半岛姐妹复习日记

amorela

小蓝同学,不太明白你的意思?

qianrene

以下是引用amorela在2007-10-31 12:36:00的发言：

天啊.....为什么大家都要看大洋同学的照片呢????

我描述一下,大洋同学眼睛大而且长长的,很勾人的闹...嘴巴很性感的.下巴有点尖尖的.脸型长的很好看(嗯,跟人见人爱花见花开的小F有一拼了).身材很好,有胸有腰有PP,而且腿很长的闹...一看就是练YOGA出来的身材.

反正很好看就对了.哦哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈~~~~~~

另外,姐妹团里的YOYO我也见过.....超美的.端庄漂亮,温柔娴淑. 哈哈.

而白白姐姐长的很有东南亚那些亚裔的感觉,头发长长卷卷的,很好看的.

天啊....大家要原谅我,我是外貌协会的会长来的...

挖，这个，，，什么跟什么啊，同志们，快要上前线还讨论FASHION好象有点~~~~~我们是战士，不是拉拉队哦

PS：我觉得小F的这只猫很好看哈哈

qianrene

以下是引用blackblue在2007-10-31 13:56:00的发言：

小蓝又迷糊了。

Approved April 24, 1800, the act of Congress made provision for the removal of the government of the United States to the new federal city, Washington, D.C., also establishing the Library of Congress.  这句话里made 肯定是不能做谓语的，可是偶找不到理由给自己！

可以做谓语，这个句子是对的啊

amorela

以下是引用qianrene在2007-10-31 14:22:00的发言：

挖，这个，，，什么跟什么啊，同志们，快要上前线还讨论FASHION好象有点~~~~~我们是战士，不是拉拉队哦

PS：我觉得小F的这只猫很好看哈哈

我们要美美的上战场,先把GMAC的那帮老头迷晕掉再把GMAT给漂亮得干掉...身手要象KILL BILL那么利索.嗯,就是这样滴

HOHO.

文明

KILL BILL？hmm....可是我喜欢angelina jolie耶

东南亚？hmm......第一反应是“宾宾”，就是菲佣啦，实在我是跟东南亚有那么点渊源，虽然偶不PP，可素没有那么黑啦，还有东南亚的妇女好象比较不高，偶没有不高哦，所以，你对偶的评语严重失实！

小F，伦家是叫你偷偷分享，你怎么可以上来论坛发表意见，太高调啦，快重新编辑帖子啦！！！

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-10-31 15:10:56编辑过]

amorela

以下是引用文明在2007-10-31 15:06:00的发言：

KILL BILL？hmm....可是我喜欢angelina jolie耶

东南亚？hmm......第一反应是“宾宾”，就是菲佣啦，实在我是跟东南亚有那么点渊源，虽然偶不PP，可素没有那么黑啦，还有东南亚的妇女好象比较不高，偶没有不高哦，所以，你对偶的评语严重失实！

小F，伦家是叫你偷偷分享，你怎么可以上来论坛发表意见，太高调啦，快重新编辑帖子啦！！！

拜托,很多东南亚的华裔很PP的好伐,比如新加坡的很多女人都很FASHION的...你想哪里去了啦.哎....何况小白本来就很好看,那我当然要SHARE一下我对小白同学的评价嘛.

我们换个话题吧.....

帮我看几条GWD,.乖.

26. GWD30-Q26:

In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whiplash injuries sustained in automobile accidents, reports of having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent as they are in countries where whiplash is not covered.  Some commentators have argued, correctly, that since there is presently no objective test for whiplash, spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified.  These commentators are, however, wrong to draw the further conclusion that in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious:  clearly, in countries where automobile insurance does not include compensation for whiplash, people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered.

 

 

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

 

 

1. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the judgment reached by the argument on the accuracy of that finding.

2. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence that has been used to challenge the accuracy of that finding.
3. The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is an intermediate conclusion that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument criticizes.

4. The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a narrower claim that the argument accepts.
5. The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion.

我选A,为什么是C呢?对于BB题,大家有什么方法吗?我一做就错.

28. GWD30-Q28:

In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whiplash injuries sustained in automobile accidents, reports of having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent as they are in countries where whiplash is not covered.  Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified.  Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant a conclusion that has been drawn by some commentators:  that in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.  Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance does not include compensation for whiplash, people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered.

 

 

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

 

 

1. The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
2. The first is claim that has been used to support a position that the argument accepts; the second is a position that the argument rejects.
3. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning the accuracy of the finding.

4. The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning one alleged implication.

5. The first is a finding, the explanation of which is at issue in the argument; the second is an objection that has been raised against the explanation that the argument defends.

又错了啦...我选C,怎么是D啦????

A major chemical spill occurred five years ago at Baker’s Beach, the world’s sole nesting ground for Merrick sea turtles, and prevented nearly all the eggs laid that year from hatching.  Yet the number of adult female Merricks returning to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach has actually increased somewhat since five years ago.  Clearly, environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

 

 

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument offered in refutation of the environmentalists’ prediction?

 

 

1. The chemical spill five years ago occurred at a time when there were neither Merrick sea turtles nor Merrick sea turtle eggs on Baker’s Beach.
2. Female Merrick sea turtles begin returning to Baker’s Beach to lay their eggs when they are ten years old.

