请教一道题

dabendan12

In respectable periodicals, books are given reviewing space in inverse proportion to the likely size of their saes. Airport and supermarket bookstalls stock only books that are expected to sell in large numbers. Consequently, those who buy books at such bookstalls have to do so without any guidance whatever from the book reviewers whose work is published in respectable periodicals.
(A) Bookstalls like those found at airports and in supermarkets are designed to induce people to buy books on impulse.
(B) The assortment of books available at airport bookstalls is different from the assortment of books available at supermarket bookstalls.
(C) The fact that a book is expected to sell well does not guarantee that actual sales will be large.
(D) Many who later come to be respected as book reviewers start their careers by writing for trashy magazines.
(E) The conclusion that respectable periodicals nevers publish reviews of projected bestsellers is unwarranted.
Thank you in advance!

kathy72

问什么?

八戒

是不是解释题呀？

如果是的话；
我选A！
对吗？

讨论......

kathy72

同意八戒的答案.因为其他的答案似乎都是无关选项.
个人认为题型更象支持.

dabendan12

答案是(E).
当初对于提干百思不得其解.人为怎么可能"books are given reviewing space in inverse proportion to the likely size of their sales"? 更搞不懂为什么人们在机场买书就得不到guidance.这两天才想明白其实关键就是我的想法不够逻辑专业化.人家就要你理解一个"书评与销量的反比",但不表明没有.所以答案说"期刊对与可能有很好销售量的书没有书评是不能保证的"

kathy72

我还是不太明白, 能不能再释清楚一点?
我对原文推论的理解是:
大前提: 书可能的销量越大, 书评越少
小前提: 机场和超市卖的书都是那些预期销量大的
结论: 人们在这些店里买书时都是没有书评的指引的.

E是如何解释的呢?

八戒

同意楼主！

55555555555

还是阅读....

those who buy books at such bookstalls have to do so without any guidance whatever from the book reviewers whose work is published in respectable periodicals.

这句话具体是什么意思呀？
whatever from the book reviewers，这边我就分不清结构了！
whatever是做什么东东的呀？？

Thanks advance!

八戒

以下是引用kathy72在2003-11-3 11:02:00的发言：
我还是不太明白, 能不能再释清楚一点?
我对原文推论的理解是:
大前提: 书可能的销量越大, 书评越少
小前提: 机场和超市卖的书都是那些预期销量大的
结论: 人们在这些店里买书时都是没有书评的指引的.

E是如何解释的呢?

我觉得原文好象不存在推理的过程吧！
存在的矛盾就是：
机场和超市卖的书都是那些预期销量大的，而买这些书的人并没有受到书评的影响！

E就解释了销量和书评之间并没有什么关系！所以不能用书可能的销量越大, 书评越少来解释呀？

对吗？

先帮我看一下最后一句什么意思！！
我在whatever这边就看不懂了！！

kathy72

我的理解是: whatever  以下应该是修饰guidance, 所为定语, whatever 有一种程度和语气上的加强, 说明读者得不到任何的指引.

是不是对原文的逻辑关系这样理解, 书评数量和销量成反比例关系这是文章给出的一个事实, 但这个事实只是一个巧合, 其实他们之间是没有必然联系的. 但我对E选项的理解仍有疑问:
the conclusion that respectable periodicals nevers publish reviews of projected bestsellers is unwarranted.
它说这个结论是没有根据的, 但这里的"结论"能从文中推出来吗?

dandan74

我觉得此题很像一道GRE的一道逻辑单体 if memory services me right，我好像有些印象。那位有GRE的材料，可以search一下。