ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development. They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.

In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following roles?

正确答案: D

相关帖子

更多...

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 3774|回复: 6
打印 上一主题 下一主题

还是黑脸题

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2013-10-19 15:44:15 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
Environmental organizations want topreserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residentialdevelopment. They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who ownit.  That plan is ill-conceived:  if the farmers did sell their land, theywould sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any otherbidders.  On the other hand, thesefarmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming itremains viable.  But farming will notremain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lackthe financial resources modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would beto assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintainviability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldfaceproportions play which of the following roles?

  • The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as     ill-conceived; the second is evidence that is presented as grounds for     that rejection.
  • The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be     attained; the second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
  • The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be     attained; the second is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
  • The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are     being evaluated in the argument; the second is a judgment providing a     basis for the argument’s advocacy of a particular strategy.
  • The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the     second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that     goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.

答案是4, 本人同意,但觉得5好像也对,请大侠帮忙指出5的错误,谢谢!!!

收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2013-10-20 16:35:49 | 只看该作者
自己顶一顶~~
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2013-10-22 19:16:51 | 只看该作者
期待大侠的出现~~
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2013-10-23 12:42:08 | 只看该作者
每天一顶
5#
发表于 2013-10-24 13:51:51 | 只看该作者
楼主可以看看这个帖子,和你的问题一样,有牛牛解答:http://forum.chasedream.com/thread-182993-1-1.html
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2013-10-25 20:45:17 | 只看该作者
wjtwenzi 发表于 2013-10-24 13:51
楼主可以看看这个帖子,和你的问题一样,有牛牛解答:http://forum.chasedream.com/thread-182993-1-1.html ...

终于明白了,谢谢好心人
7#
发表于 2020-8-24 17:00:34 | 只看该作者
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.
E 選項錯在第二個 BF
E選項的第二句:如果要達到目標(reserve the land ...)則必須改變這個狀況(farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable.)
也就是說, 必須改變『給定 farming it remains viable下農民不會賣地』這項事實, 但是題目沒有說必須改變這個條件才能達到目標, 而是 assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability 即可。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-4-28 09:01
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部