分享,求教两道真题

ohayo

1

Although the discount stores in Goreville’s central shopping district are expected to close within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long.     In the five years since the opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete with Colson’s.
    
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?fficeffice" />

    

A     Many customers of Colson’s are expected to do less shopping there than they did before the SpendLess store opened.

    

B Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since Colson’s opened have been discount stores.

    

C     At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it ever had.


题目后半部和前半部分有什么联系都不太明白 ?         参考答案 B , WHY ?


2

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.     Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere.     After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.     The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but 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 is a claim that the astronomer seeks to show is true; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the truth of that claim.

    

C The first and the second are each considerations advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument.

    


E The first is a circumstance for which the astronomer seeks to provide an explanation; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the explanation provided by the astronomer.



参考答案 C


由于是从朋友那里抄来的,选项不太全,请多包涵.


大家讨论讨论,NN解答解答.

jnlvo

第1题B大概是这么个意思，Colson，a nondiscount department 造成stores discount stores那么a SpendLess discount department store 会造成？

jnlvo

第2题好像新东方的讲义里有，费大侠当时花了点时间，不过这题的难度比不上9道题中的一些题，主要是选项不全，干扰项不多。总之，这两题还是很有价值的，毕竟是英文原版！

jnlvo

如果楼主有更多的真题，欢迎你把它们贴出来与大家分享。谢谢！

weiyu

1. The reasoning features as G’s discount cannot affect its bankrupt fate because the competition from S, a discount store. But this might not be true (Implied in the argument) because C, a non-discount store can beat any competition from other store around C. The gap is whether the stores around C are discount store like those surrounding G.

2.

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(Phenomenon and question).     Nevertheless, some indication of their size can be inferred from spectrographic analyses of Jupiter’s outer atmosphere (Evidence-Method).     After the fragments’ entry, these analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur.(Evidence1) The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter’s outer atmosphere does contain sulfur(Evidence2).     Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer(Evidence3), 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(Conclusion).fficeffice" />

The combination of Evidence1, evidence2 and evidence creates a principle that explains the method in detail to the conclusion.

jnlvo

新东方给的答案是Both 1 and 2 support the conclusion。请问weiyu你给的答案是哪里来的？

weiyu

以下是引用jnlvo在2004-3-13 20:09:00的发言：
新东方给的答案是Both 1 and 2 support the conclusion。请问weiyu你给的答案是哪里来的？

I do not give answer. Just analyze the argument. I think your answer is right. thx

cranberry

1，文章的逻辑是把原来一个例子里的事实用在现在的情况下。原来的例子里，商店关门是因为竞争不过一个同类的商店，但同时有很多商店开张。文章想用这个说明，现在这个打折店关门了，也会有许多商店竟相开张的。答案说，其实原来那些商店关张后，开业的都是不同种类的商店，所以这个例子用在这里不合适。


2，好象逻辑上是应该合在一起才可以支持结论。好象不应该有什么疑问吧，一个说的是现象，一个是试图解释现象背后的道理

ohayo

明白了,多谢.

christineq

可是原题中只说those locations will not stay vacant for long.    ，并没有说要开的是同一类型的店呀？？？