|
 
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 1000
- 经验
- 1000 点
- 威望
- 99 点
- 金钱
- 99 ￥
- 魅力
- 99
|
OG12-104。。
这道题捣鼓了很久，看了很多NN的解释，都作茧自缚出不来。。最后耐心再看了下OG解释，突然明白了。
104.Although the discount stores in Goreville’s central shopping district are expected to close within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five yearssince the opening of Colson’s, a non-discount department store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete with Colson’s.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakensthe argument?
(A)Many customers of Colson’s are expected to doless shopping there than they did before theSpendLess store opened.
(B)Increasingly, the stores that have opened in thecentral shopping district since Colson’s openedhave been discount stores
(C) At present, the central shopping district has asmany stores operating in it as it everhad.
(D) Over the course of the next five years, it isexpected that Goreville’s population will grow ata faster rate than it has for the past severaldecades.
(E) Many stores in the central shopping district selltypes of merchandise that are not available ateither SpendLess or Colson’s.
Case 1: Discount Store Spendless 会取代此地现存的 discount stores.
Case 2: 曾经，Non-discount Store Col 取代了此地的stores后，在倒闭店的原址上又出现了新店。
Conclusion: case 1 中也会出现倒闭后新建的店，重蹈case 2的覆辙。
Now come on, let's weaken!!
OG 认为的weaken也针对于 题目中作者自以为是的类比case 1&2上，so let's prove that the analogy by the author is wrong
也就是找case 1与case 2 在时过境迁后的不同！
case 2 中， Because Col is non-discount, so, discount stores就有市场需求了，所以后建的新店are discount stores.（否则怎么有市场?!）
OG ： If the stores that were driven out by Colson's were replaced mostly by discount stores, that suggests that the stores were replaced because of need
那么， 时过境迁，case 1 中现存的discount stores are replaced by Spendless后， 是不是还有同样的市场需求呢？
OG: .....stores were replaced because of a need that no longer exists after the opening of SpendLess.
B选项意思GMAC说的很隐晦，意思是Case 2中discount stores出现是因为相对non-discount Colson来说，有市场。
我们可推知 Case 1中SpendLess取代discount stores后已经没有discount stores的市场需求了，而且nondiscount的市场也被colson给填满了。
这道题说白了，就是 在Case 1 和 Case 2 中，对比某巨头淘汰小店后，是否都还有市场需求能让新店兴起。 明显，这道题Case 2中有， 而轮到Case 1时，已经没有need了。 |
|
