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

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 • 查看主题 - [問題]gwd3-17(同gwd4-15)

[問題]gwd3-17(同gwd4-15)

邏輯思維的訓練,考試戰場上的對決

版主: shpassion, Traver0818

[問題]gwd3-17(同gwd4-15)

帖子8妹 » 2004-11-14 00:13

Q17:

Brochure: Help conserve our city’s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.



Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion would save less than twenty dollars on a homeowner’s yearly water bills.




Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism?




Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve water by installing water-saving devices in their homes.
A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape.
A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards.
It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional landscaping.
Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other purposes combined

為什麼是選b呢
help~~~~
头像
8妹
中級會員
中級會員
 
帖子: 299
注册: 2004-10-30 09:33

Re: [問題]gwd3-17

帖子 » 2004-11-14 01:19

trish8m \$m[1]:Q17:

Brochure: Help conserve our city’s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.



Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion would save less than twenty dollars on a homeowner’s yearly water bills.




Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism?




1.Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve water by installing water-saving devices in their homes.
2.A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape.
3.A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards.
4.It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional landscaping.
5.Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other purposes combined

為什麼是選b呢
help~~~~


article
B :提共了一個方法 : water-conserving landscape來解決水的問題
C :節省下來的水費不足以cover water-conserving landscape的花費

題目 : argue C

1.提出其他的保水方案 ,離題 ,不相關
3.討論有沒有yard ,離題,不相關
4.說明新方法沒有比較貴 , 態度不對 ,無法weaken==> 有沒有比較便宜呢 ???
5.討論某些個案的用水量,離題,部相關

:)
白金會員
白金會員
 
帖子: 2290
注册: 2004-08-24 19:24

帖子8妹 » 2004-11-14 07:44

謝謝魚~~
头像
8妹
中級會員
中級會員
 
帖子: 299
注册: 2004-10-30 09:33

帖子James » 2004-12-09 14:49

謝謝說明
我本來看完題目,預期的答案會是說省水才是重點,(省水有可能會花錢,但為了省水該花的錢還是要花),因為一開頭談的主題是幫忙省水
你想想看當宣導節約用水時,考量的應該是如何省水,而不是水費沒省多少吧?
(回想去年北台灣缺水的時候就應該可以了解吧)
Aim high, soaring; aim low, sorry.
Don't pray for tasks equal to your powers; pray for powers equal to your tasks.
James
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
帖子: 959
注册: 2004-10-28 01:55

帖子becker » 2005-03-26 23:18

有沒有人可以解釋一下,
看完B答案還是無法理解。
becker
初級會員
初級會員
 
帖子: 29
注册: 2004-12-09 17:28

帖子Calvin » 2005-03-26 23:28

To becker

說說為何無法理解好嗎?思路在那�卡住了?
有一些無聲的話語,只有尋夢的人,彼此才聽得懂
头像
Calvin
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
帖子: 1155
注册: 2004-12-28 02:46

帖子becker » 2005-03-27 00:32

答案B說
一般的landscape比water-conserving landscape花更多的錢在肥料和除草劑上。
這跟criticism講的換到water-conserving landscape一年省不到20塊美金有什麼關係,還是我哪裡搞錯了,麻煩幫我理一下頭緒
becker
初級會員
初級會員
 
帖子: 29
注册: 2004-12-09 17:28

帖子cocaine » 2005-03-27 00:46

Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism?

請問這句是指支持criticism言論還是要去weaken criticism??
我是解讀成支持criticism言論..所以才會選到B
因為criticism說
變換庭院景觀省水不明顯
選項B是說變換庭院景觀是省其他藥劑費用.
所以B是支持說省水不明顯,是其他花費變少了.

請多多指導一下
努力,才有甜蜜的果實
头像
cocaine
高級會員
高級會員
 
帖子: 502
注册: 2004-12-23 23:53
地址: Mar

帖子hsiaoj » 2005-03-27 02:29

cocaine \$m[1]:Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism?

請問這句是指支持criticism言論還是要去weaken criticism??
我是解讀成支持criticism言論..所以才會選到B
因為criticism說
變換庭院景觀省水不明顯
選項B是說變換庭院景觀是省其他藥劑費用.
所以B是支持說省水不明顯,是其他花費變少了.

請多多指導一下


我覺得是Weaken耶

因為 criticism主要的論點是 conversion省不了錢,因為conversion每年省不到20塊水費

B論點則點出,conversion可以節省fertilizer, herbicide 等其他費用
因此也就weaken了criticism的論點
头像
hsiaoj
初級會員
初級會員
 
帖子: 60
注册: 2005-01-30 00:42

帖子becker » 2005-03-27 11:17

看完我也覺得是在問weaken,
因為criticism講話沒有提到省水的部份,都是在講錢的部份,他的結論是不會省錢,
所以找個答案是會省錢,這樣就可以反駁他了。
becker
初級會員
初級會員
 
帖子: 29
注册: 2004-12-09 17:28

帖子cocaine » 2005-03-27 23:55

becker \$m[1]:看完我也覺得是在問weaken,
因為criticism講話沒有提到省水的部份,都是在講錢的部份,他的結論是不會省錢,
所以找個答案是會省錢,這樣就可以反駁他了。


恩..明白了..應該是weaken.
甘謝
努力,才有甜蜜的果實
头像
cocaine
高級會員
高級會員
 
帖子: 502
注册: 2004-12-23 23:53
地址: Mar

帖子James » 2005-05-27 17:42

the best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism
題目的意思會看成兩種:
1. a rebuttal of the criticism 等於C:..., 而 ...=反駁B
=C的反駁(C反駁B),而不是反駁C
2.題目是反駁C:...,則可接受答案B
Aim high, soaring; aim low, sorry.
Don't pray for tasks equal to your powers; pray for powers equal to your tasks.
James
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
帖子: 959
注册: 2004-10-28 01:55

帖子Pudding » 2005-05-28 03:17

CR裡的雙重甚至多重否定很討厭, 稍不留神就繞進去了... 要特別小心...
"為此我更加堅信, 這個世界上的人是會分'掛'的. 假如你發現自己跟某種族群成為'一掛', 你會驚訝自己的生活細節中, 原來跟他們有那麼多的相像; 而隨著廝混的日子增長, 你們對人生的品味大約也就會越來越接近. 透過這樣的接近, 差不多也就能分享一生了吧."
头像
Pudding
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
帖子: 762
注册: 2004-12-02 09:42

[問題]gwd3-17

帖子yotoan » 2005-06-16 23:01

抱歉..各位大大..
看了大家精闢的解釋..
我還是繞不出來.. ;''(

我覺得cocaine大大原先說的support criticism好像比較有道理耶~~
provides the best basis for (a rebuttal of the criticism)
即我可以將一整個a rebuttal of criticism看作是c的論點嗎??

請指教..謝謝!!
yotoan
初級會員
初級會員
 
帖子: 56
注册: 2005-03-02 00:28

帖子Calvin » 2005-06-16 23:23

不,這種問法是在找weaken

provides ( the best basisi for a rebuttal ) of the criticism

所以是找Criticism的反駁

FYI
有一些無聲的話語,只有尋夢的人,彼此才聽得懂
头像
Calvin
黃金會員
黃金會員
 
帖子: 1155
注册: 2004-12-28 02:46

下一页

回到 GMAT Critical Reasoning 考區

在线用户

正在浏览此版面的用户:没有注册用户 和 2 位游客