¡¡¡¡4. The author refers to Abernathy's study £¨line 36£© most
¡¡¡¡probably in order to
¡¡¡¡£¨A£© qualify an observation about one rule governing
¡¡¡¡manufacturing
¡¡¡¡£¨B£© address possible objections to a recommendation
¡¡¡¡about improving manufacturing competitiveness
¡¡¡¡£¨C£© support an earlier assertion about one method of
¡¡¡¡increasing productivity
¡¡¡¡£¨D£© suggest the centrality in the United States economy
¡¡¡¡of a particular manufacturing industry
¡¡¡¡£¨E£© give an example of research that has questioned the
¡¡¡¡wisdom of revising a manufacturing strategy
¡¡¡¡5. The author's attitude toward the culture in most
¡¡¡¡factories is best described as
¡¡¡¡£¨A£© cautious
¡¡¡¡£¨B£© critical
¡¡¡¡£¨C£© disinterested
¡¡¡¡£¨D£© respectful
¡¡¡¡£¨E£© adulatory
¡¡¡¡6. In the passage£¬ the author includes all of the following
¡¡¡¡EXCEPT
¡¡¡¡£¨A£© personal observation
¡¡¡¡£¨B£© a business principle
¡¡¡¡£¨C£© a definition of productivity
¡¡¡¡£¨D£© an example of a successful company
¡¡¡¡£¨E£© an illustration of a process technology
¡¡¡¡7. The author suggests that implementing conventional
¡¡¡¡cost-cutting as a way of increasing manufacturing
¡¡¡¡competitiveness is a strategy that is
¡¡¡¡£¨A£© flawed and ruinous
¡¡¡¡£¨B£© shortsighted and difficult to sustain
¡¡¡¡£¨C£© popular and easily accomplished
¡¡¡¡£¨D£© useful but inadequate
¡¡¡¡£¨E£©misunderstood but promising
´ð°¸
BCCBE D
