ChaseDream

标题: 大家来看看奇怪的GWD-8-Q20 [打印本页]

作者: zhushanyi 时间: 2008-9-2 23:01
标题: 大家来看看奇怪的GWD-8-Q20

Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also caused erosion and very quickly deforested whole regions.

Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast), which gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
The systematic clearing of forests in the United States, creating farmland (especially in the Northeast) and giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also
The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also
The systematic clearing of forests in the United States not only created farmland (especially in the Northeast), giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it

答案是B，奇怪了WHICH的指代不明吧，IT 也省了，怎么对呢，个人觉得D比较对吧，不清楚，求助NN~~

作者: 汲绾 时间: 2008-9-2 23:05

我不是NN，但我觉得D后面那个but用得不对，因为没有需要转折的语气

作者: zhushanyi 时间: 2008-9-2 23:27

那你认为which的指代有错误么？如果有的话，是effectiveness的错误？

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-9-2 23:28

B逻辑都不对了，farmland怎么提供家具了...要提供也是砍伐森林提供。

而且B里面not only... but also...架构了那么长一个句子，不符合书写习惯..

同意楼主，D里面的,but it also形式看到过好几次了。

作者: dianecarton 时间: 2008-9-3 00:09
我觉得这道题没正确答案，非选个的话选A，不过把but it also改成 it but also

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-9-3 01:13

IMO:

A. Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also...

除了but it also，还有一个错误...gave既然与create平行，那么应该共享前面的did了，应该用give...

但是D我找不出错误...

作者: dianecarton 时间: 2008-9-3 01:25
有道理，如果把两个句子理解成转折关系，仿佛也能说得通。也只能选D了

作者: Zeldaw 时间: 2008-9-3 13:54

请教一下，not only可以省略吗？

然后A的 gave必需要改成give吗？能不能说did只是针对creat,而gave依然是gave

作者: dianecarton 时间: 2008-9-3 14:07

不懂啊

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-9-11 23:12:23编辑过]

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-9-3 14:11

以下是引用Zeldaw在2008-9-3 13:54:00的发言：

请教一下，not only可以省略吗？

然后A的 gave必需要改成give吗？能不能说did只是针对creat,而gave依然是gave

我觉得D里面不是not only... but also的结构了...只是单纯的转折吧...

还有A的gave改为give我更加准确，倾向于改...要不然遮住前面不看，单看并列成分，读者会奇怪，同时发生的动作怎么就用两个时态了呢...

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-9-3 14:13

umm...感觉原句的逻辑不合理的，D里面的转折才符合逻辑，因为前后分句态度是相反的，所以不用not only, but also才是对的..

这一点曾经在哪个帖子里面看到过...

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-9-3 14:17:04编辑过]

作者: Zeldaw 时间: 2008-9-3 14:26

以下是引用aeoluseros在2008-9-3 14:13:00的发言：

umm...感觉原句的逻辑不合理的，D里面的转折才符合逻辑，因为前后分句态度是相反的，所以不用not only, but also才是对的..

这一点曾经在哪个帖子里面看到过...

恩，这个很有压倒性。

在讨论一下gave的问题，aeoluseros你认为的就是说did的作用能够越过and，同时覆盖多个动词对吧？

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-9-3 15:14

是的...我觉得这个是并列，跟比较不一样，比较的话反而是要留下助动词(在此也就是指写成gave而不是give)或情态动词了。

我查阅一下Prep语法有没有类似例子，如果没记错的话应该是有的（不过可能是情态动词的例子，但我觉得情态动词在此方面用法基本跟助动词一致）。

作者: Zeldaw 时间: 2008-9-3 15:30

以下是引用aeoluseros在2008-9-3 15:14:00的发言：

是的...我觉得这个是并列，跟比较不一样，比较的话反而是要留下助动词(在此也就是指写成gave而不是give)或情态动词了。

我查阅一下Prep语法有没有类似例子，如果没记错的话应该是有的（不过可能是情态动词的例子，但我觉得情态动词在此方面用法基本跟助动词一致）。

作者: zhushanyi 时间: 2008-9-3 21:55

以下是引用Zeldaw在2008-9-3 15:30:00的发言：

恩,大家的讨论很深刻呀,工夫很深的!不过作的是时候看到NOT ONLY BUT ALSO 就超级兴奋,也没太注意句子意思的问题了.在少量的时间到底应该先关注结构还是句意啊,大家讨论下~~

作者: lovebing 时间: 2008-9-13 03:02
我也是看到了not only...but also就兴奋过头了！看来对付ETS是要多留心眼的

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-10-20 17:00

以下是引用aeoluseros在2008-9-3 15:14:00的发言：

是的...我觉得这个是并列，跟比较不一样，比较的话反而是要留下助动词(在此也就是指写成gave而不是give)或情态动词了。

我查阅一下Prep语法有没有类似例子，如果没记错的话应该是有的（不过可能是情态动词的例子，但我觉得情态动词在此方面用法基本跟助动词一致）。

始终没有找到类似的例子...momo...如果有谁看到就发上来，大家一起帮忙吧。

这样的例子太少了。

但是我还是坚持我原先的猜想...

