It is widely assumed that a museum is helped financially when a generous patron donates a potential exhibit. In truth, however, donated objects require storage space, which is not free, and routine conservation, which is rather expensive. Therefore, such gifts exacerbate rather than lighten the demands made on a museum's financial resources.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weaken the argument above?
According to New Oriental, the answer is "Objects donated by a patron to a museum are often of such importance that the museum would be obliged to add them to its collection through purchase if necessary."
能给出其他的几个答案么? 按题目的理解,donated会应为需要额外的Storage and conservation,回对图书馆的财务负面的影响,XDF答案的意思是DONATED的东西是如此的重要,MUSEUM如果没有DONATED,他必须花钱购买,(买了以后当然还是要提供STROAGE的地方),这说明了DONATED的对MUSEUM的财务是有POSITIVE的影响的。 不知道我的理解对不对。 TO Lstzhang,什么是“他因削弱”?
能给出其他的几个答案么? 按题目的理解,donated会应为需要额外的Storage and conservation,回对图书馆的财务负面的影响,XDF答案的意思是DONATED的东西是如此的重要,MUSEUM如果没有DONATED,他必须花钱购买,(买了以后当然还是要提供STROAGE的地方),这说明了DONATED的对MUSEUM的财务是有POSITIVE的影响的。 不知道我的理解对不对。 TO Lstzhang,什么是“他因削弱”?
Thanks!!! I understand now. Sometime GMAT make me feel that I'm silly.
THe other choices are,
1. To keep patron well disposed, a museum will find it advisible to put at least some donated objects on exhibit rather than merely in storage. 2. The people who are most likely to donate valuable objects to a museum are also the people who are most likely to make cash gifts to it. 3. A museum cannot save money by resorting to cheap storage under less than adequate conditions, because so doing will drive up the cost of conservation. 4. Persons expect a museum to keep donated objects in its possession rather than raise cash by selling them.