继续求助 prep07 #63

bonfin

我是从概率的角度看的,因为问题中提到了less likely to.所以应该是job related accidents/all accidents
(A) The employees of Company P lost more time at work due to job-related accidents than did the employees of Company O.
说因为job-related accidents,Company P的人损失更多工作时间,是说它造成的结果,对原文无作用
(B) Company P considered more types of accidents to be job-related than did Company O.
可以直接作用削弱原文,说P公司相比O公司把更多accidents算成job-related.所以公式的分子变大了,P公司的概率就大了.
(C) The employees of Company P were sick more often than were the employees of Company O.
P员工生病比O多,和accidents没什么关系
(D) Several employees of Company O each had more than one job-related accident.
几个O公司的人出工作意外的次数不止一次.这个方向确实反了,因为O公司有猛将"以1顶2,顶3",结果数量还不及P公司的accidents多,只能让我更加相信O比P less likely.因为即使假设O公司的其他人没有发生一次job-related意外(不可能发生负意外抵消),P公司要比O多,一定要有个人或集体上比这several employees发生更多job-related意外才行.
(E) The majority of job-related accidents at Company O involved a single machine.
机器有什么用不知道.

-- by 会员 orangemoo (2011/10/31 6:37:13)

谢谢你~~~很详细~~！

teddybearj4

That really make sense!!!

楼主看清选项
(D) Several employees of Company O each had more than one job-related accident.

说的是只有一些有多余1个的事故，却没有说等于1的，如果很多人都有等于1个呢？那么事故不就很多了么

-- by 会员 sandychen168 (2011/10/30 22:45:40)

InfiniteAlex

D没有用，因为题干里job-related accidents总数和the number of employees定了，即使有个别员工身上发生的事故多但于事无补。