og12-84

wuych

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives .However, since there are several wine makers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these wine makers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A.These wine makers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine.
B.Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reactions.
C.Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.
D.Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.
E.Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these wine makers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.
答案是e。
但是我主要不明白的是e的表达，感觉好像有语法错似的。看到these wine makers之前还是明白句子意思的，但是后面居然接着in amounts large enough````天阿。那这句话到底什么意思阿，是说酒里面本身就没有sulfites还是说，酒本身就没有足以产生过敏的数量呢？请大侠赐教~~（最好解说一下这个句子·····）

bigpig

sulfites会引起某些人国民，而且是作为防腐剂被加入的，但是是不是没有加入作为防腐剂的SULFITES后的酒水就没有这种物质呢？我们不能说不加入SULFITES作为防腐剂的酒水肯定就不含有SULFITES了，只能说其含量要少于之前有加防腐剂的分量。所以最大的一个削弱的可能就是酒水本身就含有这样的物质，喝多了依然会出现过敏。E刚好弥补了这个不足，所以是ASSUMPTION。E的意思是即使酒水本身有SULFITES天然存在，喝得再多也不会出现量变导致质变使人过敏。