OG30

What was as remarkable as the development of the compact disc has been the use of the new technology to revitalize, in better sound than was ever before possible, some of the classic recorded performances of the pre-LP era.

(A)  What was as remarkable as the development of the compact disc

(B)   The thing that was as remarkable as developing the compact disc

(C)  No less remarkable than the development of the compact disc

(D)  Developing the compact disc has been none the less remarkable than

据我的经验，在这中类型题中，以no   less   than   or no  better  than开头的选项，就为正确选项。

就具体分析，ＯＧ的解释最为权威：Besides being wordy, the clauses beginning What was in A and The thing that was in B cause inconsistencies in verb tense: the use of the new technology cannot logically be described by both the present perfect has been and the past was. In B and D, developing the compact disc is not parallel to the use of new technology to revitalize... performances; in C, the best answer, the noun development is parallel to use. The phrases none the less... than in D and no less... as in E are unidiomatic; the correct form of expression, no less... than, appears in C, the best choice.

我认为应该具体题目具体分析. OG30最主要的原因是对称use---development, 再加上对时态的判断, 才选c.

OG242. Even their most ardent champions concede that no less than a technical or scientific breakthrough is necessary before solar cells can meet the goal of providing one percent of the nation's energy needs.

(A)  that no less than a technical or scientific breakthrough is necessary

(B)  that nothing other than a technical or scientific breakthrough is needed

(C)  that a technical or scientific breakthrough is necessary

(D)  the necessity for an occurrence of a technical or scientific breakthrough(C)

(E)   the necessity for a technical or scientific breakthrough occurring

这里A中的no less than 结构就不是正确答案. 因为不简洁.

薰衣紫草MM说的对，242是个简洁的好例子，我对这类题没进行过总结，但做题的印象里，no better than 是比较地道的表达法，的确属于优先级。不知ＭＭ有何高见

楼主ＧＧ不用着急，多做题，多总结，多看ＯＧ解释，多上ＣＤ看大家的讨论，思路慢慢就有了

我总结了一些题目, 发现no   less   than   or no  better  than确实是正确答案的"长相". 但我总结的规律总能找到反例, 如OG242, 这就是ETS的高明之处---无论什么考点, 都能把它灵活变通. 因为每道题的组合是不一样的, 有优先级的选项到另一题里跟别的答案比较就不优先了.

总结也是辩证来用: 对于我们这些不是以英语为第一语言的人来说, 对语言的表达很难有直观的感觉, 即语感, 特别是在做语法题的时候. 总结的好处就在于省去很多比较的时间, 硬性地培养语感. 但这种强化的方式接触的表达比较片面(大全总共才900多题), 不可能有十足的把握哪种表达在任何题目里都是优先级最高(注意, 这是effectiveness). 利用总结至高境界还是要回到总结本身, 即怎么会总结出这个规律的. 就拿OG30来举例

要想一上来就看出use---development的对称对我来说很难. DE错的没商量, 因为no less than的固定结构被改错了, 剩下AB. 除了时态不对以外, AB 皆是不简洁表达. What + be + n. + has been...  很绕口, 为什么不直接写成 n. + has been.....  A非要用what引导的一个系表结构从句来作主语. what+系表结构做主语, 再+ 一个系表结构---太啰嗦了. 比如 What is the best is ...., 为什么不直接写成the best is....   B的结构也是一样. the thing that +n. 作主语, 可以直接写成n. 作主语.   再看OG242, DE不用看了, C 就是一个n.+系表结构, 只是前面少了修饰no less than. OG的解释是这种用法更简洁. the line of reasoning: 242和30中的no less than其实是不一样的. 30里的less修饰remarkable构成一个比较级, 而242里的less有实意, 即"少". 知道了这一点, 更领悟了简洁的真谛!

242: 不能比a technical or scientific breakthrough 少 is necessary 可以简写成 a technical or scientific breakthrough is necessary . (不能少和 necessary其实是语意重复的)

30: no less remarkable than 和后面的没有重复

这就是我所说的"回到总结本身". 要利用总结, 但临驾于总结之上. 利用语感, 但领悟语感的精髓. 不仅要知其然, 还要知其所以然. 总结的最高境界不是背下所有的优选结构, 而是让自己变的ETS(形容词)起来, 出神入化, 以毒攻毒.

大家过奖了. (真的不是假谦虚)

复习语法之前, 看了一些大N的帖子, 发现他们靠的不是题海战, 而是有水平的总结. 一直很想学, 努力当中, 但还远远不够. 其实语法的考点, OG十有八九都涵盖了, 但作题时为何仍拿不准? 关键在于对OG的理解不够深刻, 不能活学活用. 我也是这样.

感谢X4444提出这个很好的问题.

可不可以请版主把这个讨论加入30, 242的讨论链接(别骂我皮厚啊), 方便后人使用. 以前做题时查阅过相关link,但没有类似讨论. 后来自己琢磨出来了.