GWD17-Q34，Q9

jkzlg

针对lz的疑惑:" 我认为E和题目没有关系，人家的argument说的是poses no serious threat to the migrating shorebird populations，又没说the success of the shorebird's breeding"

要读仔细题哦...重心不是migrating.而是population.也就是鸟的数量. 鸟的数量和什么有关. 当然就是和breeding生殖有关啦.  所以要weaken的是"因为呆久了能保证迁徙, 能保证迁徙之后的生殖,所以egg少不会影响数量"这一推理. 我记得有一种weaken方式是通过反对文中假设: 如原文认为因为A所以B, 但实际上是A非但没有导致B反而阻止B的实现, 从而weaken.
而本题E的选项就是证明A(呆久一点) 不利于B(生殖),所以weaken了" poses no serious threat  to population"这一结论.
希望有帮助啦~

若雪

Reading comprehension.

Conclusion: This decline, however, poses no serious threat to the migrating shorebird populations.

migrating shorebird populations, this is not THIS year's population. This the population of this species!

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/8/5 12:22:24)

内个...我知道可能有点钻牛角尖哈。。可是我还是想不明白额。。不是说的是migrating shorebird的populations么。。。migrating shorebird不是今年的那些迁徙的鸟么。。为什么会是整体鸟的数量呢。。。加个migrating是干嘛的？？


谢谢噢。。。。！！

wycg

E 其实就是在说,birds越早动身迁徙,越有可能吃到足够的eggs,从而成功完成迁徙.
the eariler, the more likely. 就是说越晚走,越没吃的, 越不可能成功完成迁徙.
还是在说egg数两不足. 削弱题干

sdcar2010

One-child policy poses no threat to the growing Chinese population because it only affect the size of the next generation for years to come.

Is this above statement valid? Is the word population llimited to the current head count ONLY?

Reading comprehension.

Conclusion: This decline, however, poses no serious threat to the migrating shorebird populations.

migrating shorebird populations, this is not THIS year's population. This the population of this species!

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/8/5 12:22:24)

内个...我知道可能有点钻牛角尖哈。。可是我还是想不明白额。。不是说的是migrating shorebird的populations么。。。migrating shorebird不是今年的那些迁徙的鸟么。。为什么会是整体鸟的数量呢。。。加个migrating是干嘛的？？


谢谢噢。。。。！！

-- by 会员 若雪 (2011/8/6 1:04:25)

若雪

One-child policy poses no threat to the growing Chinese population because it only affect the size of the next generation for years to come.

Is this above statement valid? Is word population llimited to the current head count ONLY?

Reading comprehension.

Conclusion: This decline, however, poses no serious threat to the migrating shorebird populations.

migrating shorebird populations, this is not THIS year's population. This the population of this species!

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/8/5 12:22:24)

内个...我知道可能有点钻牛角尖哈。。可是我还是想不明白额。。不是说的是migrating shorebird的populations么。。。migrating shorebird不是今年的那些迁徙的鸟么。。为什么会是整体鸟的数量呢。。。加个migrating是干嘛的？？


谢谢噢。。。。！！

-- by 会员 若雪 (2011/8/6 1:04:25)

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/8/6 11:29:59)

我默默的。。来回答了。。不valid. 我理解是因为growing是逐渐增长的。。没有尽头的那种。。所以包括未来的next generation. 我觉得题目中migrating作为定语修饰bird population，应该不会他们一直迁移到永远没有结束吧。。所以才觉得特指他们这次迁移的鸟.....
好像脑子就是转不过来。。。咳咳。。。。不好意思吖。。又要麻烦sdcar了。。。>_<!

sdcar2010

One-child policy poses no threat to the Chinese population because it only affect the size of the next generation for years to come.

Is this above statement valid? Is the word population llimited to the current head count ONLY?

若雪

One-child policy poses no threat to the Chinese population because it only affect the size of the next generation for years to come.

Is this above statement valid? Is the word population llimited to the current head count ONLY?

-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/8/7 3:45:01)

不valid。。。population包括未来的。。。

scarlettshaw

up

gigi68788

17-9.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President’s party.
Here, the scheduled projects are those which are not cancelled.
If most of the scheduled projects - i.e. not cancelled projects - which are identified as wasteful were in the districts controlled by the President's party while most cancelled projects are from the districts controlled by opposition partyes, it implies that these projects are handled to benefit to the districts controlled by President's party. It will contradict to what the secretary said - "So the President’s choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics."
So the secretary has to make this assumption in order to make her conclusion true.

-- by 会员 rockytundra (2007/8/22 12:31:00)

大概明白是什么意思了～
但是题目真的奇怪，The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful     为什么wasteful还scheduled呢？

HDcoffee

其实这里不存在最优选项的问题。 答案只能是B。这是个数学交集问题。
文章内容:总统发言人说，有人批评总统最近的政策是针对反对党的，他们的evidence是 总统cancel了反对党选区的90%的projects.但是一个中立正直的审核员的报告显示 所有的被cancel的项目（注意这里是所有的，但没说是在反对党选区的所有projects，是所有被cancel的projects）都是浪费，也就是说应该cancel掉。
所以结论说根据审核员的report：总统cancel的都是该cancel的，因为都是wasteful的。那么是什么才能有这样的结论呢？一定要把审核员的审核的目标放在反对党选区才行。要不然审核员的结论对前边的批评者的论述没有任何影响，否则这两个就是两个孤立事件。也就是审核员口中的cancelledprojects一定要和批评者证据中的projects 对应，而且大部分交集。而批评者口中的projects都在oppositionparties 的选区（总统控制的选区和反对党选区无交集），那么反之也就是说 审核员的 cancelled projects 大部分，或者全部都不在总统控制选区内。 一定要有这样的assumption才能使结论成立！


我讲的可能有点绕，就放下边的图给大家理解：

也就是说只有wasteful的projects 在大部分全在反对党选区，才能说明President 是切实按照政策执行的而不是公报私仇。这里一定要注意答案是用了子集的反来叙说的。 而不是简单的引用原文
这个题需要一些背景知识，不知道国内的很多同学对这个背景知识是否有了解，如果知道的话，这个题目是比较容易的
反对党选区+President控制选区=1
------------
回答前边的同学问为什么scheduled了，还要说wasteful。 如我前边分析，其实这个题是给了两个条件，并不一定有交集，只有有了答案的assumption两者之间才有了交集。才正确。
而第一个条件就提供的是scheduled，
而第二个条件提供的是wasteful。 两个等同，或者mostly 等同了也就正确了。您问的正好是为什么B是正确。
希望这个分析能帮助到你