請注意提幹所說: The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that --> 這 argument 容易遭受批評，因為其論點相信何者可能發生? 意思是，這並不完全是一個 weaken 題 而是應該要找 argument 當中 "自然" 或 "自我矛盾" 的錯誤 題目說高腳椅有兩個優點 1. 顧客喜歡坐高腳椅看名人 2. 做高腳椅的，通常不會坐太久 (周轉率高對商家有利) 但這兩個論點很明顯有矛盾的情形，想看名人應該不會想要提早走。 這就是答案 (C) 所表述。 Ron 解釋在此: https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/post5683.html The key word is CRITICISM: you're looking for something that's WRONG with the argument. The OA, which is C, is just that: the 'generalization about lingering' is the idea that people won't sit at tall tables for as long as at short tables. Yet, according to the passage, the customers at tall tables will probably be there to gawk at celebrities, so they will probably stay for a long time - the 'exception' mentioned in this answer choice. 至於答案 (D) 我認為 Dustin 提供了一個不錯的 idea profit 的確是要考慮到成本，在 Ron 論點裡面也的確有提到 在這個人補充認為不可選的原因有 2 1. 如果時間待的短，金額付的少，但這並不能說"比例上"有變少 for example: 如果時間少一半，但付的金額確有 8 成， 那總體 profit 還是會上升 2. 這並不是 argument 本身自相矛盾的問題，不是一個好答案 ※ 引述《si4410dy (si4410dy)》之銘言： : 17. (26864-!-item-!-188;#058&003368) : At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height tables. : However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the : Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating : would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on : stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height : tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high : tables and stools, its profits would increase. : The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason : to believe that it is likely that : (A) some celebrities come to the Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to : sit at the tall tables if they were available : (B) the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the Hollywood : compensates for the longer time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals : (C) a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would : be an exception to the generalization about lingering : (D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically : order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer : (E) with enough tall tables to accommodate all the Hollywood's customers : interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tabl : OA:C : 想請問這題的D選項 : 花較少時間吃飯通常點的較便宜，反之亦然 : 為何不能這樣解: : 部分換成高腳桌椅的點的變成較便宜所以profit不會increase : 這樣感覺像否定因有他因(高的點的較便宜)的weaken : 腦袋轉不過來 麻煩指教 感謝~~~ -- Donz + Keewee 11月四週速成實力班: http://ppt.cc/2oGt Donz GMAT FB: https://www.facebook.com/groups/DonzGMAT ----

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 1.161.147.118 ※ 文章網址: http://webptt.com/m.aspx?n=bbs/GMAT/M.1415891279.A.142.html ※ 編輯: ndxica (1.161.147.118), 11/13/2014 23:15:20