[問題]GWD 30-Q28

[bonus]

Q28:
In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whiplash injuries sustained in automobile accidents, reports of having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent as they are in countries where whiplash is not covered. Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant a conclusion that has been drawn by some commentators: that in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious. Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance does not include compensation for whiplash, people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A. The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
B. The first is claim that has been used to support a position that the argument accepts; the second is a position that the argument rejects.
C. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning the accuracy of the finding.
D. The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning one alleged implication.
E. The first is a finding, the explanation of which is at issue in the argument; the second is an objection that has been raised against the explanation that the argument defends.

Answer: D

[習慣仔]

Can you elaborate further your question?

First BF: fact
2nd Sentence: implication
3rd Sentence or Second BF: intermediate conclusion after rebuttal of the 2nd sentence...
Last sentence: conclusion

[小花]

Q28:
In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whiplash injuries sustained in automobile accidents, reports of having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent as they are in countries where whiplash is not covered. Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant a conclusion that has been drawn by some commentators: that in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious. Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance does not include compensation for whiplash, people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A. The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
B. The first is claim that has been used to support a position that the argument accepts; the second is a position that the argument rejects.
C. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning the accuracy of the finding.
D. The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning one [b]alleged implication.
E. The first is a finding, the explanation of which is at issue in the argument; the second is an objection that has been raised against the explanation that the argument defends.

Answer: D[/b]

D選項中
請問哪裡有alleged implication?

[dibert8]

應該是這一句: in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.

[angela_yj0424]

1st與2nd boldface不同國，因2nd boldface前有nevertheless.
A (1st: 前面對了，是argument disputes; 2nd: 變與1st同國了──錯)；
B (1st: the argument accepts—錯。有轉折，證明後面的作者觀點反駁前面的；2nd: argument rejects錯，應該是accepts)
C:沒有反駁,即1st與2nd同國－錯
D:at issue爭議中－對；2nd :reached by the argument－對（argument表作者觀點）
E: 1st: at issue—對; 2nd: objection that …against the 1st that the argument defends---變支持1st的explanation了－錯