OG11th--86

frankman

86.   Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?

(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.

(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.

(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.

(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.

(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication.

请教下NN一个思路上的问题

这道题的结论是:由于particle accelerators可获性下降导致期刊上关于该类研究的文章的数量减少

如果(E)是答案,是由于期刊编辑政策上的改变使该类文章数量减少,是他因削弱吗?如果是,那不是加强结论了吗? 这不是和削弱题"反对结论"的思想相矛盾?

我是初学者,问题多有幼稚之处,请高人谅解并希望能指点下,谢谢!

香柔cheese

The argument is not "The number of particle accelerators decreased last year. ", but rather "The low number of articles can be attribute to the decline in availability of particle accelerators."

Choice E weaken the argument by demonstrating another possible cause.

经常考试

亲爱的：

The lowered number of articles can be attributed to the decline in availability

frankman

谢谢NN的解释

roboform

削弱 给出他因，加强是排除他因。

 

楼主记得时候不必拘泥于套路，举几个简单的例子，自己出几道题对他加强削弱啊各种方法，会发现逻辑很简单的……

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-2-4 12:13:39编辑过]