OG112

112. Domestic automobile manufacturers have invested millions of dollars into research to develop cars more
gasoline-efficient even than presently on the road.
(A) into research to develop cars more gasoline-efficient even than presently on the road
(B) into research for developing even more gasoline-efficient cars on the road than at present
(C) for research for cars to be developed that are more gasoline-efficient even than presently the road
(D) in research to develop cars even more gasoline-efficient than those at present on the road
(E) in research for developing cars that are even more gasoline-efficient than presently on the road

Answer to Question 112
Choice D, the best answer, uses the preposition than to compare two clearly specified and grammatically
parallel terms, the cars the manufacturers hope to develop and those at present on the road. In A, the phrase
more gasoline-efficient ... than presently on the road does not identify the second term of the comparison. In
B, the misuse of modifying phrases produces an ambiguous and awkward statement: even more
gasoline-efficient cars could refer either to more cars that are efficient or to cars that are more efficient.
Choices B, C, and E all use research for [verb] where the idiom requires research to [verb]. In addition, C
awkwardly separates even from more, and C and E again fail to indicate the second term of the comparison.

=> Question 1: A可否看作是than后省略了cars？记得在OG中看到过类似省略。。。

=> Question 2: 不是不可随意改变原句中副词(此处even)的位置吗？这一点记忆也蛮深刻。。。

If both answers are possitive, then choice A should be correct, right?

Q1. 如果比较的主语相同，那么可以省略。但是这里不相同，一个是开发中的cars, 一个是现实中的cars.

Q2. 的确不能随意改变even的位置，应该把even放在符合句意的位置。A放错了。注意OG的解释: In addition, C
awkwardly separates even from more.

t Question 1: A可否看作是than后省略了cars？记得在OG中看到过类似省略。。。

觉得A可以这样省，但是OG的宗旨是选出最优的答案，而如果在这里省的话，会造成比较物相对的不明确。

t Question 2: 不是不可随意改变原句中副词(此处even)的位置吗？这一点记忆也蛮深刻。。。

是不可以随便改，根据这里的意思A实际上是随便改了。even修饰more

even more gasoline-efficient than～

而非more gasoline-efficient even than ～

综上，A有两点不如意。

两位解释的很清楚，谢谢!

我得问题是：

OG对B 项说得是misuse，但是像A说the second term of the comparison.

我想B是不是也缺少了比较对象呢，不是很确定，请大家帮忙看看

up

我同意你的观点

而且恰恰是这个比较对象的缺失使得B有歧义。如果是说造出更多的汽车，应补出than gas-efficient cars；如果是说造出更efficient的车，补出cars就行了。

不过个人感觉B的问题是into research 和for developing，长得有点儿不顺眼，呵呵

以上有不对的地方，还请大家指正喔：）

谢谢adii这样我也就更明白了，同意你说的

顶上来，有点迷惑。

112. Domestic automobile manufacturers have invested millions of dollars into research to develop cars more gasoline-efficient even than presently on the road.

(A)  into research to develop cars more gasoline-efficient even than（ｃａｒｓ） presently on the road

(B)   into research for developing even more gasoline-efficient cars on the road than （Ｇａｓ－ｅｆｆｉｃｉｅｎｔ　ｃａｒｓ或者ｃａｒｓ）这里因为前面的ｍｏｒｅ的歧义，注定了补足的歧义。但从语法上来说ｔｈａｎ是可以做关系代词的吧？）at present

但是看看Ａ，Ａ的ｍｏｒｅ　位置用得很好，后面是否补足不会造成歧义。为什么

为什么ＯＧ还会解释说：

In A, the phrase more gasoline-efficient ... than presently on the road does not identify the second term of the comparison.

什么叫，ｓｅｃｏｎｄ　ｔｅｒｍ　ｏｆ　ｃｏｍｐａｒｉｓｏｎ呀？？

In B, the misuse of modifying phrases produces an ambiguous and awkward statement: