84. Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, includingthose that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since thereare several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people whowould like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines producedby these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A)These winemakershave been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfitesby means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances totheir wine. (B) Not all formsof sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. (C)Wine is theonly beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. (D)Apart from sulfites,there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergicreaction. (E)Sulfites are not naturally present in thewines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergicreaction in someone who drinks these wines.我不懂答案D是怎么来的用取非的方法的话，因为ARGUMENT的意思是，因为这些酒厂的酒没S所以人就算对S过敏的也不会过敏，简单来说，S会导致过敏。首先对B取非，那就是S会导致过敏，并没削弱原来的ARGUMENT的主旨，所以我当时排除B，同样的D选项，取非的话，那就是把句子里面的NOT去掉，S在数量上足够大的话就会让喝酒的人过敏，简单是S会导致过敏，在此，和B的取非结果一样，我就不明白为什么选D不选B，请好心人帮忙解释，我被CR弄的很CONFUSE，先谢谢哈。。。。。
If you negate D), you have: Apart from sulfites,there are SOME substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.
The above statement does not mean S在数量上足够大的话就会让喝酒的人过敏. It simply means there are SOMETHING ELSE other than S, will cause the allergic reaction. If so, the conclusion made in the passage falls apart.
这道题好奇怪，如果问题最后一句话是说without risking an allergic reaction 而不是具体说without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites, 我觉得D 是对的。原文说有些wine不添加sulfites，喝的人就不会因sulfites引起过敏。D削弱是说可能还有别的物质导致过敏，但是这个也不削弱"没了sulfites就不会因sulfites过敏”啊，晕晕晕~~~~求解~~~~多谢！！！！~~~
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-2-28 04:57:11
收藏
收藏
