[問題]gwd3-17(同gwd4-15)

[8妹]

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~~~~

[魚]

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

:)

[8妹]

謝謝魚~~

[James]

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)

[becker]

有沒有人可以解釋一下，
看完B答案還是無法理解。

[Calvin]

To becker

說說為何無法理解好嗎？思路在那�卡住了？

[becker]

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

[cocaine]

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

[hsiaoj]

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

[becker]

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。

[cocaine]

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

[James]

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

[Pudding]

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...

[yotoan]

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!!

[Calvin]

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