12. Light utility trucks have become popular among consumers who buy them primarily for the trucks’ rugged appearance. Yet although these trucks are tough-looking, they are exempt from the government’s car-safety standards that dictate minimum roof strength and minimum resistance to impact. Therefore, if involved in a serious high-impact accident, a driver of one of these trucks is more likely to be injured than is a driver of a car that is subject to these government standards.
The argument depends on the assumption that
(A) the government has established safety standards for the construction of light utility trucks (B) people who buy automobiles solely for their appearance are more likely than other people to drive recklessly (C) light utility trucks are more likely than other kinds of vehicles to be involved in accidents that result in injuries (D) the trucks’ rugged appearance is deceptive in that their engines are not especially powerful (E) light utility trucks are less likely to meet the car-safety standards than are cars that are subject to the standards
如果truck和car无区别，则答案E最好。问题：truck和car不同，truck当然不会meet car-safety standards，就象坦克肯定不会meet the car-safety standards一样。所以，e等于说了一句毫无意义的废话。应该是个非典型的无关选项。请指教！谢谢！
你是这样理解的，因为truck与坦克与car不同，所以car 的安全标准不适用于truck或坦克。 我是这样理解的，truck的安全性能有可能超过car的安全标准，也有可能低于car的安全标准，所以truck有可能meet the car-safety standards,也有可能 less likely to meet the car-safety standards than cars。
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2003-6-5 21:59:00
