GWD-32-11，在线等待回复，这个题同时是八月份寂静的考古题，关系很大的！！

yezhuchuanghua

Several ancient Greek texts provide accounts of people being poisoned by honey that texts suggest was made from the nectar of rhododendron or oleander plants. Honey made from such nectar can cause the effects the texts describe, but only if eaten fresh, since the honey loses its toxicity within a few weeks of being made. In Greece, rhododendrons and oleander bloom only in springtime, when they are the predominant sources of nectar.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly support the accounts of Greek texts?

A.    There are no plants that Greece in ancient times that produce more nectar than rhododendrons or oleanders does.
B.    In areas where neither rhododendrons nor oleanders grow, honey is never poisonous.
C.    A beebive’s honeycomb cannot have some sections that contain toxic honey and other sections that contain nontoxic honey
D.    The incidents of honey poisoning that are related in the ancient texts occurred in the springtime or in the early summer
E．Whether the honey in a beehive is toxic depends solely on which plants were the source of that was used to make the honey.



GWD-32-11的一个题，在D和B之间纠结，答案给的D，可是我的那个版本的GWD的答案有很多明显的错误，所以想在确认下，文中标注的红字部分大家看下，所以觉得D是不对的，应该选B啊。恳请确认。同时这个题也是八月份寂静的考古题，所以关系到很多人的选择，我在线等待回复。关键词是predominant sources
还有一个连接http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_Math/thread-580668-1-1.html这个是我几天前发表的，已经很多人浏览过了，要是错了会害人的！！！！请大家再看一个百度搜索出来的连接！！http://www.taisha.org/bbs/thread-1350213-1-1.html

sdcar2010

D is right since the toxicity can last a few weeks after the springtime and into the early summer time, according to the passage.

B is also right by presenting "no source, no effect".

Therefore this question's answers were poorly written.

yezhuchuanghua

这个……可是确确实实考了这个题的……刚刚吃早饭去了……没看见你的回复……

竹灵溪月

感觉上是B，因为B是一个比较明显的反因反果式加强……

至于D，我个人觉得应该没有A好，因为B选项里面的early summer一来在原文中没有可对应的信息，二来（个人感觉）如果D成立，是不是就改变了原文的信息范围？？




个人见解，顺便帮顶，求更多人解答~

pinven

个人理解：
Conclusion： honey made from the nectar of rhododendron or oleander plants -> poison
Reasoning: 1) rhododendrons and oleander bloom only in springtime； 2） rhododendrons and oleander the predominant sources of nectar； 3）Honey is toxic only if eaten fresh
Q: Which strengthen?
B: No source and no poison. 不加强，因为如果rhododendrons and oleander不是source，当然没有poison了。极端的例子，如果是由其他植物引起的，而没有 rhododendrons and oleander的地方也恰巧没有那种植物，那么honey is never poisonous 完全可能。
D: 搭桥，不解释了

yezhuchuanghua

看来就是选D了

liberal00

还是没明白

hanshipeng

D其实是一个条件，题干当中没有提到中毒时间，而只是提到了这两种有毒花bloom的时间。所以有D的存在，对蜂蜜中毒起到了support的作用。就是D。仔细看看B，有瑕疵。B说没有这两种花存在的地方，蜂蜜就无毒。那意思有两者中的一种，或者两者都有的地方，蜂蜜都是有毒的。不起到支持作用。试想，调查一个人中毒的原因，除了了解中了什么毒，还要了解什么时间中的毒。正因为中毒时间和这两种花蜜有毒的时间差不多吻合，才导致人们有理由推测中毒是有这两种花蜜引起的。

峣纸

Premise：一些古老的希腊文字记载了人们蜂蜜中毒的事情，而且说这些蜂蜜是从R或O的花蜜中来的。由R或O的花蜜制成的蜂蜜确实可以引发文字中记载的反应，但这个蜂蜜在制成后的几个星期内就会丧失毒性，因此需要在很新鲜的时候吃，才会中毒。R和O只在春天开花，它们是花蜜的主要提供者。
题干要求：找一个选项说明 希腊文字记载的内容是属实的。

