問題: GWD 3-16

[JJ]

Q16: Economist: Tropicorp, which constantly seeks profitable investment opportunities, has been buying and clearing sections of tropical forest for cattle ranching, although pastures newly created there become useless for grazing after just a few years. The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though greater profits can be made from rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists conclude that Tropicorp has not acted wholly out of economic self-interest. However, these environmentalists are probably wrong. The initial investment required for a successful rubber-tapping operation is larger than that needed for a cattle ranch. Furthermore, there is a shortage of workers employable in rubber-tapping operations, and finally, taxes are higher on profits from rubber tapping than on profits from cattle ranching.

In the economist's argument, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A. The first supports the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
B. The first states the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second supports that conclusion.
C. The first supports the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first states the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states the conclusion of the economist's argument.
E. Each supports the conclusion of the economist's argument.


ANS :C 關於boldfaced題 該如何因應呢?

sorry I can't make it be boldfaced, so I copy the two boldfaced sentences here.

Boldface 1: The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though "greater profits can be made from rubber tapping",which leaves the forest intact.

Boldface2: Thus, some environmentalists conclude that "Tropicorp has not acted wholly out of economic self-interest. "


Thank you

[micht]

看不到two boldfaced sentences....please edit your question^^

[nana]

我對這題的C也有疑問ㄟ~~~
Economist: Tropicorp, which constantly seeks profitable investment opportunities, has been buying and clearing sections of tropical forest for cattle ranching, although pastures newly created there become useless for grazing after just a few years. The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though greater profits can be made from rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists conclude that Tropicorp has not acted wholly out of economic self-interest. However, these environmentalists are probably wrong. The initial investment required for a successful rubber-tapping operation is larger than that needed for a cattle ranch. Furthermore, there is a shortage of workers employable in rubber-tapping operations, and finally, taxes are higher on profits from rubber tapping than on profits from cattle ranching.

In the economist’s argument, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A.The first supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
B.The first states the conclusion of the economist’s argument; the second supports that conclusion.
C.The first supports the environmentalists’ conclusion; the second states that conclusion.
D.The first states the environmentalists’ conclusion; the second states the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
E.Each supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument.


整段文章是由經濟學家所說的
第一句粗體字是說"由rubber tapping製成的話會有比較多利潤"
第二句粗體字是說環境學家下的結論是"Tropicorp公司的行為並不全然是出自於自己利益的考量"

選答案C真的很怪
不過我是先把A.B.E刪除
因為文章後段說其實因為一些因素用rubber tapping反而成本大於利潤
所以第一句粗體字絕不會是經濟學家所支持的
C.D選一個
D的後面說第二句是經濟學家下的結論必錯
到最後只能選C囉
不知道大家的意見怎樣......

[agk99]

同意，不過我想這是沒有辦法的辦法
以標準答案C為例
他可以寫成
The first supports the environmentalists’ conclusion
當然也可以再改寫成
The first is the conclusion that the economist opposed.

[nana]

嗯恩...
我好像有點想通了
The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though greater profits can be made from rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists conclude that Tropicorp has not acted wholly out of economic self-interest.

看看斜線的部分
是因為第一句greater profits can be made from rubber tapping
所以環境學家才下了第二句的結論

因此C.The first supports the environmentalists’ conclusion 是正確滴 (AA)

[James]

這題後來再來看一遍時，發現可以用兩個粗體字之間的Thus當作關鍵字來解，就出現因果關係