CXD逻辑13,N哥请进!

supervivian

Despite the fact that the health-inspection procedures for catering establishments are more stringent than those for ordinary restaurants,more of the cases of food poisoning reported to the city health department were brought on by banquets served by catering services than were brought on by restaurant meals.
Which of the following,if true,helps explain the apparent paradox in the statement above?
a) A significantly larger number of people eat in restaurants than attend catered banquets in any given time period.
b) Catering establishments know how many people they expect to serve,and therefore are less likely than restaurants to have,and server,leftover food,a major source of food poisoning.
c) Many restaurants provide catering services for banquets in addition to serving individual meals.
d) The number of reported food-poisoning cased at catered banquets is unrelated to whether the meal is served on the caterer's or the client's premises.
e) People are unlikely to make a connection between a meal they have eaten and a subsequent illness unless the illness strikes a group who are in communication with one another
用排除法选出了E，也是正确答案，但究其含义来说，为什么E是正确的？

reginechen

题目中的矛盾现象是:

对包办酒席的机构的卫生检查要比一般的餐馆更为严格
按照正常的逻辑来说,我们会直接推出------食物中毒应该由餐馆的饭菜引起而不是包办酒席服务的服务部门

可原文的结论是:
上报到市卫生部门的食物中毒案例大多是由包办酒席服务的服务部门引起而非餐馆饭菜.
E选项:
人们不大可能将其所吃过的饭与之后得的病联系在一起,除非一群互相有联系的人都得这病
答案必须使原文相矛盾的事物不矛盾或都是真的
E选项成立   由于人们不大可能将其所吃过的饭与之后得的病联系在一起,所以排除了多数人们由于餐馆饭菜导致食物中毒而上报市卫生部门的可能性,这样原文的结论就显得合情合理

supervivian

有一个疑问，包办酒席服务,它也只能在餐馆里开展的
catering services 和restaurant meals一个是虚的服务，一个是实实在在的饭菜
本身就是不同类的事情,怎么比较

voleroiseauer

我理解catering是外包服务，不是虚拟的，可以是在某些展会或者会务现场，也可以在家里，但不一定在餐馆吧。

supervivian

还是不明白，常识中让人中毒的meal而不是service

iaboutyou

retauratns meals 是和 banquet 对应的不是和catering services， catering services 提供banquet。