GWD 26-4

singdeath

    

其实看了大家那么多讨论，在B和C之间争来争去，感觉还是对题目的理解不一致。我做题的时候对这题的背景内容感觉很清楚，题目中说的都是很明显的东西，原本就不该有那么多争议。归根结底还是我们中国人对西方人的习惯表达不太了解。下面说说我的看法，有不对的地方请指正。

    

 

    

首先要说明的是，这题我们根本不用钻牛角尖，好像前面有人讨论去过外度假包不包括登山野营，要是去国外野营设备在国外买还是国内买，公园提供的设备是不是从那个店里买的，公园设备好了游客还要不要自己买，这些统统是在钻牛角尖。题目中有暗示这些么？既然题目中半个字都没有说，我们何必庸人自扰呢？ETS出题是很公正的，人家外国人出门登山带什么设备我们根本不用关心。这题说度假就是度假，度假和登山野营没有交集。不然B选项也不会那这两个东西放在对立面。买设备就是在Boravia城买设备，可能不在这个店（为什么？因为这个店专营高档货，有人要买便宜的，下面有说明，这一点跟选项推理有关系），但在不在B城不是问题。那些不在B城买的不考虑。

    

 

    

其次，很多人说C中的visitor
facilities是公园提供的hiking and camping equipment，这种理解是错的。如果这两个词意思一样，干吗不用equipment
supply或者干脆用visitor equipment?去字典查查这两个词就知道，equipment指items
necessary for a particular purpose,这里指的是登山野营必备的东西，就是游客自己带的去店里买的那些。而facility指的是resources
or set-up to fulfill a particular function。我们常在CR题里面看到government用什么funding来improve
public facilities了，指的是全民公用的公共设施。同样，这题里面facilities是指公园为登山野营者搞的设施，而不是为他们自身提供的设备。

    

 

    

搞清了这些背景，我们就可以开始推理了。当然推理第一步要理清楚文中已知的条件，和到底问的是什么。

    

 

    

文中第一句话说，打算买设备的人会挑贵的。而结论却说销量不会增加。这两者，“价格贵”（指单价，unit
price）和“销量”（卖了多少，number of units sold）概念不一样。经济好了，原本就打算买设备的人本来想挑便宜的，现在挑贵的了。这里注意一句话，文中提的这个店是卖贵的设备的店！（Hill and Dale is a business that sells high-quality,
expensive camping and hiking equipment in Boravia.）所以，原来不会在这个店买东西的人（因为图便宜），现在会来买东西（因为要买贵的），但是经理却说总销量却不增加。所以问题就问为什么。其实这是个很简单的数学题：

    

原来销量S＝
        经济不好的时候来买东西的人的销量s1（这些人即使经济不好也来买贵的设备）

    

现在销量S’＝
s1＋原来买便宜的现在买贵的人的销量s2 (这些人就是上文我提到的改变购物方针的那一类)

    

那么，那么既然S’中多了s2这部分，为什么S’还不比S多呢？

    

B提供了一个解释：原来贡献s1的那部分人去度假了，所以S’中s1的那部分变少了，而加进来的s2填补了这个空缺，所以使得S’和S相当。

    

C呢？公园设施变好了，跟人们买不买设备有什么关系？根本和文中的推理不相干。用OG的思维方式，如果没有提供关于公园设施的改善和人们买设备的欲望的联系，我们无从推知如何从C推到结论。就算其中有个假设吧，公园改进设施，照理说应该能吸引更多的游客来登山野营，那么应该有更多的人去买设备。虽然不一定全都去那个店里买，但是那个店也会相应的增加一些销量（have
a probability）。那么这不是更难解释了么？

    

所以我仍然坚定不移的支持B选项！

    

一点点个人看法，欢迎指正！

    

balabaladou7

以下是引用minivicki在2007-8-12 15:17:00的发言：

看了大家很多的讨论，突然有了点灵感。

我原来也选了B，现在想想，觉得C好。

因为：

题目的一个条件是：经济好了，大家就买贵且质量好的camping equipment. 可是现在经济好了，商店却不期待销量增加。为什么呢？那么应该就是给出他因，就是说是因为公园improve了设备，所以大家就不去买了。

如果选B，好像是直接否定了题目给出的前提，变成经济好了，大家就不做camping 这件事情了，而去国外度假了。那么题目的第一句话，给我们的background就变得没有意义了。

open to discussion...

agree. lawyer 前辈的答案是对的，但解释给的不太好。

关键是原文的前提的提示作用。

这题选C了。

lzj1209

up~~

singdeath  MM牛！！

如阿比特人

C应该是 经济好了后 政府会投资很多来弄那些个camping hiking的设施 这样visitors就不用自己去买了

杯uu

beat the gamt 论坛上expert的解答：
B. Boravia is different from the general trend: people don't camp as much when economy is strong. That sounds pretty decent. Let's check the others.
C. hmm. what are "visitor facilities"? Does that mean trails and port-a-potties? Or does that mean log cabins and other things that would replace the recreational equipment people buy for themselves? This is also tempting, but we have to make some assumptions here, so I don't like this one as much as I like B.

kudoucliff

引用Stacey Koprince在beattheGMAT上的解答：

I received a PM asking me to respond.

First, I did a quick search, and found some sites that list the OA as B and some that list the OA as C. This is one of the reasons I tell my students not to use the Sets. There are lots of typos and errors riddled throughout. Some of the questions are perfectly fine... but you don't know which are which.

Cons. buy high Q, more
RE when economy is strong.

H&D sells high Q,
RE in Boravia
Boravia econ becoming strong
BUT H&D not expecting better sales
why?

A. that doesn't explain why people would not buy more
B. Boravia is different from the general trend: people don't camp as much when economy is strong. That sounds pretty decent. Let's check the others.
C. hmm. what are "visitor facilities"? Does that mean trails and port-a-potties? Or does that mean log cabins and other things that would replace the recreational equipment people buy for themselves? This is also tempting, but we have to make some assumptions here, so I don't like this one as much as I like B.
D. that doesn't explain why people would not buy more
E. that doesn't explain why people would not buy more; if anything, sounds like people who want to spend time in wilderness areas would buy more when they could afford to do so.

I noticed on another post that the reasoning against B was that people could go camping overseas. But look at the wording of B: it specifically says "people who might otherwise go camping" - that means they're not going camping now, overseas or at home.

I'd pick B.