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-10-22 19:18
last but one bump...

作者: senecabbs 时间: 2008-10-22 19:47
这个题的问题是首先使用了错误的句型，因为not only, but also 本身是并列的关系，应该是相同性质的，但是前后造成的结果是相反的，一个是好事，一个是坏事，怎么能用一个带有递进意思的句型呢，所以应该改掉，个人认为D是对的

给出B答案的原因可能是出于1.尊重原文的句式，不能轻易把这种强调句型改成普通句，2.可能只注意到了原文后半部分的gave用错了时态，前面有个did所以应该是give。

作者: aeoluseros 时间: 2008-10-23 10:39

以下是引用aeoluseros在2008-9-3 15:14:00的发言：

是的...我觉得这个是并列，跟比较不一样，比较的话反而是要留下助动词(在此也就是指写成gave而不是give)或情态动词了。

我查阅一下Prep语法有没有类似例子，如果没记错的话应该是有的（不过可能是情态动词的例子，但我觉得情态动词在此方面用法基本跟助动词一致）。

COOL!! I found an instance to support my idea:

Shoppers in sporting goods stores, unlike in department stores, do very little impulse shopping, not buying a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball, but they leave with a basketball only.

A. in department stores, do very little impulse shopping, not buying a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball, but they leave with a basketball only
B. in department stores, shop impulsively very little; someone who comes in for a basketball will leave with a basketball only and not also buy a pair of skis and a boomerang as well
C. those in department stores, do very little impulse shopping, do not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball, but leave with only a basketball
D. those in department stores, do very little impulse shopping; someone who comes in for a basketball will leave with a basketball only and not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang as well
E. department stores, shop impulsively very little; someone will not buy a pair of skis and a boomerang when they come in for a basketball but will leave with only a basketball

key: D

D里面可以看到will的提前，然后面的leave和buy都成为了动词原形

作者: Zeldaw 时间: 2008-10-23 11:07

以下是引用aeoluseros在2008-10-23 10:39:00的发言：

COOL!! I found an instance to support my idea:

key: D

D里面可以看到will的提前，然后面的leave和buy都成为了动词原形

哇塞，痛快啊

作者: connie4895 时间: 2008-10-28 14:43

以下是引用zhushanyi在2008-9-2 23:01:00的发言：

除了语意上面的错误外，其他小错似乎也是有迹可循

Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave
consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also (and表对等连接，gave应该和前面的create一样用原形)
Not only did the systematic clearing of forests in the United States create farmland (especially in the Northeast), which gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also (which有错误指代farmland的嫌疑，not only...but also...二边接的对象要符合平衡对称的原则，前面接子句后面也要接子句，但but also后面却少掉了主词)
The systematic clearing of forests in the United States, creating farmland (especially in the Northeast) and giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but also (but also前面那半句缺少动词)
The systematic clearing of forests in the United States created farmland (especially in the Northeast) and gave consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it also (correct)
The systematic clearing of forests in the United States not only created farmland (especially in the Northeast), giving consumers relatively inexpensive houses and furniture, but it (but it also后面的这个also代表"也"的意思，是不可省略的)

答案是B，奇怪了WHICH的指代不明吧，IT 也省了，怎么对呢，个人觉得D比较对吧，不清楚，求助NN~~

作者: nerakuhs 时间: 2009-1-17 18:22

TN版的答案是D啊

不过我做的时候也是光顾着not only but also了句意都没有好好体会

作者: amumu 时间: 2009-8-1 12:12
在GWD详解里面说：

Note: Guan, Weidong told me that ETS made the question wrong. The answer
should be “A” on the condition of “it but also”.

但是我觉得怎么加个it还是怪怪的，而且gave的问题没有解决啊？

作者: dietywake 时间: 2009-8-1 16:03
B答案在语法结构上没问题，但是逻辑关系上错了。WHICH逻辑关系上应该是指代砍森林，而不是B答案里面的farmland。D答案研究了10分钟，确定没错

作者: mhe2 时间: 2009-8-24 18:13

以下是引用dietywake在2009/8/1 16:03:00的发言：
B答案在语法结构上没问题，但是逻辑关系上错了。WHICH逻辑关系上应该是指代砍森林，而不是B答案里面的farmland。D答案研究了10分钟，确定没错

which为什么不可以指代前面砍伐森林整个分句？非限制性定语从句不是可以这样用的吗？

作者: 没办法1987 时间: 2009-8-24 19:06

以下是引用mhe2在2009/8/24 18:13:00的发言：

which为什么不可以指代前面砍伐森林整个分句？非限制性定语从句不是可以这样用的吗？

which不能指代前面整个句子，切记切记。。。

作者: milichen 时间: 2009-12-30 00:34
出题的这帮人还真挺坏的

作者: mars0624 时间: 2010-7-30 13:50
恩。ets太坏了

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