Soru

Zorluk: ZorAnalyzing Boldface Statement Roles and Argument Structure

Read the following argument regarding urban transport policy carefully, focusing on the roles played by the bolded statements:

Many urban planners contend that introducing congestion pricing in central business districts will inevitably reduce commercial activity by discouraging consumers from driving downtown. However, [1] this position overlooks the reality that severe traffic gridlock itself imposes substantial monetary costs on local merchants by delaying deliveries and curtailing customer turnover. Furthermore, empirical data from metropolitan areas with peak-hour tolls show that retail foot traffic increases once gridlock is alleviated. Therefore, [2] the claim that congestion pricing inherently harms central district businesses is unfounded, and municipal governments [3] should proceed with implementing peak-hour tolls to revitalize urban commercial centers.

Match each bolded statement from the passage to its exact structural role in the argument.

  • First bolded statement: "[1] this position overlooks the reality that severe traffic gridlock itself imposes substantial monetary costs on local merchants by delaying deliveries and curtailing customer turnover."A premise presented by the author to counter an opposing position and lay factual groundwork for the author's position.
  • Second bolded statement: "[2] the claim that congestion pricing inherently harms central district businesses is unfounded,"An intermediate conclusion reached by the author that directly rebuts the opponent's argument and provides support for the final recommendation.
  • Third bolded statement: "[3] should proceed with implementing peak-hour tolls to revitalize urban commercial centers."The main conclusion of the argument, which formulates a definitive policy proposal based on the preceding evaluation and evidence.

Cevap

Statement 1 matches the premise supporting the author's rebuttal of the opposing position; Statement 2 matches the intermediate conclusion refuting the opponent's claim; Statement 3 matches the main conclusion containing the final policy proposal.
Statement [1] functions as a premise introduced after the transition word 'However' to challenge the urban planners' assumptions. Statement [2] draws a sub-conclusion that the planners' claim is unfounded, based on the evidence provided in statement [1] and the empirical data. Statement [3] presents the author's primary recommendation and final thesis, supported by the sub-conclusion in statement [2]. Matching statement [1] to the premise role, statement [2] to the intermediate conclusion role, and statement [3] to the main conclusion role reflects the exact structural hierarchy of the passage.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main objective of the passage and distinguish the author's voice from opposing viewpoints.
The author opposes the urban planners' claim and advocates for peak-hour tolls.
Understanding the overall argumentative direction is necessary to contextualize each component.
2
Analyze the function of statement [1].
Statement [1] provides evidence that gridlock causes financial harm, countering the claim that congestion pricing alone causes harm.
It acts as a supporting premise designed to undermine the opposing planners' premise.
3
Analyze the relationship between statement [2] and statement [3].
Statement [2] derives a sub-conclusion ('the claim... is unfounded'), which is then used as justification to support statement [3] ('governments should proceed...').
Because statement [2] supports another claim rather than standing as the final endpoint, it is an intermediate conclusion, leaving statement [3] as the main conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying structural roles: premises, intermediate conclusions, counter-arguments, and main conclusions.
Bu soruyu puanla