developed system of agricultural symbols.

我知道其他多错误的选项都是错的，但是我无法理解为什么正确选项D是正确的，答案说D指出了当地的后来的文化会用以前的文化用的器皿的那种设计——这也就说明了，刚找到的implement像是Mayan人的原因，并非那些东西就是Mayan人的，而是Mayan人模仿了这些implement做了她们自己的implement，可以削弱原文。是的，这里我也能理解，可是我不知道为什么原文还说了the implements’ designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times，这句话在原文中的作用是排除了这些implements是other cultures known to have inhabited the area的可能性，但是根据答案D，这些其他文化不是也应该adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site吗，那么，她们的implement不是也应该跟这个很像吗，可是不像啊？（——额，话说，我意识到我犯了质疑削弱题里面选项成立的可能性了——但是我还是不能理解这道题的逻辑）

还有一道题是OG的120题：

120. Codex Berinensis, a Florentine copy of an ancient Roman medical treatise, is undated but contains clues to when it was produced. Its first 80 pages are by a single copyist, but the remaining 20 pages are by three different copyists, which indicates some significant disruption. Since a letter in handwriting identified as that of the fourth copyist mentions a plague that killed many people in Florence in 1148, Codex Berinensis was probably produced in that year. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the hypothesis that Codex Berinensis was produced in 1148?

(A) Other than Codex Berinensis, there are no known samples of the handwriting of the first three copyists.

(B) According to the account by the fourth copyist, the plague went on for 10 months.

(C) A scribe would be able to copy a page of text the size and style of Codex Berinensis in a day.

(D) There was only one outbreak of plague in Florence in the 1100s.

(E) The number of pages of Codex Berinensis produced by a single scribe becomes smaller with each successive change of copyist.

我看了一些人的分析，这个答案D应该算是用排除他因法来加强原文。可是，我还是不能理解，就算是1100s只有一场瘟疫又怎么了吗，这个答案是说1100s只在1148年发生过瘟疫，排除了其他他们那些人死于其他年份的瘟疫的可能性，可是我没觉得原文就有任何inference说就是死在瘟疫上了啊？而且，就算是死在瘟疫上吧，那么B选项说那场瘟疫旷日持久，不就加大了当时人死得很多的可能性，所以他们就可能死在那场瘟疫上了？不能理解呀!

谢谢大家指教！！