Seller's promise doesn't mean that the good will give satisfaction to buyers. Hence I is not implicit. Nothing can be assumed about unbranded goods from the statement. Hence II is not implicit.
Gift scheme gave a spurt to paging industry but we cannot generalise it. So assumption I is not implicit because of the word always. II is implicit. That is why paging industries are now going through tough times.
National interest could or could not be paramount for other industrial concerns. So assumption I is not implicit. There is not even a mention of environmental resources. We can treat assumption II as a possibility but it is not necessarily so.
Assumption I is implicit because otherwise it would not have been prescribed. As the Environment pollution Authority is concerned with auto-rickshaws, assumption II seems quite plausible.
Neither can we assume about the CIA nor about the toughness of its work from the statement.
How did the know about the advertisement? Hence it can be assumed that they read newspapers. Why did they get puzzled over the publication of the advertisement in the newspaper? All the advertisement can't puzzled all persons of the same profession. Hence it can be assumed that the advertisement was a rare one.
The connection between "advertising hype' and "one would imagine" makes I implicit. II is not implicit: what the speaker assumes is that there might be some change but not on the grand scale being talked about.
if neither I nor II is implicit.
The speaker has used the name of Sachin and Shahrukh because of their popularity among young students. Replacing their posters clearly hints that II is implicit. I is clearly an assumption.
West Asia has a large stock of oil resources; that is why they have monopoly in this sector. Similarly, the speaker is assuming that India has human resources (in the form of IT entrepreneurs) which will lead it to become no. 1 in this field or contribute a large part to India's economy. Hence both are implicit.
Here "others ' cost " means others ' peace, others' safety..... but certainly not others' expenses. Hence I is not implicit. II is implicit; that is why Delhi police has issued the statement.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.