feifei-37

flyinggemini

37. Editorialist: Drivers with a large number of demerit points who additionally have been convicted of a serious driving-relative offense should either be sentenced to jail or be forced to receive driver reeducation, since to do otherwise would be to allow a crime to go unpunished. Only if such drivers are likely to be made more responsible drivers should driver re-education be recommended for them. Unfortunately, it is always almost impossible to make drivers with a large number of demerit points more responsible drivers.

If the editorialist’s statements are true, they provide the most support for which one of the following?

(A) Drivers with a large number of demerit points who have been convicted of a serious driving-related offense should be sent to jail.

(B) Driver re-education offers the best chance of making drivers with a large number of demerit points responsible drivers.

(C) Driver re-education is not a harsh enough punishment for anyone convicted of a serious driving-related offense who has also

(D) Driver re-education should not be recommended for those who have committed no serious

(E) Drivers with a larger number of demerit points but no conviction for a serious driving-related offense should receive driver re-education rather than jail

请帮我指正，C错误在哪里？

我认为这里说有罚分的司机有2中惩罚1送监狱，2重新驾驶员教育，而且说了只有当这些司机有可能以后变得更加有责任感，才能去再教育。。

那C错再哪里了》

alice2292

有罚分的司机有2中惩罚1送监狱，2重新驾驶员教育，而且说了只有当这些司机有可能以后变得更加有责任感，才能去再教育。。所以他们都该进监狱 A

hedongshi

两种方式都是很严厉的惩罚，原文已经表示的很清楚了，C在这点上不符合原文的意思，但是任何方式也不能让这些司机变得更有责任感，所以还不如送到监狱去

jennifer1985

37. Editorialist: Drivers with a large number of demerit points(记作A) who additionally have been convicted of a serious driving-relative offense（记作B） should either be sentenced to jail （记作C）or be forced to receive driver reeducation（记作D）, since to do otherwise would be to allow a crime to go unpunished. Only if such drivers are likely to be made more responsible drivers（记作E） should driver re-education be recommended for them. Unfortunately, it is always almost impossible to make drivers with a large number of demerit points more responsible drivers.

根据文中的句子，现有的关系是

AB-〉C+ D（即AB-〉C，AB-〉D或者AB-〉CD）

D-〉E

A-〉E不成立

下面我们看看具体的选择项：

（A）AB-〉C，正确。因为如果AB-〉D成立，则AB->E成立，而这与A-〉E不成立矛盾，所以AB-〉D与AB-〉CD都不成立，所以选择项正确

（B）A-〉E，显然与已经条件矛盾，错误

（C）not(C+D)->allow a crime to go unpunished,文中并没有对两者的harsh进行展开或者比较

（D）not(B)->not(D),根据已经条件没有这个结论

（E）A和not(B)的交集->not(c)和D的交集，根据已经条件没有这个结论

我做的时侯就是先把A推出来然后就没有看下面的，也没有时间的说。总结来看，这种能用推导的题目一般第一个或者第二个就是答案。

欢迎讨论

crystal_z_ys

推断题，可以用费费的无关词排除法啊～

题目中只是说了 送进监狱和重新教育 是两种惩罚。 并没有提到这种惩罚是否严重

sea3ufooio

Only if such drivers are likely to be made more responsible drivers should driver re-education be recommended for them.

这句话是什么意思，能解释一下吗？

是不是可以这么理解：

drivers should driver re-education be recommended for them，Only if such drivers are likely to be made more responsible 。

如果是这样的话，那a答案就优于c了。

rongmmers

不懂，另外

drivers should driver re-education be recommended for them，

正常的语序是不是这样：drivers should be recommended driver re-education for them。

大家帮帮忙，说两句吧

宿命情缘

C.  Driver re-education is not a harsh enough punishment for anyone convicted of a serious driving-related offense who has also

这个C选项中的 who has also. 修饰的是什么？

who has also之前都理解，但是加了who has also, 变得云里雾里了。

nn帮我解释一下好吗？