請問新PP2-114 感謝~!

kbkgqoo

114.  (25146-!-item-!-188;#058&001219)  (GWD 23-Q32)

 

Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species:  a hare, a partridge, and various Mediterranean fish.  Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created.  Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in other Roman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman Empire.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in the Sepphoris area.

B. There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native.

C. No motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city.

D. All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosaics are readily identifiable as representations of known species.

E. There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman Empire were familiar.

ANS: E     想請問C選項是 weaken嗎~? 沒出現在 Sepphoris mosaics 的主題~也沒出現在其他的mosaics~! 還有A選項 是不是~有可能是本地的artisan去外地找stones~所以此選項不成立呢?? E選項是不是說有待過很多地方的artisan 並沒有熟悉的 common repertory of mosaic designs ~~所以表示是從other Roman cities來的呢~??     多謝~~大家指點~!!!

alohabrian

C是无关选项，取非。原文也能成立。

E如果取非，也就是说，尽管那些动物在 Sepphoris没有，但是 mosiac的图案是 全罗马通用的，mosiac的图案里，可以出现不在当地的动物，那么conclusion就不成立。 

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-4-19 18:37:23编辑过]

kbkgqoo

多謝阿~~!! 大概懂你的意思了~~!!

richrobey

A为什么不对呢？取非也weaken了结论啊。Mosaics是用本地专有的材料做的不就weaken了是舶来品了么？请指点

fancycc

大谢，看了1楼的回帖醍醐灌顶啊~

几米的世界9

顶！！终于明白了！！！