T-9-Q19

victoriahcj

T-9-Q19. TS-7-11

In 1992 outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting lobsters from the territorial waters of the country of Belukia. Soon after, the annual tonnage of lobster legally harvested in Belukian waters began declining; in 1996, despite there being no reduction in the level of legal lobster fishing activity, the local catch was 9,000 tons below pre-1992 levels. It is therefore highly likely that the outlaw fishing boats harvested about 9,000 tons of lobster illegally that year.

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

A.The illegal lobster harvesting was not so extensive that the population of catchable lobsters in Belukia’s territorial waters had sharply declined by 1996

B.The average annual lobster catch, in tons, of an outlaw fishing boat is has increased steadily since 1992.

C.Outlaw fishing boats do not, as a group, harvest more lobsters than do licensed lobster-fishing boats.

D.The annual legal lobster harvest in Belukia in 1996 was not significantly less than 9,000 tons.

E.A significant proportion of Belukia’s operators of licensed lobster-fishing boats were out of business between 1992 and 1996


我的逻辑实在很差。。看了半天也弄不明白为什么是选A
大家帮我分析下吧。。。 我觉得就没有答案。。。。

victoriahcj

我不懂的是A。The illegal lobster harvesting was not so extensive that the population of catchable lobsters in Belukia’s territorial waters had sharply declined by 1996

为什么这句话表示到96年为止可捕捞的lobster的总数没有大幅下降？？？
not so extensive that...我认为是捕捞不是经常行为所以导致数量下降。。虽然逻辑上有点奇怪。。但是为什么前面那个not是全部否定不是部分否定前面的extensive呢？？

wakjzmb

DEFENCE:防止他因WEAKEN。文章说：因为今年的合法捕捞活动没有减少，而相比1992（非法捕捞年）以前的捕捞水平，下降了9000吨。得出结论，非法捕捞所获得的捕捞量为9000吨。这里有个暗含的公式：捕捞量=捕捞活动数×每次捕捞龙虾的量（受龙虾密度、数量控制），基本上等同于总量等于数量×密度那种题。所以，这里面要准确推出非法捕捞的量，那么，每次捕捞龙虾的量和能够用于捕捞的龙虾量，即龙虾种群的数量、密度就不能变。这个选项，取非WEAKEN结论。如果龙虾自身数量变了，那减少的9000吨就不能都归咎于非法捕捞了。（WEAKEN: 虾自己跑了又不是我非法捕捞所致，9000吨不能都扣我脑袋上。）

mcair

victoriahcj

重新研究了一下，终于理解了：
可以这样简化题目，1992年之后，由于有了illegal捕虾，所以合法的产量下降。1996年的产量较1992年之前(没有非法捕虾)的产量下降9000t。
结论：这9000t的下降应该怪illegal捕虾

A。去掉not  就是说捕虾太频繁导致虾数量下降（可能来不及产小虾之类的原因）。对A 取非，就是说这9000t的下降有可能是虾自身数量的下降，与illegal捕虾关系不大，weaken了结论。所以选a

ruclcy

up

nysen

E选项为何不对？

louishirley

choice E

despite there being no reduction in the level of legal lobster fishing activity, the local catch was 9,000 tons below pre-1992 levels
原文说，合法lobster fishing并没有减少，E选项与原文这句话矛盾
且如果licensed fishing out of business 那么legal fishing比pre-1992 减少的9000tons 就不能说是illegal fishing的，E选项成立的话有weaken的感觉