→ Vierro:小小淺見 本題是要找個原因去weaken說這次不能復甦 05/19 11:39
→ Vierro:A選項解釋了這原因 這OK C選項確給了一個要復甦的前提 05/19 11:40
→ Vierro:只提出前提無法weaken 因為文中也沒告訴你這次的情形有沒有 05/19 11:43
→ Vierro:符合前提 符合就可能復甦 不符合就不能 05/19 11:44
Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?
Twenty percent of the stores in Morganville's downtown shopping district will
fail within five years because they will be competing directly with the
SaveMart discount department store newly opened in East Morganville. The
downtown shopping district has lost business at this rate before and has
always completely rebounded. Confidence that it will rebound again from the
losses it is now about to suffer is ill founded, however, because __________.
A. the stores likely to be put out of business by direct competition from
SaveMart are the downtown shopping district's anchor stores, on whose ability
to draw shoppers many of the other downtown stores depend
C. when the downtown shopping district has rebounded before, the business
premises of a failed business were typically taken over by a business of the
same kind as had been there before
答案是A。A的答案的確比較好，不過想知道C為什麼不對。
我的想法是：
文中雖然說過去在鬧區的倒了的店，很快都復甦，但沒有說是什麼原因造成倒店，
說不定不是競爭造成的。接著，C說到倒了的店後來又有類似的店取代而復甦，似
乎在證明說過去的確不是競爭造成。所以如果這次是競爭造成的，就沒那麼好復甦了。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 61.230.97.231