救命啊！这种假设题太变态了！！！

ethyl

就是：假设题选项里面有加强滴家伙，尤其是当这个加强是桥梁型加强时，取非肯定削弱，就他啦！Hiahia! 结果错了，再往后看，还有更好的not+weaken

大虾们这种题怎么做呀，万一ETS把那个桥梁型加强放在A，我觉得对，就不再往下看，岂不惨死？？？？

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-5-18 22:28:36编辑过]

ethyl

自己顶一下

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-5-18 22:29:12编辑过]

bigmouse

能把具体的题目贴出来吗？

这样方便大家讨论～～

ethyl

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A.        Urban pollution has not doubled in the past decade.

B.        Doctors and patients generally ignore the role of allergies in asthma.

C.        Bronchial inhalers are unsafe, even when used according to the recommended instructions.

D.       The use of bronchial inhalers aggravates other diseases that frequently occur among asthma sufferers and that often lead to fatal outcomes even when the asthma itself does not.

E.        Increased urban pollution, improved recording of asthma deaths, and the used of asthma deaths, and the use of bronchial inhalers are the only possible explanations of the increased death rate due to asthma.

参考答案：E

思路：不是解释1和2，就是解释3。隐含了1，2，3外没用其他解释的理由。

A.        支持。

B.         无关。中心是role的问题。

C.         可以算无关，也可以算削弱。

D.        加强

E.         取非，除了1，2，3解释还有其他解释。典型的他因削弱，符合ETS 假设定义。

ethyl

题目：

Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate from this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms.

kingsoft

         做assumption题目有两招

        1。必要条件：原文可以推出选项

        2。取非

        正常做题目，取非太慢了。一般先用第一种方法能解决80%以上的assumption题目

        这个题目其实很简单：

        A原文的信息无法推出；B原文信息也没有，C也推不出，D更加推不出

        E说只有几种解释，因为原文提出两种解释，之后都被否定，否定后又说唯一的可能是。。。，因此可以推出E

tonyadidas

没有必要每个选项取非嘛。一看到assumption就去找有not的选项，取非看削不削弱，削弱就赢了。不削弱就从看剩下的，反正都是看五个选项，又不耽误时间。像这道题，来就看A，取非后城市人口在过去几年加倍了。明显的反对前提，文中结论的前提就是in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution。反对前提的削弱是无效的。

ethyl

嗯，肯定。

ethyl

还是很害怕这种题，万一出现桥梁型加强

ethyl

再看一道：

Advertisement: Clark brand-name parts are made for cars manufactured in this country. They satisfy all of our government automotive tests-the toughest such tests in the world. With foreign-made parts, you never know which might be reliable and which are cheap look-alikes that are poorly constructed and liable to cost you hundreds of dollars in repairs. Therefore, be smart and insist on brand-name parts by Clark for your car.

The argument requires the assumption that

A.        Clark parts are available only in this country

B.        foreign-made arts are not suitable for cars manufactured in this country

C.        no foreign-made parts satisfy our government standards

D.       parts that satisfy or government standards are not as poorly constructed as cheap foreign made parts

E.        if parts are made for cars manufactured in our country, they are not poorly constructed

参考答案：D

思路：C东东通过了G test, 所以，选C东东，不选国外东东。

A.        无关，而且有only,

B.         加强。

C.         无关。用不用G和国外的与satisfy standards 无关。

D.        取非。通过了test的G与国外的一样。削弱。

E.         加强。

E选项有not,取非，是削弱，但却不能选。怎么办？

好像最newbee的方法是将文章完全读懂，然后挑答案。汗ing