[求助]OG11-101(看不懂OG解释)

OG11-101

For a trade embargo against a particular country to succeed,a high degree of both international accord and ability to prevent goods from entering or leaving that country must be sustained . a total blockade of Patria’s ports is necessary to an embargo,but such an action would be likely to cause international discord over the embargo

Most strongly support which of the following conclusions.

A the balance of opinion is likely to favor Patria in the event of a blockade

B as long as international opinion is unanimously against patria, a trade embargo is likely to succeed.

C a naval blockade of patria’s port would ensure that no goods enter or leave patria.

D
any trade embargo against patria would be likely to fail at some time (答案)

E for a blockade of patia’s port to be successful,international opinion must be unanimous

我怎么也看不明白在OG对B和E的解释中, 那个contradicts分别指什么?!(OG解释如下)

B This conclusion contradicts the given information.

E This statement contradicts the given information and cannot be a justifiable conclustion.

高级会员

Rank: 4

精华: 0
积分: 893
经验: 893 点
威望: 0 点
金钱: 1365 ￥
魅力: 523

2^#

quanquanwins发表于 2008-4-16 21:26 | 只看该作者

I think, contradicts in B means the logic got reversed. Since the statement says Embargo -> International Accordance + Blockade, but B says IA -> Embargo.

contradicts in E probably means: it contradicts the premise (which can't be broken ------ a total blockade of Patria’s ports is necessary to an embargo,but such an action would be likely to cause international discord over the embargo ------this indicates Embargo->Blockade->Inverse(International Accordance) while E says, Blockade -> IA which contradicts Blockade->Inverse(IA).

TOP

高级会员

Rank: 4

精华: 0
积分: 893
经验: 893 点
威望: 0 点
金钱: 1365 ￥
魅力: 523

3^#

quanquanwins发表于 2008-4-17 07:05 | 只看该作者

or B could mean, as premise states that Embargo -> blockade-> Inverse(IA) then IA-> inverse(blockade)->inverse(Embargo), contradicts B which says IA->Embargo.

TOP