tania的考试复习计划贴：谢谢大家的帮助和支持！！M51,V41,760!

ethyl

以下是引用tania在2005-9-1 21:48:00的发言：

刚刚楼下有人吵架，好烦，看来是晕了，竟然b、c写错了

还有，确实如ethyl说得，是得注意时间了，今天又超时12分钟。。。。。。

而且早上想试验一下，还喝了半罐红牛，明天再试试，也许这东西对我没什么用

你想得真是周到，，，我那时候什么都不清楚，，，呵呵

真好！。。。

ethyl

以下是引用vacationer在2005-9-1 23:15:00的发言：

昨天做了XY版的GWD6, 有两个问题.

Q14:

Political Advertisement:
Mayor Delmont’s critics complain about the jobs that were lost in the city under Delmont’s leadership.  Yet the fact is that not only were more jobs created than were eliminated, but the average pay for these new jobs has been higher than the average pay for jobs citywide every year since Delmont took office.  So there can be no question that throughout Delmont’s tenure the average paycheck in this city has been getting steadily bigger.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the advertisement?

1. The average pay for jobs created in the city during the past three years was higher than the average pay for jobs created in the city earlier in Mayor Delmont’s tenure.
   
   
2. Average pay in the city was at a ten-year low when Mayor Delmont took office.
   
   
3. Some of the jobs created in the city during Mayor Delmont’s tenure have in the meantime been eliminated again.
   
   
4. The average pay for jobs eliminated in the city during Mayor Delmont’s tenure has been roughly equal every year to the average pay for jobs citywide.
   
   
5. The average pay for jobs in the city is currently higher than it is for jobs in the suburbs surrounding the city.

这道题答案是D,我觉得D相对来说是很好,但是题目问的是strengthen, 我怎么觉得D更象是assumption呢?

我只说一点哈。。。assumption本身有时候就是一种加强，因为assumption可能把原文的gap给填补了，不就是加强吗？

但是，assumption要求是原文结论成立的必要条件，而加强就没有这个要求啦！

ethyl

以下是引用liu977在2005-9-2的发言：

个人觉得那样不对，因为改成commodities, such as aluminum and other metals, remains以后，就便成such as 修饰the market 了，这里是特意将such as 与commondities相连以避免歧异，这点和V-ing的位置关系有些相似。

哇！。。。liuliu真厉害。。。我都没有看出来呢。。。呵呵

tania

以下是引用番茄笑了在2005-9-2 21:41:00的发言：


Wow...Tania, you still have almost a month. This is a very good result!!! I think you will do very well.

没有一个月啦，只剩下17天啦，好着急，还有头痛的作文

臆想中：（要是没有作文该多好）

番茄队长，有时间多上来帮我们指导指导啊！

今天下午又是一道语法题（就是那道关于be five times as likely as to plan 的用法）看了两个小时的帖子，还好最后看明白了，晚上上网找了一些作文模板和nn经验，但还是感觉issue 不知如何下手，郁闷ing.........

ethyl

以下是引用tania在2005-9-2 23:05:00的发言：

没有一个月啦，只剩下17天啦，好着急，还有头痛的作文

臆想中：（要是没有作文该多好）

番茄队长，有时间多上来帮我们指导指导啊！

今天下午又是一道语法题（就是那道关于be five times as likely as to plan 的用法）看了两个小时的帖子，还好最后看明白了，晚上上网找了一些作文模板和nn经验，但还是感觉issue 不知如何下手，郁闷ing.........

嘻嘻，issue确实该开始写了。。。

tania

按类别写吗？需不需要每个大类写一篇？

是先背例子和句型，还是先看题目想论据？

一点思路都没有

ethyl

以下是引用tania在2005-9-2 23:14:00的发言：

按类别写吗？需不需要每个大类写一篇？

是先背例子和句型，还是先看题目想论据？

一点思路都没有

呵呵，不管怎么样，想那么多都没有用。。。你先写出来一篇再说。。。我不敢进一步知道啦，因为我的作文只有5分。。。555

babypace

大家都比我早。我还有21天。ＳＣ和ＲＣ还是不能上去。

babypace

以下是引用tania在2005-9-2 14:22:00的发言：

先汇报一下今天的作题情况吧

唉，还是没啥进步，不过数学好一点了（可错的那两题还是很简单）

gwd-10    v  9  今天是平均分配，各错了3个

          m  2

羡慕。Ｖ错８个以下，Ｍ不错就可以７５０了。离目标越来越近。

tania

gwd-5-30也是gwd-11-12

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage.  However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods.  For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain.  roponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking.  However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since _______.

1. many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life
   
   
   
2. it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
   
   
   
3. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
   
   
   
4. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is
   
5. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

以下是引用ethyl在2005-8-28 21:26:00的发言：

这个题历来争议颇多，不过我一直主张选C，很明显说irradiation跟cooking一样不好的人是把这两个当成可比的东西，其实这两者不具可比性，因为如C所说。

晕了，今早做题又觉得应该选E了，总结的时候仔细又看了所有前人的讨论帖，自己又想了一下，觉得还是选E。理由如下：

原文中的逻辑关系是这样的：irradiation的支持者提出，在破坏营养方面，irradiation与cooking的效果其实是一样的。(根据这个论述他们支持人们使用irradiation).但其实这个论述是不对的，一方面beside the point，另一方面这个论述误导了人们，（使得人们认为使用irradiation 不会对营养造成更多的破坏 ）。为什么说它误导呢，因为对那些不生吃的食物来说，cooking 是一定的，如果人们认为irradiation不会对营养造成更多的破坏，那人们就会在cooking 之前进行irradiation，但实际上irradiation 之后的食物再cooking 的话，对营养造成的破坏是compound的（我暂且理解为是成倍增加的）。所以这个论述误导了人们，使人们赞同irradiation.而C并没有形成misleading。

open to discussion