1. GWD32-Q1

The cause of the wreck of the ship Edmund Fitzgeraid in a severe storm

on lake Superior is still unknown , when the sunken wreckage of the ves-

sel was round , searchers discovered the hull in two pieces lying close

together , The storm’s violent waves would have caused separate pieces

floating even briefly on the surface to drift apart . Therefore . the breakup

of the null can be ruled out as the cause of the sinking .

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument dipends?

1) Ships as large as the Edmund Fitzgerald rarely sink except in the

most violent weather.

2) Under water currents at the time of the storm did not move the sepa-

rated pieces of the hull together again .

     3) Pieces of the hull would have sunk more quickly than the intact hull

would have

4) The waves of the storm were not violent enough to have caused the

5) If the ship broke up before sinking , the pieces of the hull would not

have remained on the surface for very long (B)

why????help me!!

up!

我选了E

NN help!!

我也是菜鸟,但我觉的这个选项不是标准的排除他因么,和题目问题很好的结合啦,E选项无关吧~~

我的问题是storm和sink在文中是前因后果吗???

NN  please~~~~~

不是NN，不过我是这样想的：如果在风暴来袭的时候，水流没有把原本（被风暴）

分开的两段船体残骸move together. 那现在发现两段残骸彼此贴近的事实就可以说明船

不是因为遇到风暴被折断而沉没。（因为风暴应该会把两段残骸吹得更散才对） 。 若

把这个条件取非，说水流把原本分开的两段残骸又聚集到一起，那样就不能排除船也有

遇风暴沉没的可能性。

选 B 没问题，排除他因

E无关

同意B