M－1－17和20

bfghdggf

17. Companies considering new cost-cutting manufacturing processes often compare the projected results of making the investment against the alternative of not making the investment with costs, selling prices, and share of market remaining constant.

Which of the following, assuming that each is a realistic possibility, constitutes the most serious disadvantage for companies of using the method above for evaluating the financial benefit of new manufacturing processes?

(A) The costs of materials required by the new process might not be known with certainty.

(B) In several years interest rates might go down, reducing the interest costs of borrowing money to pay for the investment.

(C) Some cost-cutting processes might require such expensive investments that there would be no net gain for many years, until the investment was paid for by savings in the manufacturing process.

(D) Competitors that do invest in a new process might reduce their selling prices and thus take market share away from companies that do not.（D）

(E) The period of year chosen for averaging out the cost of the investment might be somewhat longer or shorter, thus affecting the result.

第一题，我选了C，是根据题目说对比cost，C正好削弱说明cost不一样是不可以比的。

看到答案，我知道它是虚弱文中的类比不对，就是投资新技术的公司和没有投资的公司不可比。

我想知道，为什么D比C好？

Questions 19-20 are based on the following.

Archaeologists seeking the location of a legendary siege and destruction of a city are excavating in several possible places, including a middle and a lower layer of a large mound. The bottom of the middle layer contains some pieces of pottery of type 3, known to be from a later period than the time of the destruction of the city, but the lower layer does not.

20. The force of the evidence cited above is most seriously weakened if which of the following is true?

(A) Gerbils, small animals long native to the area, dig large burrows into which objects can fall when the burrows collapse.

(B) Pottery of types 1 and 2, found in the lower level, was used in the cities from which, according to the legend, the besieging forces came.

(C) Several pieces of stone from a lower-layer wall have been found incorporated into the remains of a building in the middle layer.

(D) Both the middle and the lower layer show evidence of large-scale destruction of habitations by fire.（A）

(E) Bronze ax heads of a type used at the time of the siege were found in the lower level of excavation.

题目不是很理解，引用的证据的力量被削弱了，文中的evidence，是发现两层土与legend有关。

削弱证据，应该是这两层土与legend的无关。

A，找了一个桥梁，就是pottery of type 3可以从鼠洞里掉进来，不正间接加强了，pottery与中间的土无关，这层土是legend时期的吗？ 我觉的是加强

C。说两层土不一样，就削弱了，肯定有一层土不是legend时期的。 削弱。

我的想法哪里错了？请指正！

teyvhf

17，D正如你所说的，削弱了文中类比。因为题干说了一种衡量生产方法的手段，说一般衡量他是把他和其它没有采用这种方法的公司相比，染你削弱，那么只能找个选项说这个方法不成立，也就是和其它公司相比不可行。C的不好处就是根本没有说到这种方法，没说到和其它公司比有什么不好。

你说C对比cost，其实是自己和自己比，因为C说some process怎么怎么样，而没有涉及到和其他公司比，所以不能这样理解。

20，题目所给的evidence是有两个土层，中间的土层有遗迹，而下面的土层没有。那么这个evidence所支持的结论就可能是这个城市的毁灭是发生在中间土层这个年代。让你削弱这个evidence，也就是削弱这个中层的遗迹并不代表他发生在中层的年代。

A说有这么一个小动物喜欢挖土，就会使得上一土层的东西跌落到下一土层，那么考古家发现的中间土层的遗迹很可能是从再上一层的土层中发现的。所以削弱。

C说发现下层土层有些石头和中层的建筑物残骸连在一起。这对这个evidence起不到一点作用啊。这并没有削弱到这个残骸有可能不是中层土的年代啊。如果你问那有可能是低层土年代的呢，那就更不合常里了，怎么后发生的事反而跑到以前去了。

你的理解说C说了两个土层不一样，可是这并没有说不一样啊，相反，它还说了两个土层相连呢。