Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/formosam/public_html/phpBB3/includes/bbcode.php on line 112
FormosaMBA 傷心咖啡店 • 檢視主題 - GWD4-Q14

GWD4-Q14

邏輯思維的訓練,考試戰場上的對決

版主: shpassion, Traver0818

GWD4-Q14

文章QQcandy » 2004-09-04 21:01

Q14:
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.

B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.

C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.

D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.

E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.


Why the answer is D ? I chose C *-)
頭像
QQcandy
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
文章: 1298
註冊時間: 2004-08-24 19:05

文章訪客 » 2004-09-05 17:27

I agree with you. The answer is C.
Then, I check the GWD-key's answer is C not D.
The quatlity befoe 1930 =the quality after 1930=>weak The quatlity befoe 1930 >the quality after 1930
訪客
 

文章QQcandy » 2004-09-05 17:39

咦 ? 我又看了一次, 兩份答案都是 D 吶 @@ so maybe we are correct :P
頭像
QQcandy
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
文章: 1298
註冊時間: 2004-08-24 19:05

文章QQcandy » 2004-09-07 22:50

Mike...

I discussed this case with other friends but they don't think we are right...

As it mentioned that the buildings after 1930 are with better quality because they are with skillful carpenters. If the answer is C, "material quality is same before 1930 and after 1930" doesn't weaken the skillful carpenters...as the carpenters are key factors to have the buildings w/better quality from the argument....


Mike, your comment ?
頭像
QQcandy
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
文章: 1298
註冊時間: 2004-08-24 19:05

文章訪客 » 2004-09-09 21:03

I change my mind.
The answer is D but my reason is different from cd.
before 1930=>the quality of original carpentry in a building is better.
after 1930=>the quality of original carpentry in a building is worse.
If D is true, it implies that 1930 is not key fator to evaluate the better or worse quality of original carpentry.

Can you accept my analysis?
訪客
 

文章QQcandy » 2004-09-09 21:57

mikelee \$m[1]:I change my mind.
The answer is D but my reason is different from cd.
before 1930=>the quality of original carpentry in a building is better.
after 1930=>the quality of original carpentry in a building is worse.
If D is true, it implies that 1930 is not key fator to evaluate the better or worse quality of original carpentry.

Can you accept my analysis?


Hmm...Mike..I'm not sure what you meant of key factor to evaluate the quality of original carpentry.

But I did some further discussions with my friends, they thought the possible explanation of D is ...

Before 1930 the building with good and bad carpentry did both exist, however, as choice D mentioned, " the better carpentry will be less likely to fall in disuse. " so the building with bad carpency will be damaged/gone very soon after 1930. So it will leave the building w/better carpency instead after 1930. Thus, what the writer said is wrong....

the key point is disuse makes the building w/bad carpency finished, not the time 1930. Is this same as your point of key factor to evaluate .... ?
頭像
QQcandy
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
文章: 1298
註冊時間: 2004-08-24 19:05

文章訪客 » 2004-09-10 08:44

the key point is disuse makes the building w/bad carpency finished, not the time 1930. Is this same as your point of key factor to evaluate .... ?[/quote]

Yeap!!That's what I mean.
訪客
 

文章QQcandy » 2004-09-10 11:53

good !!! 這樣我們取得共識了 :D
頭像
QQcandy
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
文章: 1298
註冊時間: 2004-08-24 19:05

文章 » 2004-09-13 04:09

QQcandy \$m[1]:
the key point is disuse makes the building w/bad carpency finished, not the time 1930. Is this same as your point of key factor to evaluate .... ?


(Y)
白金會員
白金會員
 
文章: 2290
註冊時間: 2004-08-24 19:24

文章wenlovying » 2005-06-17 22:23

因為我英文能力尚差拉 以上幾篇英文解說有點看不懂,後來跟自己讀書會討論,
把以上幾篇英文歸納成中文簡述如下,給跟我依樣還在摸索的人參考

題目的主要agrument在clear之後 :1930之前的工匠因該時代所遺留的建築物跟1930後比為高水準的作品 ,故推論1930前工匠之手藝較1930後的好

僅D可WEAKEN該ARGUMENT,因為D選項說手藝好的工匠的作品不會損壞。
(ETS很壞的就是換句話說 其實他要說的是1930之後爛工匠們的作品早就倒光光了,但題目出這樣我門一下就答對了!)

