[提问]OG11th,90题

ziwingfong

90、Keith:Compliance with new government regulations requiring the installation of smoke alarms and sprinkler systems in all theaters and arenas will xost the entertainment industry $25 billion annually. Consequently, jobs will be lost and profits diminished. Therefore, these regulations eill harm the country's economy.

       Laura:The $25 billion spent by some business will be revenue for others. Jobs and profits will be gained as welll as lost.

Laura responds to Keith by ___

(C) suggesting that Kwith's argument overlooks a mitigating consequence.

(E) agreeing with the main conclusion of Keith's argument but construing that conclusion as grounds for optimism rather than pessimism.

答案：C

我同意C做答案。但是，E选项中有一个main conclusion的提法，我想请教一下，是不是指"Consequently,.......Therefore,.........."引导了两个conclusion,其中一个是main,一个是subsidiary的？如果我的理解没错的话，那么哪个是主哪个是次呢？有没有什么规律或标志可循？

jessicafairy

Consequently, jobs will be lost and profits diminished. Therefore, these regulations eill harm the country's economy.

我觉得这些观点可以看成是conclusion，main conclusion 就是harm the country's economy

所以不可能是grounds for optimism

个人意见

rabbitbugs

怎么也瞅着答案E更顺眼。

NN给解释一下E 为什么不对？

WalkByFaith

QUOTE:

90、Keith:Compliance with new government regulations requiring the installation of smoke alarms and sprinkler systems in all theaters and arenas will cost the entertainment industry $25 billion annually. Consequently, jobs will be lost and profits diminished. Therefore, these regulations eill harm the country's economy.

       Laura:The $25 billion spent by some business will be revenue for others. Jobs and profits will be gained as welll as lost.

Laura responds to Keith by ___

(C) suggesting that Kwith's argument overlooks a mitigating consequence.

(E) agreeing with the main conclusion of Keith's argument but construing that conclusion as grounds for optimism rather than pessimism.

答案：C

我同意C做答案。但是，E选项中有一个main conclusion的提法，我想请教一下，是不是指"Consequently,.......Therefore,.........."引导了两个conclusion,其中一个是main,一个是subsidiary的？如果我的理解没错的话，那么哪个是主哪个是次呢？有没有什么规律或标志可循？

注意逻辑的演进顺序：cost 25 billion -> job will be lost and profits disminished -> harm the country's economy

cost 25 billion是论据，先推出一个中间结论，然后再由中间结论推出main conclusion (harm the country's economy, 逻辑线的最后是最终作者要下的结论)

E中说Laura agreeing with the main conclusion, 肯定错，因为Laura的意思本来就是说经济是个整体，这边损失点那边肯定赚点，不会harm the country's economy的

rabbitbugs

QUOTE:

注意逻辑的演进顺序：cost 25 billion -> job will be lost and profits disminished -> harm the country's economy

cost 25 billion是论据，先推出一个中间结论，然后再由中间结论推出main conclusion (harm the country's economy, 逻辑线的最后是最终作者要下的结论)

E中说Laura agreeing with the main conclusion, 肯定错，因为Laura的意思本来就是说经济是个整体，这边损失点那边肯定赚点，不会harm the country's economy的

明白了，主要是mitigating的含义搞错了。