OG-83 反常想法。。求挑错

ileisure

83. Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle
accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major
research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of
articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year
actually was published.
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last
several years.
(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.
(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that
articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication.

我搜了下B,D选项备受争议，都觉得似乎可以达到削弱的作用，但是我的理解怎么和大家都是相反的呢。。。我怎么觉得它们两个有加强的效果。。。
B选项，提供了一个信息，说等待时间变短了，而结果文章数目变少了，是不是更能说明是因为 the decline in availability of particle accelerators导致的本应变多的文章数量减少了，而D选项说accelerator历年来都可以共用，就相当于否掉了一个原来可以共用而现在不可以共用所导致文章数量减少的可能解释。。。。所以我感觉两个都是加强的。。。我是不是哪里想错了

ileisure

呼唤NN

ileisure

顶

ileisure

NN啊

ileisure

为什么没有人理我     o(>﹏<)o

ileisure

%>_<%

ileisure

AaronYao

83. Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.
文章意思就是说，去年有关粒子加速器实验的文章比前几年少了，作者认为是很可能是因为一些实验机构不再运营的原因
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?
要达到削弱原文的作用，选项答案应该有一个特征就是有去年和前几年的情况比较,表明这种变化的原因不是因为decline in availability of particle accelerators
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.
意思是说去年关于粒子加速器的文章都发表了，跟之前的年份没有比较，不能削弱也不能加强
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
前几年平均等待使用粒子加速器的时间都减少了，没有比较，你不清楚这种比较（去年和前几年比）的情况，不削弱不加强
(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.
物理学期刊去年和前几年一样多，因为文章中没有具体信息，所以这种选项最多是加强了原文，即是去除了另外的可能，比如说去年发表的文章比前几年少了，不是因为物理学期刊的减少
(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
任何一年的粒子加速器都可以被多个实验组使用，这个最多也是加强原文，而且勉勉强强，因为文章并没有具体信息说明，只是说物理器使用情况近几年都没变，不是因为这个原因，去除了其他可能，提高了作者说法的可信度，不是削弱
(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication.
涉及粒子加速器的实验的文章发表的接受度降低了，典型的他因削弱，选E

ileisure

83. Journalist: In physics journals, the number of articles reporting the results of experiments involving particle accelerators was lower last year than it had been in previous years. Several of the particle accelerators at major research institutions were out of service the year before last for repairs, so it is likely that the low number of articles was due to the decline in availability of particle accelerators.
文章意思就是说，去年有关粒子加速器实验的文章比前几年少了，作者认为是很可能是因为一些实验机构不再运营的原因
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the journalist’s argument?
要达到削弱原文的作用，选项答案应该有一个特征就是有去年和前几年的情况比较,表明这种变化的原因不是因为decline in availability of particle accelerators
(A) Every article based on experiments with particle accelerators that was submitted for publication last year actually was published.
意思是说去年关于粒子加速器的文章都发表了，跟之前的年份没有比较，不能削弱也不能加强
(B) The average time scientists must wait for access to a particle accelerator has declined over the last several years.
前几年平均等待使用粒子加速器的时间都减少了，没有比较，你不清楚这种比较（去年和前几年比）的情况，不削弱不加强
(C) The number of physics journals was the same last year as in previous years.
物理学期刊去年和前几年一样多，因为文章中没有具体信息，所以这种选项最多是加强了原文，即是去除了另外的可能，比如说去年发表的文章比前几年少了，不是因为物理学期刊的减少
(D) Particle accelerators can be used for more than one group of experiments in any given year.
任何一年的粒子加速器都可以被多个实验组使用，这个最多也是加强原文，而且勉勉强强，因为文章并没有具体信息说明，只是说物理器使用情况近几年都没变，不是因为这个原因，去除了其他可能，提高了作者说法的可信度，不是削弱
(E) Recent changes in the editorial policies of several physics journals have decreased the likelihood that articles concerning particle-accelerator research will be accepted for publication.
涉及粒子加速器的实验的文章发表的接受度降低了，典型的他因削弱，选E

-- by 会员 AaronYao (2011/10/10 9:06:26)

很清楚~~大谢~~