题目信息
 Behind every book review there are two key figures:
a book review editor and a reviewer. Editors decide
whether a book is reviewed in their publication, when
the review appears, how long it is, and who writes the review.
  When many periodicals feature the same books,
this does not prove that the editors of different
periodicals have not made individual decisions.
Before publication, editors receive news releases and
printer's proofs of certain books, signifying that the
publishers will make special efforts to promote these
books. They will be heavily advertised and probably
be among the books that most bookstores order in
quantity. Not having such books reviewed might give
the impression that the editor was caught napping,
whereas too many reviews of books that readers will
have trouble finding in stores would be inappropriate.
Editors can risk having a few of the less popular
titles reviewed, but they must consider what will be
newsworthy, advertised, and written about elsewhere.
  If these were the only factors influencing editors,
few books that stand little chance of selling well would
ever be reviewed. But editors feel some concern
about what might endure, and therefore listen to
literary experts. A generation ago, a newspaper used
a brilliant system of choosing which books to feature.
The book review editor sent out a greater number of
books than reviews he actually intended to publish.
If a review was unenthusiastic, he reasoned that the
book was not important enough to be discussed
immediately, and if good reviews of enough other
books came in, the unenthusiastic review might never
be printed. The unenthusiastic reviewers were paid
promptly anyway, but they learned that if they wanted
their material to be printed, it was advisable to be
kind.
  Most editors print favorable and unfavorable
reviews; however, the content of the review may be
influenced by the editor. Some editors would actually
feel that they had failed in their responsibility if they
gave books by authors they admired to hostile critics
or books by authors they disapproved of to critics
who might favor them. Editors usually can predict who
would review a book enthusiastically and who would
tear it to shreds.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • Which of the following is an assumption made by the book review editor referred to in line 27(marked with highlight)?
    A:A book of great worth will receive only good reviews.
    B:An important book will endure despite possible bad reviews.
    C:Reviewers might hide their true opinions in order to have their reviews published.
    D:Book review editors should select reviewers whose opinions can be guessed in advance.
    E:Book review editors have an obligation to print extensive reviews of apparently important books.
    参考答案及共享解析
    共享解析来源为网络权威资源、GMAT高分考生等; 如有疑问,欢迎在评论区提问与讨论
    正确答案: A:A book of great worth will receive only good reviews.
    答案.A
    题目大意:以下哪项是第27行中提到的书评编辑所作的假设?
    编辑的政策是出版那些给予书籍足够正面评价的评论,同时往往拒绝出版不热情的评论;也就是说,那些对书籍评价不高的评论。
    鉴于文章中的信息,这位编辑很可能在跟随其他编辑,对可能发生的事情感到有些担心。也就是说,这些编辑大概不想冒着忽视一本很有价值的书的风险。因此,这位编辑可能认为,他不发表负面评论的“卓越体系”可以防范这种风险。换言之,编辑认为不热情的评论准确地反映了被评论书籍的价值。按照这种逻辑,一本很有价值的书当然只能得到正面的评价。
    A.一本很有价值的书只能得到很好的评价。正确
    B.一本重要的书将经久不衰。如果编辑这样想的话,他出版不好的评论是有道理的,因为一本好书最终会被证明是正确的。
    C.评论者为了发表他们的评论,可能会隐藏他们的真实观点。没有任何迹象表明,编辑认为审稿人不诚实地陈述他们对所审稿书籍的看法;也就是说,审稿人为了发表他们的评论而撒谎。虽然这可能是事实,但这篇文章没有提供任何证据表明编辑是这么想的。
    D.书评编辑应选择能提前猜出其观点的书评人。这篇文章中没有任何东西表明,编辑的实践是由这样一种规则支配的,即书评编辑应该如何选择评论员。
    E.书评编辑有义务对显然很重要的书发表广泛的评论。这段话暗示书评编辑希望在他的报纸上看到有价值的书。然而,这并不意味着编辑认为这条规则应该适用于所有的书评编辑。
    笔记

    登录后可添加笔记, / 注册

    加入收藏
    在线答疑
    题目来源
    Hi,欢迎来到PAPA GMAT!
    课程推荐
    备考攻略
    Copyright © 2015-2023 上海彼伴网络科技有限公司 沪ICP备2023023608号-2

    网站维护公告

    因版权方要求,我站部分题库资源将暂停访问,由此给大家带来的不便我们深表歉意。具体恢复时间将另行通知。
    请关注趴趴GMAT公众号【趴趴GMAT商科留学】获取最新资讯和其他备考干货;免费集训营和权威公开课亦将循环开设,欢迎各位同学积极报名参加,感谢各位同学的理解和支持。
    趴趴GMAT
    2019.10.14
    确认