目次
MBA GMAT Critical Reasoning、「ロジカル思考」の世界へようこそ！
GMAT Critical Reasoningを勉強中のMBA留学準備生はもちろん、受験生、ロジカル思考、頭の体操、推理小説愛好家、英語読解に興味がある人、挑戦歓迎！
[お題」GMAT Critical Reasoning GcrC-1 06
After receiving numerous complaints from residents about loud, highly amplified music played at local clubs, Middletown is considering a law that would prohibit clubs located in residential areas from employing musical groups that consist of more than three people.
[Question]
The likelihood that the law would be effective in reducing noise would be most seriously diminished if which of the following were true?
(A) Groups that consist of more than three musicians are usually more expensive for clubs to hire than are groups that consist of fewer than three musicians.
(B) In towns that have passed similar laws, many clubs in residential areas have relocated to nonresidential areas.
(C) Most of the complaints about the music have come from people who do not regularly attend the clubs.
(D) Much of the music popular at the local clubs can be played only by groups of at least four musicians.
(E) Amplified music played by fewer than three musicians generally is as loud as amplified music played by more than three musicians.
[分析]
さて、今回のArgument（本文）は、ただ一文：
After receiving numerous complaints from residents about loud, highly amplified music played at local clubs, Middletown is considering a law that would prohibit clubs located in residential areas from employing musical groups that consist of more than three people.
「Premise（前提）」
そのうちの「Premise（前提、厳然たる事実として分かってること）」は：
▽
After receiving numerous complaints from residents about loud, highly amplified music played at local clubs,
（近隣住民から、、local clubsの大音量の音楽について、苦情届けを受け）
「Conclusion（結論）」
そしてそのうちの「Conclusion（結論）」は、
（ considering＝～しようとしている、というのが、対策すなわちまとめにかかってる、つまり結論だとわかる）
Middletown is considering a law that would prohibit clubs located in residential areas from employing musical groups that consist of more than three people.
（Middletownは（その対策として）、「住宅地近辺のclubが、3名より多い人数の楽団を雇うことを禁じる」という法案を作ろうとしている）
[Question]
今回の[Question]は、
The likelihood that the law would be effective in reducing noise would be most seriously diminished if which of the following were true?
ということだが、これは？
「likelihood～effective～most seriously diminished 」ということはすなわち、疑問を投げかけるということ、つまりこれも、「Weaken」問題。「相手（本文）の主張（通常argumentという）を、（最も強力に）論破する（ケチをつける）選択肢を(A) ～(E)の中から選ぶ」のが課題。ここでは、「そんな法案作っても、騒音公害に対抗できないよ」と、最も強く示唆している選択肢を選ぶ。
[解題]
これは、一個づつ検討していってもいいが、むしろ常識を入れると早いのでは？（もちろん意地悪な問題によっては常識を逆手に取るのもあるが、その場合でも、いったん検討を付けておいて、その後で他の選択肢と見比べるというほうが早い。
で、ここでの常識とは？
「法案のように、3名より多い人数の楽団を雇うことを禁じたとて、それより少人数でだって、騒音の原因にはなりえる」、で、その意向の選択肢を探す。
[正解]
(E) Amplified music played by fewer than three musicians generally is as loud as amplified music played by more than three musicians.
キーワードは、fewer than three musicians ～as loud
他の選択肢、もし迷ったのがあったら、連絡ください。
