gwd 8 Q35 还是不能赞同以前的讨论，求NN指点

latinjazz

As a solution, they
            challenge
            the government’s assumption that a family’s income should depend primarily on wages and urge
            the government to provide generous wage supplements (child and housing allowances) to single parents whose wages are low.
        

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

這題應該是考最後三句這個學派, 因為"providing wage supplements"只在這個地方出現.

我覺得, 依照原文末段提到的這個學派(these policy analysts, 範圍-最後三句)

他們認為: the problem is not caused by wage inequity(政府, 錯) but by low wages coupled with single parenthood(他們, 對), regardless of sex.

現在政府的判定是錯誤的,所以 they
            challenge
            the government’s assumption that a family’s income should depend primarily on wages (政府的assumption是錯誤的, 所以他們challenge)

而且他們:
            urge
            the government to provide generous wage supplements (child and housing allowances) to single parents whose wages are low.
            (這才是他們認為正確的改善方式)

總之, 他們認為政府的assumption是錯誤的, 他們才是對的

由此判定答案based on assumptions about the appropriate sources of family income的appropriate sources其實就等於在說政府的assumption是inappropriate的(同上), 他們urge的方法"to provide wage supplements"才是appropriate的. 答案B的核心集中在此學派認為政府的判定是不適當的,他們的才適當, 與此學派的核心觀念吻合

而答案C的是說這個方法(provide wage supplement)是為了回應某些policy analysts所作的修正, 文中並沒有提及此學派有類似的動作

存粹個人觀點, 如有錯誤請告知

laipiyu

以下是引用latinjazz在2008-5-6 23:28:00的发言：

As a solution, they
   challenge
   the government’s assumption that a family’s income should depend primarily on wages and urge
   the government to provide generous wage supplements (child and housing allowances) to single parents whose wages are low.
  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

這題應該是考最後三句這個學派, 因為"providing wage supplements"只在這個地方出現.

我覺得, 依照原文末段提到的這個學派(these policy analysts, 範圍-最後三句)

他們認為: the problem is not caused by wage inequity(政府, 錯) but by low wages coupled with single parenthood(他們, 對), regardless of sex.

現在政府的判定是錯誤的,所以 they
   challenge
   the government’s assumption that a family’s income should depend primarily on wages (政府的assumption是錯誤的, 所以他們challenge)

而且他們:
   urge
   the government to provide generous wage supplements (child and housing allowances) to single parents whose wages are low.
   (這才是他們認為正確的改善方式)

總之, 他們認為政府的assumption是錯誤的, 他們才是對的

由此判定答案based on assumptions about the appropriate sources of family income的appropriate sources其實就等於在說政府的assumption是inappropriate的(同上), 他們urge的方法"to provide wage supplements"才是appropriate的. 答案B的核心集中在此學派認為政府的判定是不適當的,他們的才適當, 與此學派的核心觀念吻合

而答案C的是說這個方法(provide wage supplement)是為了回應某些policy analysts所作的修正, 文中並沒有提及此學派有類似的動作

存粹個人觀點, 如有錯誤請告知

嗯,看了latinjazz的解释后，完全明白了。thanks a lot.

laipiyu

另外，redhead（红头？）批评得很对，不该去预测文章之外的东西。

redhead

以下是引用laipiyu在2008-5-5 5:24:00的发言：

first，政府的现行政策是equal pay (10) laws不是题干中的providing wage supplements。请先区分清：

Some economists believe that rigorous

enforcement of existing equal pay

(10) laws would substantially decrease

this wage inequity.

second，to parents包括to single-parent，并且信息与此题无关。

麻烦先通读文章，区分题干部分与文章内的区别。

非也非也，文章中已经很清楚的说了这个assumption不是equal pay laws的assumption.而是wage supplements policy的assumption.