in choice C, I have a different view "among lingering people( come to watch the celebrities ）, a customer who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception" it implies: even if the Hollywood Restaurant replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, it wouldn't attract more lingering people to sit and buy food. lingering people are lingering people! -- by 会员 wilincl9321 (2012/10/6 3:01:21)
我现在有些能接受这个观点，但是还是有些小的出入：
At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height tables. However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.
The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that
A.some celebrities come to the Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available
B.the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the Hollywood compensates for the longer time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
C.a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering
D.a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E.with enough tall tables to accommodate all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables
我觉得C项这个选项是个很容易让人不知道lingering的具体意思是什么。开始我依照我的字典意思，认为linger是闲逛的意思。
linger ：to continue to exist, be noticeable etc for longer than is usual or desirable
但是结合B项，C项这里的linger 说的应该是，吃饭上的linger, 就是吃饭拖拖拉拉。
反过来再看整个题目的结构是：
前提： 高凳子有两个好处，更容易看明星；这样的高的桌子上吃饭，花的时间短。
结论：换高凳子可以给餐馆带来利润的增长。
问题是： weaken (weaken 最强的就是对assumption的攻击)
其实这个问题就是在考察：整个方案好处能不能转换为实实在在利润，好方案不一定有好利润。
"among lingering people( come to watch the celebrities ）, a customer who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception" ---wilincl9321 (2012/10/6 3:01:21)
"among lingering people( the people who spend time lingering over their meals.）, a customer who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception"
也就是 在高凳子上就餐的人不是那种一般的，吃饭花一些时间的人。消费者没有把就餐的舒适作为消费的一个条件，所以他们在这样的桌子上也会花钱消费，餐馆的利润也会上升。
显然，这个解释的成立是很弱的，一般人都是要花些时间吃饭的。所以，基于这个前提的结论成立也就难了。
那D为什么不对呢？
这个选项和结论没有关系的。
正像前面所说，考察的是换高凳子是不是能给餐馆带来利润。吃饭时间短的人，在换高凳子前后对餐馆利润的影响是一样的。
（我不想再碰这个话题了，同时也希望我有些对了。） | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-10-31 17:34:52
