ChaseDream

标题: 如何分析一题的考点大全section12--20 [打印本页]

作者: xiaowan 时间: 2006-10-10 13:39
标题: 如何分析一题的考点大全section12--20

20. In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than $16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.

(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected

(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers

(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected（D）

(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers

一，读题：an manufacturer pleaded.....and agreed to pay.......for....

二，线从for 后面划起，for后面可以跟名词和分词

A were时态应为过去完成 C现在完成时分词不能作定语 E pay ...for having cars 时态 pay...for having had cars

三，关于BD

D pay ...for doing没问题

B语法上看认为没有任何问题

我的问题就在于，一分中的时间里，可以分辨出B的意思有问题么？其实B也说的通，只是仔细想想不好, 那么应该怎么解决B呢？

作者: 静远 时间: 2006-10-10 17:21

B：
cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers中that 后就不应该用it 了，直接接谓语才对阿！

作者: xiaowan 时间: 2006-10-10 19:38
it是指automobile manufacturer不可以直接跟谓语的

作者: fantasy06 时间: 2006-10-11 00:35

I agree with LZ that B had no apparent error. I feel D is more concise and precise in that:

D. "having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected"--- means that the manufacturer is paying for its misconduct

B. "cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers"--means that the manufacturer is paying for cars that were misconducted by it--sounds vague and a little illogical.

作者: xiaowan 时间: 2006-10-11 00:37
唉。。。就快考试了，一分钟内能不能静下心想出这样的差别呢？？实在没信心。。。

作者: Iawfy 时间: 2006-10-11 01:43
祝楼主考试成功

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-10-11 5:26:31编辑过]

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)