A：无关；

B：在既没有R也没有O的地方，蜂蜜从来没有毒—>逆否命题：蜂蜜有毒，在有R或O的地方。  
可以看出B选项强调的是“蜂蜜有毒”和“R和O”的关系，但是题干要求是“证明希腊文字记载的内容是真实的”，即不仅要证明这种蜂蜜确实有毒，还要证明人们因为这种蜂蜜而中毒的事件真实发生过。B只证明了蜂蜜确实有毒，没有证明人们的蜂蜜中毒事件发生过，待定；

C：无关；

D：翻译：古籍中记载的蜂蜜中毒事件多发生在春天或初夏。D选项承认了2个事实，①蜂蜜有毒；②发生了人的蜂蜜中毒事件。D选项中的”springtime or early summer“对应题目中的”R或O花只在springtime开放“+”R或O的花蜜制成的蜂蜜在制成的几个星期之后就会失去毒性“—>spring time+a few weeks=spring time~early summer；

E：无关；（回答yes或no都不能support/weaken the accounts of Greek texts）

【B D都一定程度上支持了the accounts of Greek texts，但D的支持程度更深，选择D。】

Bensontuo

Apparently

IF " the answer is correct ", then the argument must be most strongly supported.

So we are looking at "  which is to to assume " then the argument must be correct compared to " could be correct :

Or

We are looking at " which is to assume, then the argument must be " could be correct ", which is among other others answers, being assumed, those could not guarantee the argument must be " could be correct "

Ok, Let us break down the argument:

P1: Poison by honey, made from the nectar of R or OP

P2: Poison by honey, made from the nectar of R or OP ---> Eaten Fresh as within few weeks of being made

P3: R and OP ---> Predominant source of nectar --->  R + OP blossom --- > Spring.

ok, IF ( Answer choice is correct ), then Argument or premises presented must also to be correct to ensure which be most strongly supported.

A. Even there are plants that produce more nectar the r or op does, it does not mean that within the springtime as both r " and " op as the predominant source of nectar, people would not use the nectar from either R or OP to produce the honey, and not to consume it when it is fresh, but from the other plants. So its actually non relevant.


B. If no R + no OP, Honey is not poisonous. - You can only prove one fact that honey from the place grows either R or P or both R and P is poisonous. However, what about spring time ? what about eating fresh ?

C. How could it even relevant to the various of sections that honey from the honeycomb of beehives stored ? If it is poisonous from the toxic section, then it might be from the nectars of the other plants, if it is not poisonous from the no toxic section, then you still can not determine whether the toxic one are from either r or op.

D. ok, so we know incidents occurred in spring time or in the early morning.

If ( If incidents happened, the its either in spring time or in the early morning ), then A ( If nectars are mainly from either R or Op or both, both must blossom at spring time ) must be true and B ( if the honey made from such nectars cause poisonous, then it must be eaten within a few weeks of being made ) must be true.

So, to symbolize it, If option D is true, then A and B must be true. Ok, let's see if we negate both a and b as the way we negate the necessary assumption just to see if option d could also be negate.

Negate A: If nectars are either from R or from Op or from both, it is not true that both of them blossom only at spring time, and if its not only at sprint time,  how could the incidents of honey poisonous occurred in spring time or summer time ?

Negate B: If honey from such nectars cause poisonous, then it must not been eaten within a few weeks.

If it must not been eaten within a few weeks is true, then it must been eaten more than within a few weeks, and if it must been eaten more than within a few weeks, it would not be fresh due to the original premises, then if wont be fresh would not cause people poisonous, then the incident must not happened either at the spring time ( eating fresh as honey being made immediately at summer time ) or in the early summer ( eating honey within a few weeks ), In the other words, the incident must be happened after both the spring time and also a few weeks after it.

For sure, in this case, we could only assume that only by passing " a few weeks ", it would not be early summer. However, as question stated " mostly stronger support " . This is by far the best answer we can have.

E.  is it possible to have nectars of other plants be treated as the source to make the honey ? If so, then no support. being predominately sources of nectar for both R and Op does not guarantee that beehive can't take the nectar from the other sources.