Q20
In 1981 children in the
of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing
household chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six
hours a week.
A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours
a week
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly
six hours a week
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were
spent in 1997
D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours
a week in 1997
E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a
week in 1997
答案B，可为什么要用过去完成时啊。我选E。
E已经改变了原文的逻辑意思了。
我记得初中的时候英语老师这样说，by+一个时间作为时间状语，就是过去完成时的标志了。不知道现在是不是也能这样讲。
如果可以用过去完成时，A为什么不行呢？
E 怎么改变逻辑了呢？
D 的错误是不是分词有修饰前面名词chores的歧异。
C 我觉得不好，具体有什么语法错误呢？
谢谢
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997
six hours a week一个频率：一周六小时，这样的话，要were干嘛
另外【一周六小时】这样一个频率可以被spent吗？
只能说spent six hours weekly或者spent six hours in one week
再或者就是six hours were spent in one week但是如果是这样的结构，后面的by一定要出来，否则就显的意思怪异
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
by 1997：首先肯定是完成时，
1997年已经过去，所以是过去完成时
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
in 1997
使用一般过去时
D为什么不对啊 有人知道这样比较为什么不对吗？
这一题偶的看法:
A中的they指代不清，排除。
C逻辑不对，一周6小时，这是一个频率，不能were spent，in 1997也不好。
D用了compared with,改变了句子意思。
E中的growing很怪异，不知作何成份，而且改变句子意思。
如果可以用过去完成时，A为什么不行呢？
E 怎么改变逻辑了呢？
D 的错误是不是分词有修饰前面名词chores的歧异。
C 我觉得不好，具体有什么语法错误呢？
谢谢
我觉得compared with在比较中总是用在主语和compared with 后面名词比较时，我觉得这个compared with已经有点像like/unlike了，不是去修是前面的名词，而是主语。这里主语显然不能比较。
参考下：
GWD3-Q39:
Minivans carry as many as seven passengers and, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less, get better gas mileage, allow passengers to get in and out more easily, and have a smoother ride.
A. Minivans carry as many as seven passengers and, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less,
B. Minivans, which carry as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles, they cost less,
C. Minivans carry as many as seven passengers, in comparison with most sport utility vehicles, and have a lower cost, they
D. Minivans, carrying as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less,
E. Minivans, which carry as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles the cost is lower, and they
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GWD1-Q7:
A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times in 1980.
我觉得compared with在比较中总是用在主语和compared with 后面名词比较时，我觉得这个compared with已经有点像like/unlike了，不是去修是前面的名词，而是主语。这里主语显然不能比较。
参考下：
GWD3-Q39:
Minivans carry as many as seven passengers and, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less, get better gas mileage, allow passengers to get in and out more easily, and have a smoother ride.
A. Minivans carry as many as seven passengers and, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less,
B. Minivans, which carry as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles, they cost less,
C. Minivans carry as many as seven passengers, in comparison with most sport utility vehicles, and have a lower cost, they
D. Minivans, carrying as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles, cost less,
E. Minivans, which carry as many as seven passengers, compared with most sport utility vehicles the cost is lower, and they
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GWD1-Q7:
A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO’s now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times in 1980.
MM解释的真好！我正朦朦胧胧的有此想法，被MM肯定了，好开心！
six hours a week一个频率：一周六小时，这样的话，要were干嘛
另外【一周六小时】这样一个频率可以被spent吗？
只能说spent six hours weekly或者spent six hours in one week
再或者就是six hours were spent in one week但是如果是这样的结构，后面的by一定要出来，否则就显的意思怪异
对不起不会用引用
我刚刚查了一下，可以说什么被spend
nearly 3.7 hours a week was spent on Assembly,从剑桥大学的网站上查到的（search whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997 in google UK
我觉得这道题选C,1981年用的过去式，难道1997年发生的事比1981年的是发生的早，显然不符合逻辑，所以我觉得用一般过去式好，而且符合句意
同意yl1004,本人也觉得应该是C,
但E错在哪里呢? 看成同位语的独立主格结构可以啊.
想了想,还应该是C. 应为B/E的问题出在FIGURE上, FIGURE不能对应前面的真正核心词HOUR
虽然已开始我选的C，但是现在想想看还是B比较的好，
B OG中强调的是主句用过去时，从句中国去完成时的形势，而这里是两个不同的句子，所以不存在OG中场出现的那种情况的
C中的whereas用的比较的奇怪，把原句中好端端的并列结构，改成了对比了，改变了巨资的意思的
D中的compared逻辑主语错，
E中的that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997是独立主格，但是改变了原来句子的结构
ding~~~快来讨论~~
我觉得这道题选C,1981年用的过去式，难道1997年发生的事比1981年的是发生的早，显然不符合逻辑，所以我觉得用一般过去式好，而且符合句意
偶觉得是选B，因为在
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly
six hours a week
中，用了“；”因此，我认为1997不是与1981作时间对比，而是与目前做对比，因此要用had done的形式。
虽然已开始我选的C，但是现在想想看还是B比较的好，
B OG中强调的是主句用过去时，从句中国去完成时的形势，而这里是两个不同的句子，所以不存在OG中场出现的那种情况的
C中的whereas用的比较的奇怪，把原句中好端端的并列结构，改成了对比了，改变了巨资的意思的
D中的compared逻辑主语错，
E中的that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997是独立主格，但是改变了原来句子的结构
ding
有"BY"也不一定要用完成时态啊? 比如11版本OG里P354的最后一句话.
"By the end of 1980'S,Beta was no longer in production"
这道题我做过的，在别的gwd套题里，一时找不到，答案好像是D
compared to一般都是正确答案
up
help
1. Compared with…逻辑主语不是children，D肯定错
2. E后面的that figure growing to 的成分，也不是表示结果，也不是表示与主句同时的事情，莫名其妙，排除。
3. A B C作比较，从意思上理解，这个句子想强调的是这个数字的增长，B有分号，用两个分句来表达，表达清楚，而且grow也体现了数字的增长
C选项的whereas不好，句子的意思不是说这个数字不同了，而是想说增长了
A选项分号后面的内容不完整，而且说得也不清不楚
所以相对来说，B是表达最清楚且没有障碍的
C is wrong
如果用whereas，两个句子是并列（转折）关系，就是说两个句子不是主从关系，那么后面的time is spent 跟前面没有什么逻辑关系的。
所以 whereas six hours are spent (doing what)? 我们不知道的。这里要补出来到地干嘛花了6小时。
ding
A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997
D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997
E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997
有分号就可以用过去完成时了？
现在这个解释是错的，过去完成时，一定要有一个动作在它之后，否则不能随便用
这里我不赞成用过去完成时
？？？/？
芝麻开门
还是B比较好,by 1997,到1997年为止,1997年是作者陈述这句话之前的一个时间点,因此可以用过去完成时.而C中的IN 1997改变了原句想要表达的意思,而且whereas的转折也用的不够恰当.
A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week （they 代chores还是children?)
B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week
C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997 （个人觉得用whereas的前后两句应该是平行的，但是这里是被动）
D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997 （个人觉得compared with的主语应该是主句主语children,不合逻辑）
E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997 （如果是从句，它没有谓语，同位语的话，修饰的应该是chores,不合逻辑）
越看越晕了...
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |