ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3526|回复: 10
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求助!OG13 CR83

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2014-10-9 12:55:30 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
83. Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine.
(B) Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction.
(C) Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.
(D) Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.
(E) Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.



正确答案是E,这个好理解的,但是我不太能理解D的解释,OG的意思是说过敏的原因只考虑sulfites,为什么呢?我真的不太能明白这个逻辑- - 求解答~~~谢谢啦






收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2014-10-9 13:11:48 | 只看该作者
个人认为D的解释就是说明其他的物质不再讨论范围内,属于无关选项。
板凳
发表于 2014-11-20 12:29:44 | 只看该作者
我也来说说自己的理解吧。我觉得d选项可以作为一个support的选项但是不是assumption,assumption是要你选择能够必要加强原文结论的选项,也就是说这个选项一定是原文结论成立的必要条件。E选项符合必要条件,分析如下,把选项取非大概意思变成了酒里面本身天然含有的sulfites足够导致过敏反应了,削弱了原文结论,也就说葡萄酒里天然不含有S或者说含量不足以产生过敏反应是原文结论成立的必要条件。同理把D否定了大意是说葡萄酒里含有其他物质导致过敏,第一这和S是否导致过敏无关所以不对,og就是这么解释的。第二就算牵强削弱了原文结论也绝对不是必要条件,不能成为一个assumption...
地板
发表于 2015-5-3 15:55:17 | 只看该作者
DerekDuan 发表于 2014-11-20 12:29
我也来说说自己的理解吧。我觉得d选项可以作为一个support的选项但是不是assumption,assumption是要你选择 ...

呵呵!               
5#
发表于 2015-5-3 15:56:32 | 只看该作者
怒赞楼上!仔细一看果然只是讨论对sulfites过敏的人,没有讨论其他过敏原!
6#
发表于 2015-8-28 11:27:10 | 只看该作者
刚看完这个题目,好像有一点自己的头绪了,试着解释一下,不对请指正
首先,assumption的意思就是它是推导结论的必要+先决条件
即A(正确选项) ——> B(argument)成立
反之,若将A取反则B必须不成立

再看这题E选项取反就是:即使不添加s但是酒酿造的过程中自己就会产生s,
所以argument中的结论:不添加s就可以随便喝!是被推翻了
再看D中说还有别的过敏原,把它取反也能推翻结论,但是相比起来e更优
所以我觉得如果没有e选项,d也是可以选的
7#
发表于 2015-8-29 01:20:07 | 只看该作者
D是一定不对的,因为这是一个fact,请看题目第一句话! Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives.
D 否定的是题目给的事实,而这种事实你是不能否定的,一旦否定了就没有意义了
8#
发表于 2015-8-29 01:35:41 | 只看该作者
这个没那么复杂吧,原文的argument限定很明确阿:people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.

其他物质导致过敏跟argument没有关系啊
9#
发表于 2015-8-29 20:46:57 | 只看该作者
ron的课,2014年feb 20th讲的最后一题是这个
不过选项不太一样而已,大致都一样
可以听一下
10#
发表于 2016-3-12 23:26:17 | 只看该作者
ansionjoe 发表于 2015-8-29 01:20
D是一定不对的,因为这是一个fact,请看题目第一句话! Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certa ...

同意!!
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, 2024-12-5 11:49
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