連串起來之所以後來的GUIDEBOOK WRITER看到的都是好作品 並不能推論1930前的工匠手藝都是同樣的高水準,而是因為1930前的爛工匠建築都毀掉了,剩下1930之前好工匠的不朽之作,若拿1930之后的好壞工匠的平均作品來比當然會遜色。並非題目的原來推論1930之後的工匠手藝差。
頭像
wenlovying
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 64
註冊時間: 2005-03-16 23:57

文章daydream » 2005-10-15 14:57

wenlovying \$m[1]:

僅D可WEAKEN該ARGUMENT,因為D選項說手藝好的工匠的作品不會損壞。
(ETS很壞的就是換句話說 其實他要說的是1930之後爛工匠們的作品早就倒光光了,但題目出這樣我門一下就答對了!)


結論句說==> 1930年前造的旅館比1930之後的旅館木工精緻, 是因為1930年以前的木工手藝大大的比1930年之後的木匠手藝好.

D 項的意思是說, 越是被認為是工藝佳作的建築物, 越不會淪落到被不當使用或任意破壞的地步..

So. D weaken 了原本的論點, ==> 並非是手藝有差別, 是人們對於佳作愛惜的態度造成現今旅館建築內的差異.
頭像
daydream
新手會員
新手會員
 
文章: 16
註冊時間: 2005-10-02 14:35

文章hccill » 2006-08-05 15:15

請問各位大大,
(E)是不是一個Support的選項?
因為學徒的學習期間變短了, 所以手藝不精,也就support題目了?

另外(C)是不是也是一個support的選項呢?
因為, 1930年之前和之後的工人用的材料品質都差不多, 而1930年之前的工人的房屋品質卻比1930之後的好, 所以也就支持題目的論點-手藝較好?

謝謝!!
工作是這樣子低: 做事一半, 做人一半!
hccill
中級會員
中級會員
 
文章: 174
註冊時間: 2005-12-22 14:43
來自: 阿波星球

文章acharlie » 2006-08-05 17:22

hccill \$m[1]:請問各位大大,
(E)是不是一個Support的選項?
因為學徒的學習期間變短了, 所以手藝不精,也就support題目了?

另外(C)是不是也是一個support的選項呢?
因為, 1930年之前和之後的工人用的材料品質都差不多, 而1930年之前的工人的房屋品質卻比1930之後的好, 所以也就支持題目的論點-手藝較好?

謝謝!!


試著講看看:
(C)是排除他因的支持 在材料條件不變下,支持1930以前的人技術比較好
(E)感覺像是直接找理由支持1930以前的人技術比較好

---------------
open discussion
acharlie
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 55
註冊時間: 2006-02-08 15:01

急!!(support的觀念)

文章pinky9955487 » 2006-12-13 05:38

請問大家
1.C是不是assume
 assume是不是support中最嚴格的一種
2.E是支持嗎
題意:之前的品質比較好--->之前的技術.照顧比較好
支持是要跟前面(之前的品質比較好)也有關係
還是像E,只要支持結論(之前的技術.照顧比較好)就可稱為支持
pinky9955487
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 40
註冊時間: 2006-04-28 13:17

Re: 急!!(support的觀念)

文章keane0727 » 2007-02-15 11:08

pinky9955487 \$m[1]:請問大家
1.C是不是assume
 assume是不是support中最嚴格的一種
2.E是支持嗎
題意:之前的品質比較好--->之前的技術.照顧比較好
支持是要跟前面(之前的品質比較好)也有關係
還是像E,只要支持結論(之前的技術.照顧比較好)就可稱為支持


1.C不是assumption。 正確的assumption取非後必能否定原題因推果之論證,但C取非為1930年前本工可用的建材跟1930後差異相當大;差異相當大有可能是1930年前的建材品質比1930年後差很多。如此一來原題因推果依然成立

2. E既不支持也不減弱。E只是說1930年後的木匠實習學藝的時間縮短,但未必代表1930年後的木匠技藝較差
keane0727
中級會員
中級會員
 
文章: 134
註冊時間: 2006-05-24 16:57


回到 GMAT Critical Reasoning 考區

誰在線上

正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者:沒有註冊會員 和 9 位訪客