[下载]CR SC全整理（10月）7道原题，27个线索

lisy

我也看了，是难懂，但是我没有做GWD，所以没法check,就按照原来JJ主人的抄上去了，请NN来确认一下，回头我更新的时候更改一下，谢谢！

sofinew

以下是引用chrisf在2007-11-6 21:27:00的发言：

1.        Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those fragments were.  In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere.  These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.  Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.     In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A)    The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.

(B)    The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

(C)    The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that conclusion.

(D)   The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that conclusion.

(E)    The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.   C

 

这是楼主的这个版本，偶逻辑比较差，死活看不出来为啥要选C，有没有NN讲解一下啊

为什么第一句是against the conclusion of the argument?

查了一下，原题是GWD－29－q28，不过原题划线部分和本题不同。

这题我看应该选E，最后那个很明显是CONCLUSION而不是EVIDENCE。选C是原题的答案，不过上面说了，原题划线部分不同。

lisy

谢谢NN

miyako31

谢谢，快要考试了，真是救命

yinziglory

机经in need is 机经 in deed！！！

10port再10port lz！！！

ilovecushi

以下是引用gracygj0408在2007-11-6 10:26:00的发言：

1.         GWD 原题In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week.
   

A.    chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week

B.     chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week

C.     chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997

D.    chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997

E.     chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997

请问答案是C么？

    

i vote for B, lisy is right, there is one question in OG has similar construction.  don't remember the question no.

the reason i choose B is  (1) by 1997 come first (2) that figure=children in US who do household chores.

construction is the same, and no problem in logic.

if something wrong, u r always welcome to correct

actionone

以下是引用chrisf在2007-11-6 21:27:00的发言：

1.        Astronomer:
Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with
Jupiter showed that the comet broke into fragments before entering
Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were.  In hopes of gaining some
indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied spectrographic
analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere.  These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur after the fragments' entry. The
fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer
atmosphere does contain sulfur.  Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer, it
is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have
passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up.     In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A)    The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that explanation.

(B)    The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

(C)    The
first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion
of the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that
conclusion.

(D)   The
first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument;
the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that
conclusion.

(E)    The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.   C

 

这是楼主的这个版本，偶逻辑比较差，死活看不出来为啥要选C，有没有NN讲解一下啊

为什么第一句是against the conclusion of the argument?

这题选E, 沸沸讲义上有.

请问GWD 版本的答案是啥?

lisy

BF题，请参看32楼的解释

rain119911

谢谢好人！