[問題]OG31

[haijung]

(以下OG31題雖然討論裡有此題號，但是點進去卻是131題。所以在此提出，請大大幫忙，並請版主修改討論內的題號)
Some who favor putting government enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national part system, which is now run by the governement.

Which if the followings, assming that it is a realistic possibility argues most strogly against the suggestion above?

(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as memebers and eventually take over their leadership.
(B) Private environemtnatl groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and the general public.
(D) There might be competition among pricate environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
(E) Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private encironmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.

ANS. A
我可以了解答案A的論點。但是我一開始選了答案B，OG上對(B)的解釋我認為不是很清楚，它只說了 "Choice B indicates the potential for disagreement among various private environmental groups, but it does not suggest that disagreements could not be resolved" 我覺得似乎有點牽強耶，可以請大大幫忙解惑嗎? 謝謝~

[haijung]

自己頂一下~~ 有沒有好心大大可以幫忙~~

[維尼]

為了好懂 先把題目簡化成推論是 環保團體比較好
問最佳反對答案
而答案B意指環保團體不總是(=有時)比較好
是個不夠有效的攻擊囉 :)

[小柔]

(以下OG31題雖然討論裡有此題號，但是點進去卻是131題。所以在此提出，請大大幫忙，並請版主修改討論內的題號)
Some who favor putting government enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national part system, which is now run by the governement.

Which if the followings, assming that it is a realistic possibility argues most strogly against the suggestion above?

(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as memebers and eventually take over their leadership.
(B) Private environemtnatl groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and the general public.
(D) There might be competition among pricate environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
(E) Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private encironmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.

ANS. A
我可以了解答案A的論點。但是我一開始選了答案B，OG上對(B)的解釋我認為不是很清楚，它只說了 "Choice B indicates the potential for disagreement among various private environmental groups, but it does not suggest that disagreements could not be resolved" 我覺得似乎有點牽強耶，可以請大大幫忙解惑嗎? 謝謝~

B指的是這些民營環保團體對於如何保育可能無法達成共識
而OG解釋是說 這些歧見不見得不能解決
所以其實大家雖然有歧見 但還是往目標走 而非對環境有負面影響
這是我的想法 給你參考喔 ^_^

[dibert8]

(B) 有個武斷字眼 best, 而題目只要 better 就行

[pimi]

請問A選項如何翻譯阿???
(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as memebers and eventually take over their leadership.

[dibert8]

Those {seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks} might join the private environmental groups as memebers and eventually take over their leadership.
那些尋求費限制以掠奪自然資源的人,可能加入私有環境團體成為會員,最終奪取主導權.