og 198 新问

If than is followed by a clause referring to army, the subject of that clause must be singular (it). Furthermore, the verb of that clause will need to be in the past perfect form (had had) because it refers to a time before the simple past of entered. Finally, the preposition for is more precise than in because supplies are gathered for an upcoming campaign. Choices A and C incorrectly use the plural they and the simple past had. Moreover, A uses the less precise in. Choices D and E wisely dispense with the full clause and use a simple prepositional phrase. D, however, uses the imprecise in and the plural their. Only E, the best choice, avoids all the errors mentioned above.

我对OG解释中加黄色底色的部分有疑问，因为我觉得A中的错误就在于A中的代词与未划线部分中的代词在数上不一致，而had已经表明了过去完成时的含义，也就是说，如果A改为"it had in its previous campaigns"应该是可以的吧，它其实是"it had entered Russia with supplies in its previous campaigns"省略了与主句相同的部分。恳请各位指教。。。困惑ing。。。

你自己改后的答案中，had已经是助动词了

而显然包括A选项在内，had表示的是实义动词，所以用had had，你改的错

同一個句子使用兩個動詞，且發生在過去時

則先發生的要用過去完成式，後發生的用過去式，不可以兩個都是過去式

携隐版主，能否解释一下ＯＧ199中，这题好像符合你的条件，但是没有省略will. 题目如下：

Because the Earth's crust is more solid there and thus better able to transmit shock waves, an earthquake
of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it
does in the West.
(A) of a given magnitude typically devastates an area 100 times greater in the eastern United States than it
does in the West
(B) of a given magnitude will typically devastate 100 times the area if it occurs in the eastern United States
instead of the West
(C) will typically devastate 100 times the area in the eastern United States than one of comparable
magnitude occurring in the West

(D) in the eastern United States will typically devastate an area 100 times greater than will a quake of
comparable magnitude occurring in the West(D)
(E) that occurs in the eastern United States will typically devastate 100 times more area than if it occurred
with comparable magnitude in the West

对啊，也觉得携隐的说法有问题。

不是可以这样吗：entered..... had (entered).......

主句部分不一定非要助动词的啊。

就我现在看来,携隐解释的应该比较合理.

6楼的,D是把will后面的devastate省略了; 助动词相同的,把助动词(will)保留,动词(devastate)可以省略.

welcome more commets

sorry,6楼,发现好像看错了你的问题

我想198题可能和have这个词的特殊性有关,既可以作助动词,也可以作实意动词.

所以198题在前半句没有使用助动词的情况下,后半句不能省略

有清楚的N吗?帮着看一下哦

至少按你的理解是又歧义的,因为had既可以理解为助动词,也可以理解为有这个含义的过去式啊