）关于上面的红字，为什么so that可以而in order that 不行，她的回答我认为有一定价值，所以贴出来，大家讨论讨论！67. Congress is debating a bill requiring certain employers provide workers with unpaid leave so as to care for sick or newbom children.
(A) provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
(B) to provide workers with unpaid leave so as to
(C) provide workers with unpaid leave in order that they
(D) to provide workers with unpaid leave so that they can
(E) provide workers with unpaid leave and
Choices A, C, and E are ungrammatical because, in this context, requiring ... employers must be followed by an infinitive. These options display additional faults: in A, so as to fails to specify that the workers receiving the leave will be the people caring for the infants and children; in order that they, as used in C, is imprecise and unidiomatic; and E says that the bill being debated would require the employers themselves to care for the children. Choice B offers the correct infinitive, to provide, but contains the faulty so as to. Choice D is best.
我问一个也在备考GMAT的美国朋友（据她说她的voberl几乎可以全对，不过数学只能对一半）关于上面的红字，为什么so that可以而in order that 不行，她的回答我认为有一定价值，所以贴出来，大家讨论讨论！
Regarding that question. "so as to" and "in order that they" are both wordy. In other words, they use extra words that do not give the phrase meaning. These phrases would be wrong in ANY question on ANY test. The second I saw them I knew they made their choices wrong--they "set off alarms" ringing in my head! We were taught in school to avoid using phrases like this. Since you didn't learn English in an American high school that taught students how to write for exams, of course you don't understand well--I myself didn't understand the difference between these phrases until I was taught the difference in high school. "So that they can" would be right because it makes the sentence mean that the bill ENABLES people to care for children. The bill allows people TO BE ABLE TO care for children. "Can" means the same thing as "to be able to". This is what the sentence is trying to say, so it's the most meaningful word to use. The sentence with choice C. says "Bla bla ...requiring certain employers to provide unpaid leave in order that they care for sick...." could mean two things. It COULD mean that the providing of unpaid leave ENABLES employees to care for their loved ones. But it could also imply that the company is giving the employee leave almost as an order to take care of the sick person. "In order to" is a very direct phrase. It has a different meaning than "can". It carries the meaning that something has been facilitated, or made possible. But it also has an official connotation: the company provides leave to facilitate the taking care of the sick, as if the company wanted to take care of the sick person itself, but had to provide leave in order to do it. This is obviously not what the sentence means.
"Can" means the employee is free to take care of the sick person, the employee has the option to take care of the sick person, the employee now has the ability to take care of the sick person, whereas before the bill was passed, the employee didn't have the option or the ability to take care of the sick person because the employee COULDN"T do it, because the employee HAD TO go to work. If the employee didn't go to work, he/she would lose his/her job.
This is what "in context" means. You are supposed to know that the central issue for a bill like this is the freedom of the employee to do what is very important to him/her. The employee wants to take care of the sick, but can't if he/she will lose the job by taking time off. It is generally seen as unfair and cruel of companies to punish someone that's trying to help a sick loved one or baby. So before the bill is passed, the employee CAN"T take care of the sick, and after the bill is passed, the employee CAN.
These phrases would be wrong in ANY question on ANY test.
这句说的有点大了，GMAT中是有正确的例子的。
套用一句逻辑的术语：全称判断是不可靠的。美国人很多时候是评语感的，这个是一种更高的解题思想，不过很难驾驭，建议楼主还是看好OG，这个是王道！
语言的魅力在于灵活多样.
我也曾经跟一些考G的美国人聊过. 有的人VERBAL本身很好, 不用复习, 但也有人OG的语法做了很多遍才去考试. 他们只要了解了商业英语的套路, 接下来便是靠语感. 凭借大量的听说读写的实际运用, 每道题在他们看来都是a unique case, 一针见血, 但他们所做的推广未必正确. 而我们正相反, 我们了解大量的规则, 但面对具体题目时缺乏应变能力, 因为欠缺语感.
水可载舟, 亦可覆舟, 关键看如何取其所长.
觉得熏衣紫草说的很有道理，OG的解释有的看似很矛盾的，其实不然。就像你说的每道题实际上都是a unique case，其中的道理未必能够推广到所有题中。
看来唯一的办法只有多读多看，增强语感。所以我觉得不要只啃语法，只啃GMAT,每天要有一些时间多看各类英语文章。
先好好谢谢mmmzzz分享
不过要是我第一个看，是会迷信的
,但看了大家得说法，觉得也得辨正得看待老美得说法。
一起加油！！！
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |