→ Chantalparis:謝謝!~ 06/02 13:26
※ 引述《tootoobenee (A級垂耳兔)》之銘言：
: ※ 引述《Chantalparis (Chantal)》之銘言：
: : Exports of United States wood pulp will rise considerably during this year.
: : The reason for the rise is that the falling value of the dollar will make it
: : cheaper for paper manufacturers in Japan and Western Europe to buy American
: : wood pulp than to get it from any other source.
: 這題的推論點在paper manufacturers in Japan and Western Europe to buy American
: wood pulp
: cheap(這裡在提幹中是已成立的條件) ---- buy American wood pulp
: : Which of the following is an assumption made in drawing the conclusion above?
: : 正確:(B) The quality of the wood pulp produced in the United States would be
: : adequate for the purposes of Japanese and Western European paper manufacturers.
: Assumption是對結論句的必要條件，若品質不適合，就會影響 buy American wood pulp
: 這個推論
: : 疑問:(C) Paper manufacturers in Japan and Western Europe would prefer to use wood
: : pulp produced in the United States if cost were not a factor.
: 的確如你判斷的if cost were not a factor是有問題的，因為cost在原文題幹中已經是
: Premise(討論一件事的前提)，意即討論是否日本和歐洲會去買美國產品都是在"考量成
: 本背景之下"，若用與現在事實相反假設不考量cost因素，並沒有在討論背景之下(可以算
: 是與前提相違背)
: 另外C取非變成would not prefer，基本上這個句變成討論"主觀"的偏好，套美加某位邏輯
: 老師的名言，AT選項是客觀陳述，主觀偏好無法對結論句產生影響
這裡個人有些不同看法：對於
Paper manufacturers in Japan and Western Europe would prefer to use
wood pulp produced in the United States if cost were not a factor.
可從 were 看出，這句話並不是條件句，而是與現在相反的假設語氣。
而按照假設語氣的分析方式，上文意思是
「由於『現在』價格『是』個因素，所以歐日廠商『現在不』喜歡美國紙漿。」
所以(C)的原文，確實「有」考慮價格，而非不考慮。
至於(C)不能當假設的理由，乃因為原文結論是
Exports of United States wood pulp will rise considerably.
美國紙漿出口『將』大幅增加。
而從(C)的文字當中，完全無法得知「將來」歐日廠商對於購買美國紙漿與否的
判斷準則。同時若想利用「反駁的反駁」法，也行不通。因為(C)整句只侷限在
對目前狀況的陳述，無法用來推翻將來的情況。故而(C)錯。
大家參考看看囉
: : 不清楚(C)錯誤點除了Prefer外,還有什麼判別地方,將之取非後也怪怪的,只是感覺
: : if cost were not a factor此句應該是有問題,但說不出所以然..
: : 感謝~.
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 114.24.57.66