在线词典,在线翻译

2012年1月1日更新作文机经AA部分(十七)

所属:其他考试 作者:cwf1986 阅读:1906 次 评论:0 条 [我要评论]  [+我要收藏]

小编摘要:海词为您收集GMAT机经,充足的准备是考G成功的最重要的一步。

  24. V1.席栀 :argument 一个Apex公司说给员工还是管理层每人家里买个电脑就能增加他们在家工作的时间。去年他们公司productivity增加了。所以其他公司也可以学习这个方法来增加员工的工作时间并增加效益。

  V2. zengshukun : 一个公司给员工发放了home computer and access to working resource 以后其productivity提高了15%,因为员工可以在回家以后工作,所以其他公司也都应该给员工发computer和access to working resources。

  V3. tinatomoyan: 讲的是一个Apex Manufacturing给它的Managers home computers,让他们在家里就能access data files, 然后他们的productivity上升了,因为他们在家里工作。于是作者说其他公司为了提升profits,也要给他们的employees home computers.

  考古:

  原题:97. The following appeared as part of an article in a computer magazine.

  ”A year ago Apex Manufacturing bought its managers computers for their homes and paid for telephone connections so that the managers could access Apex computers and data files from home after normal business hours. Since last year, productivity at Apex has increased by 15 percent. Other companies can learn from the success at Apex: given home computers and access to company resources, employees will work additional hours at home and thereby increase company profits.”

  一年前Apex制造公司给它的经理们在家买了电脑,并支付电话费,这样他们就可以在工作时间以外从家里连接到Apex的电脑和数据文件。从去年开始,Apex的生产能力增长了15%。其他公司可以借鉴Apex的成功,提供家用电脑和到公司资源的链接,雇员会在家里加班并提高公司利润。

  思路:

  Notice that only managers were bought computers by Apex, whose productivity indeed rose 15 percent as the result. It is different from the assumption made in the article, which stated that if all employees were brought computers, they would work extra hours at home. Managers ≠ all employees

  A. This argument suffers from a fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

  B. Next, the author fails to provide any evidence that installing home computers for managers really led to the increase of Apex’s productivity.

  l home access 和increase productivity因果关系错误

  l 就算有关系,productity增加也不代表profits会增加

  l 就算以上都对,用去年来推今后也是错的

  l hasty generalization。有两个,一是把apex推广到所有公司,二是把managers推广到了所有employees

  范文:

  In this article the author attributes Apex Manufacturing’s 15 percent increase in productivity over the past year to its decision to equip its manager with computers and paid telephone connections for their homes so that they would access company computers and files from home after normal business hours. On the basis of Apex’s experience the author recommends that other companies follow Apex’s example and provide computers and access to company resources to their employees. The author believes that such a policy would increase productivity and profits for other companies, just as it did for Apex. The author’s line of reasoning is questionable for several reasons.

  First, the author assumes that Apex’s increase in productivity is due to its equipping its managers with home computers and access to company resources. However, the only evidence offered in support of this claim is the fact that Apex’s increase in productivity occurred after the home computers and after-hours (adv. 工作完毕后) access was provided. Unfortunately, this evidence is insufficient to establish the causal claim in question. While temporal precedence is one of the conditions required to establish a causal relationship between two events, by itself it is not a sufficient condition. Consequently, it is possible that Apex’s increase in productivity is not related to its decision to equip its managers with computers and after-hours access in the fashion required by the author’s argument.

  Second, the author assumes that Apex and other companies are sufficiently similar to warrant a conclusion based on an analogy between them. Even if we accept the view that Apex’s increase in productivity was brought about by its policy of enabling its managers to work from home, differences between Apex and other companies could nullify this result. Lacking detailed information about Apex and the other companies in question it is difficult to assess the author’s conclusion.

  In conclusion, the author’s argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to provide additional evidence for the claim that Apex’s decision to provide its managers with home computers and access to company resources was responsible for its increase in productivity. Furthermore, it would be necessary to show that Apex and other companies are sufficiently similar to justify the analogy between them.

  以上就是2012年1月1日更新的GMAT作文机经AA部分,考生可以适当借鉴,并通过练习来掌握GMAT作文的解题规律,从而顺利通过GMAT考试。

2
2012-05-25 16:55 编辑:cwf1986
分享到:
关注海词微博:
发表评论:
表达一些您的想法吧!已有0条评论>>
登录,再发表评论
文明上网,理性发言!
您可能还感兴趣的文章:
  • [其他考试]美国大学GRE和GMAT要求

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology GRE: 1353 GMAT:720   Stanford University (CA) GRE: 1354 GMAT:720   University of California–Berkeley GRE: 1353 GMAT:707   Georgia In
  • [其他考试]【考试介绍】GMAT考试介绍

    GMAT考试是美国管理专业招收研究生委员会主办和负责指导的考试, 其英文全称是Graduate Management Admission Test。GMAT考试的科目包括会计学、经济学、管理学、普通管理、生产管理、行政管理、
>>精华推荐阅读
热门评论文章