[讨论]八月八号厦门gmat学习小组成立了！

albert

以下是引用greenfish在2003-7-16 15:10:00的发言：
再请教一题：
LSAT14 SEC-II
25. Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute. Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate; an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations. But no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side, thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting.

If the statements above are true, and if negotiations between the two sides do begin soon, at the time those negotiations begin each of the following must also be true EXCEPT:

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides

(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides

(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed

(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute

(E) The negotiations'reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.

答案A，我选B。从第一句话就能不能判断A正确，是否要考虑充分必要条件？但B我觉得并不一定会存在。谢了！

Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute. Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate; an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations. But no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side, thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting.

from the passage, we know:
1. NOT vilolated cease-fire ---> negotiation begin
2. negotiation begin ------> other countried have pressured the two countries
3. agreement emerge  ----> other countries continue pressure
4. negotiation be held  -----> international troops demostrated ability to....

then you can use the information above to get the answer...
but greenfish, I don't know how is your study going on...But as I know, you will take the test soon, so I would recommend that you not take too much time on such pure logic questions in LSAT...because such questions won't occur in the GMAT test...such pure logic questions will take you a lot of time and you can't get anything useful to crack the GMAT...
good luck!

mike1999

手头上的GMAT,LSAT逻辑全部做掉了,现在在做GRE逻辑单题,大概有200道,些题目挺难,不过大部分思路还是一样的,有谁也做过吗?

albert

以下是引用tocean0222在2003-7-17 0:04:00的发言：
I am just working on it.pls wait!

great!! tocean, I want your copy too..could you give me one copy? thank you very much!

joywzy

T2
C tell us that there are some limit before we can use gasoline instead of wood economically...so C support the conclusion... I agree that C use such words as "narrow",which seems not good enough to support the conclusion...However, the "relatively" used to modify "narrow" compensate for this weakness..

albert,

Such words as narrow or marginal seem to weaken the argument. In the real test, how to discern two choices that undistinguishable? Could you please demonatrate your reasoning by explaining the choice of C and E?

Thanks.

joywzy

以下是引用albert在2003-7-15 21:52:00的发言：

T7.
we should know the connection of the cause and effect in this question... The arguer tell us that because the advertisement in only 3 months has attacted enough contributors, an advertisment in more than 3 months will certainly attract more contributors...you can see between the cause and effect, there is a gap or prediction...Even if most of those contributor contribute to the advertisement in response to the advertisement, as D said, it just repeat the cause of the argument(advertisement attracts 70 percent of its contributors)...we still can  not make sure that the propose of arguer will take effect unless we add some premise such as choice A...

Albert, i agree with you about the premise such as A to support the argument.

But i was still confused about choice D. I will show you my reasoing, ok?

P.the advertisement in three months boost the contribution.
C. Additional advertisements will definitely result in more contribution.

As D said , most of those who contribute  do so in response to advertisement. I regard choice D as a bridge between premise and conclusion. If D is weaken, that is , contributor don't react to the advetisement , we cannot expect any contribution.

So i regard choice D as support . Albert, what is the flaw of my reasoning?

joywzy

以下是引用albert在2003-7-15 21:52:00的发言：


T10
A is a irrelevant choice...
You should notice the first sentence:
more persons diagnosed as having the ....were born in the winter months than at any other time of year...
This is a phenomenon, the arguer give an explanation...
A is irrelavant because it only talk about how the illness occurs, but does not talk about the reason why the illness were most related to the winter months, a reason the arguer want to explain...So  A will be a good choice if A is  changed to: the reason why most persons diagonsed as ....were born in th winter months is NOT because other factor, such as....

Albert, i agree with you . I seem to make the same mistakes as before.

I am occasionally mixed in eliminating other causes. In weaken or support in CR, any choice about eliminating other causes should connect the cause and effect, rather than state a fact or phenomon.

Albert, thank  u . i will learn from this lesson. Hope that i will not make the same mistakes again.

joywzy

以下是引用albert在2003-7-15 21:52:00的发言：
T39
there are two reasons for the reduction  of contamination..
1.  law took effect in 1975
2. the drop in the use of gasoline between 1975-1985

if the law does contribute most to the decline, most of the contamination decline will occur after 1975, the year that law took effect....B tell us that most the use of gasoline decline happened between 1980 and 1985, we have no reason to believe that it is an effect of 1975-LAW, we would rather believe other reasons contribute to the decline... So the key to solve such question is the date...notice the difference of the date and try to use the difference of the year to solve the problem

A the contamination fell sharply in both 1975 and 1983... choice tell us that both the law and the drop in the use of gasoline contribute to the contamination...

albert, thank you very much. i got the key to solve such problem.

tocean0222

以下是引用albert在2003-7-17 9:19:00的发言：

great!! tocean, I want your copy too..could you give me one copy? thank you very much!

I just designed a program to list the topics of AWA in accordiance with their frequency of appearing in JJ of recent months.Everyone who wants its copy,pls give your email and wait for couple of days.

joywzy

以下是引用tocean0222在2003-7-17 13:30:00的发言：

I just designed a program to list the topics of AWA in accordiance with their frequency of appearing in JJ of recent months.Everyone who wants its copy,pls give your email and wait for couple of days.

tocean , it is very quicker to just list the number of AWA in Suyuan's book . The sooner the better. My email is joywzy@msn.com

Thank u very much.

mike1999

以下是引用tocean0222在2003-7-17 13:30:00的发言：

I just designed a program to list the topics of AWA in accordiance with their frequency of appearing in JJ of recent months.Everyone who wants its copy,pls give your email and wait for couple of days.

You are so nice, Tocean Bro, I want a copy too.
My email: junqiangxie(A) hotmail.com.
Thanks you very much.