3. Under normal conditions, only a small proportion of hatchling female Merrick sea turtles survive in the ocean until adulthood and return to lay their eggs at Baker’s Beach.
4. Environmental pressures unrelated to the chemical spill have caused a significant decline in the population of one of the several species of sea birds that prey on Merrick sea turtle eggs.

5. After the chemical spill, an environmental group rejected a proposal to increase the Merrick sea turtle population by transferring eggs from Baker’s Beach to nearby beaches that had not been affected by the spill.

我选D,他因WEAKEN嘛.为什么是B呢?

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-10-31 15:27:11编辑过]

qianrene

我只说最后那道题，前面的BF看了头晕呵呵

environmentalists’ prediction that the world’s Merrick population would decline as a result of the spill has proven unfounded.

题目问什么能够削弱反驳环境学家关于spill引起海龟下降的言论

所以D跟spill是无关的

B：削弱了，因为环境学家的spill引起海龟下降要10年以后才能反映出来，5年内的海龟是发生spill以前的蛋

文明

BF，偶也是一做一个错！OG那唯一的一题偶就是做错了！hmm.....对于这个可恶的缩写，偶是会想论家没有啦，所以实战不要硬给我乱搭一个甚至几个

确实BF应该不是难题，因为只要知道原文的推理过程就好，不太用深入思考，甚至看不懂生字都没关系，难就难在总是爆长，而且会用到一些讨厌的逻辑专有名词，偶们又不是native，哪知道这些词的应用涵义，就好比从前学哲学来个广义狭义的，所以呢，就只好从容易的地方入手，我会认为看原文的关系词比较容易。

第一题还好，偶觉得挺清晰，就是盯着就看原文的“further conclusion ”，对应C项的“intermediate ”，再来原文的“wrong to draw”对应C项的“criticizes”是不是很容易！

第二题，我开始以为跟第一题一样的原文，结果再读下去脑子里总有第一题的意思参杂在脑细胞里，确实有点晕，所以说做逻辑题一定要尽量简化信息，而且别看太懂，越看的仔细越影响思考：这里的“关键是说否定的对象是【跟......有关】”，是跟夹在两个黑体字之间那句话有关，不是跟第一个黑体句有关的，所以C可定不对，而第二句本身就是一个从第一句的finding得出的，所以说是“alleged implication”【这里就是我上面提到的那些逻辑专业术语，我们很难弄懂其含义的，只好用“态度”来帮助判断，这里是批判的对象，所看见alleged就差不多可以确认，再看看其它选项没有更合适，那就赶紧选它吧】

BF还有一个奇怪的方法，就是不要去比较选项，越比越觉得几个都有点对，又哪个都不太对！如果实战遇到，我建议妹妹还是掠过，别耗时间，实在错了就让它错吧......【我看这两题直接之看你变色的两个选项，头脑比较不乱的说，所以不要以为我做就一定对】

第三题确实很搞，小F，这题的CDE选项是明显无关选项，你可以认真体会一下“无关”的要领，然后偶觉得这题的原文是在考查“观察能力”，而问题就是“变向思维能力”：

原文是说“某年occured five years ago”的污染导致“当年that year”可以产卵但不能孵卵，但是事实海龟从那年开始增加回去产卵，因此对海龟数目下降的预测有误。

问题：因为原文是一个批判论述，于是“weaken”的对象恰好是“support”作者观点，所以可以用“support”的方式去思考

B：海龟的年龄肯定是老中青并存的嘛，“begin”就是意味着——逐渐会有满了10岁的海龟陆续回去产卵，那么当年不能成功孵化，但是因为陆续有来，所以还是会逐渐增加数量，就是这样支持作者观点而相对就削弱了环境学者的预测。

 以上蓝字为错误理解，请勿被误导！

是哦，谢谢宝儿，帖子编到后面有点眼花了 ，，，这样反而好理解了，难怪我之前一直在觉得自己是为了找理由支持B项而硬掰的说 ，偶强调观察能力，但是自己很瞎啦

应该是这样： the eggs laid that year from hatching 跟A项说的当年没有产卵矛盾，，，CDE无关

原文驳斥的是——污染发生之后海龟增加回去产卵，所以环境学者以污染为理由预测海龟数量将会下降是错误的

B项是指出它因——数量没有下降的原因不是污染没有危害，而是海龟在污染之后陆续回去产卵，所以仅仅在当年不能孵化，但是之后回升，数量才没有下降。

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-10-31 19:23:02编辑过]

qianrene

更正一下文明MM，是支持作者观点，削弱了反对环境学家预测的言论

大洋彼岸369

姐妹们聊得很开心啊,大早上起来就发现自己成为你们的话题了. 先好好复习考试,等偶考完了如果还过得去的话,就给大家看看偶的照片.不过别听小F乱讲,偶是那种放到大街上就找不到的银......

对于BF, 我个人有点做题教训,刚开始经常错,现在基本不错了.关键是把握两点: 1.哪个是作者的主要观点,或者是这段话的结论. 找出这个很重要,其他的一切都是围绕这个来谈的. 2. 分析BF部分在句子里面是fact, evidence, judegement,还是intermediate conclusion. 或者说哪个是作者支持的, 哪个是作者反对的,或者是作者拿来当assumption的. 这些搞清楚了,它搞来搞去就那几下子. 建议拿一两个有代表性的题目好好体会和研究一下,肯定收获不同. 大家加油哈, 我去做数学了,好几天没看JJ了....