if B followed A, people are likely to contribute A to B without taking other possible causes into consideration...probably, A is a factor that caused B to happen but not the only factor...if you wanna waken the argument that the decreased price (A) leads to the failure (B), you have to clarify that factors other than A can cause the program to be a failure.
The program to control the entry of illegal drugs into the country was a failure in 1987. If the program had been successful, the wholesale price of most illegal drugs would not have dropped substantially in 1987. 80. The argument in the passage depends on which of the following assumptions? (A) The supply of illegal drugs dropped substantially in 1987. (B) The price paid for most illegal drugs by the average consumer did not drop substantially in 1987. (C) Domestic production of illegal drugs increased at a higher rate than did the entry of such drugs into the country. (D) The wholesale price of a few illegal drugs increased substantially in 1987. (E) A drop in demand for most illegal drugs in 1987 was not the sole cause of the drop in their wholesale pice
麻烦大家告诉我，哪个是前提，哪个是结论？ 我的理解：第一句话是conclusion，第二句是reasoning。 由successful-->~ price drop substantially即price drop substantially-->failure。 可是我感觉答案E取非的话，即充要price drop substantially<=>demand drop 那这个取非后的假设是怎么他因削弱原结论的呢？我绕不过来了。。。
结论是：If the program had been successful, the wholesale price of most illegal drugs would not have dropped substantially in 1987. 即the wholesale price drugs dropped-->program failure。 把E取非A drop in demand for most illegal drugs in 1987 was not the sole cause of the drop in their wholesale price. drop in their wholesale price-->the sole cause is A drop in demand 这不久推出存在它因吗？
The only choice that must be true in order to conclude legitimately from the drop in the wholesale price of illegal
drugs that the program was a failure （说明原文想用E来表达的是drop in price－>failure）is choice E, the best answer. If the drop in price was caused by a drop indemand, there is no reason to suspect that there has been any increase in supply caused by drugs entering the country.(如果价格的下降是因为需求的下降，则没有理由认为毒品的进入会产生任何供给量的上涨。这里它是把E取反了，说如果demand下降-- >price下降，那么跟原文不一致了，就不能说毒品进入-->供给量增加－>价格下降)，标红处说明原文的意思是毒品进入-->供给量增加-->价格下降，很显然就是说program failure-->price drop
By saying that a drop in demand was not the sole cause, E implies that an increase in supply and thus supports the conclusion that the program was unsuccessful. 这好像要求考生理解经济学中均衡市场的价格理论，而GMAT本来不assume考生特定的专业知识，是不是因此在OG11中就把这题删了呢？
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2006-6-16 12:21:00
