[問題]GWD4-40

[vegoblack]

傳說中消失的題目，
(同學寄給我的，不知道各位大大怎樣解這一題的)

Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President's recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the president's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press sectrtary's argument depends?

A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the President to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The schedule highway projects identified as wastful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the President's party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controllyed by opposition parties
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally rgarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projests.

答案是B，
我本來因為看不太懂題目，所以選B
可是後來把題目看懂了，發現B很怪耶~感覺是不相關選項，
可是卻不知道這幾個選項要怎樣解，
願聞其詳~

[Pufa]

B好像就是把第三團體的報告結果重複一次：
被認定是浪費的計畫中，大部分都不是出自於執政黨的區域。

我一開始選D....後來發現題目沒有提供相關資訊。

[vegoblack]

我覺得是E，
因為這些中立份子對於反對黨來說，通常並非是反對的來源之一，
換言之，這些中立份子是真的很中立。
可是選項中的generally感覺很不妥耶~
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally rgarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projests.

[HCA]

我選D
E不對
not regard as a objection <--無法有效支持結論(必為budget)

[maronchen1103]

我原來選E....
後來仔細看...覺得E錯
E說反對黨通常不認為這些報告是客觀的
把not去掉就很好了

相較之下....好像也只能選沒有什麼意義的B了

[Francis]

我都是用笨方法（翻譯）解題
題目是問新聞秘書的「假設」（assumption）
先來看結論：依據中立報告認為這些被取消的高速公路計畫是浪費的，（表示這邊要在放一個假設），因此（結論開始），總統是因為預算考量，而非政黨考量而要去懲罰反對黨。

(A)取消高速公路計畫並不是總統懲罰那些由反對黨控制之區域的唯一方法。→無關
(B)那些在報告中被認為浪費的已規畫好的高速公路計畫通常不是執政黨所控制的區域。→ 這是報告的假設，而非新聞秘書的假設（可能會跟D混淆）
(C)在所有未來政府將去執行的高速公路計畫中，被取消的計畫之數量佔有很高的比率。→無關
(D)比起被反對黨控制的，被執政黨所控制的被取消之高速公路計畫並沒有比較昂貴。→假設就是 反對黨所控制的剛好費用較高
(E)中立者所提的報告通常不會被反對黨引用當作客觀評估政府政策的來源。→所以表示這個中立可能不中立，可能是比較偏向執政黨。

所以我選（D）

[ariesmilla]

說說我的想法:

題目說
critic說總統反對這些project目的 :
demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties
提出證據:
這些報告裡面被cancel的90%都是那些非執政黨地區。
argument: 但是這些報告來源並非來自執政黨操控的結果
結論:所以總統並沒有針對他們做懲罰

前提:這份報告並沒有涵蓋很多執政黨所管轄的區域，
也就是說---如果有，critic就不成立了(非執政黨就不會做這樣的懷疑)，那整篇argument都會被推翻

希望我的理解沒有錯，歡迎討論

[hccill]

我還是覺得答案是(E)耶!
可以請各位大大幫我看一下嗎?

在野黨:總統一定是報復性的(vindictive), 因為刪掉我們90%的prejects
秘書:我們是根據可靠的中立人士,按照預算來刪的

前提:在野黨認為中立人士並不(objective),所以認為是報復性的, 因此, 秘書長才會提出此argument

而,(B)選項, 若是真的由中立人士來評估, 和涵蓋的地方是執政黨還是在野當就一點關係也沒有, 只要是wasteful的project都該砍,完全按照budget來做, 如此ㄧ來, critic就不會批評, 在野黨也不會認為是報復性的了

有錯還請改正

謝謝囉!

[chour]

同意B
Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the President's recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. (反對黨覺得總統刪預算是在報復)They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts.(反對黨的證據:被刪預算的建設90%=反對黨執政的地區) But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors.(獨立的審計部報告:被刪預算的=浪費的) So the president's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics(秘書結論:總統是基於預算考量).
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press sectrtary's argument depends?
B. The schedule highway projects identified as wastful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the President's party
(被認定浪費的大多數不是總統政黨執政地區-->大多數是在野黨執政地區)
有了這個assumption,才有辦法作出秘書的結論:總統是基於預算考量
如果沒有B,--->被認定浪費的大多數"是"總統政黨執政地區-->那總統就是在亂刪預算了

E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally rgarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projests.
--->題目要問的是執政黨做結論的assumption,和在野黨的態度無關

至於D,我覺得expensive=/=wasteful
例如:在交通困難的山區舖馬路is expensive rather than wasteful.

[hccill]

喔!原來如此!
感謝大大的回覆!

[nexxt0722]

個人以為,選項B的確可作為文中推論的前提,理由如下:

CASE 1

如果報告中有100個案子"被認定浪費",9個都是總統的政黨執政地區的案子,91個是在野執政地區的案子(選項B),

而總共只挑其中10個案子"刪除預算",9個是在野執政地區的案子,1個是總統的政黨執政地區的案子(依文中的90%來做舉例),

雖然如此,但總統的做法的確是基於預算考量!


CASE 2

如果報告中有100個案子"被認定浪費",91個都是總統的政黨執政地區的案子,9個是在野執政地區的案子,

一樣只挑其中10個案子"刪除預算",但9個是在野執政地區的案子,1個是總統的政黨執政地區的案子(依文中的90%來做舉例),

雖然這10個案子在報告中都被認為是浪費的,不過,很明顯的,總統的做法是在報復!

[bonus]

有其他解釋嗎？？？
還是繞不出來