扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2012-CR-58
The cause of the wreck of the ship Edmund Fitzgerald in a severe storm on Lake Superior is still unknown. When the sunken wreckage of the vessel was found, searchers discovered the hull in two pieces lying close together. The storm's violent waves would have caused separate pieces floating even briefly on the surface to drift apart. Therefore, the breakup of the hull can be ruled out as the cause of the sinking.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
Ships as large as the Edmund Fitzgerald rarely sink except in the most violent weather.
Underwater currents at the time of the storm did not move the separated pieces of the hull together again.
Pieces of the hull would have sunk more quickly than the intact hull would have.
The waves of the storm were not violent enough to have caused the ship to break up on the surface.
If the ship broke up before sinking, the pieces of the hull would not have remained on the surface for very long.
P2: the hull in two pieces lying close together.
船体分成两片，靠得很近。
P2: ∵ The【 storm】's violent waves 【would have 猜测】caused separate pieces floating even briefly on the surface to 【drift apart】.
因为【风暴】的猛烈海浪→ 即使是短暂地漂浮在表面上的碎片也会分开。（P2（风暴分开了船体的碎片的原因）和P1（船体没分开的事实）是相反的）
C：Therefore, the breakup of the hull can be ruled out as the cause of the sinking.
因此，可以排除船体破裂是沉没的原因。
assumption
选项B（√）
Underwater currents at the time of the【storm】 did 【not否定】 move the separated pieces of the hull together 【again】.
【风暴】发生时的水下水流并没有将分离的船体再次移动在一起。
取非后：【风暴】发生时的水下水流并将分离的船体再次移动在一起（imagine that 杠精说：谁告诉你风暴只能分开船体，今天让我告诉你“风暴也可以把船体靠在一起，看！就是因为船体破裂后，船才沉没，船体的碎片就算一开始被风暴吹风开，但后来风暴又把碎片吹回到了一起”，所以不可能排除船体破裂是沉船的原因）
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论