The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.
(A) passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
(B) the passage of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, which allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent that they will sell
(C) the passage in 1999 of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
(D) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999, and it allows companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent to sell
(E) the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, passed in 1999 and allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling
答案是C，个人觉得时间状语应该放在句子的开头或末尾，C答案放中间我觉得不是很可取，B最后介词with后面不可以跟从句吗？是这个错吗？谢谢啦
比较划线开头，lead to 的是act的passage，排除DE，passing表持续动作不好，排除A
剩下BC
B，which可以修饰1999这个时间，举例，你什么时候出生的？（when） 92年或93年，哪年（which）是你出生的年?
同时，（我自己的感觉）in 1999修饰可能有歧义，修饰act还是修饰pass？修饰act可能意思是1999已经有提议这个act，但是当年没passage。修饰passage就是说act不知道什么时候提出的，但是是在1999passage的
跟5楼有同样的意见。
我觉得prep对B选项的解释可以再探讨一下：
(A) 从逻辑意思上看The proliferation…导致的结果是反域名强占保护法案的通过,而不是通过的过程,因此passing应该改为passage,强调结果.in 1999既可能修饰Act也可能修饰passing,导致修饰不清；分词结构allowing…修饰有歧义。
(B) in 1999位置不对,导致修饰不清;with the sole intent that they will sell表达复杂,笨拙.
(C) 正确, lead to the passage强调了结果;which非限定定语从句修饰Act,意思表达清楚;时间状语in 1999紧靠修饰对象the passage,修饰无歧意;用of selling修饰名词intent表达正确
(D) 从逻辑意思上看,The proliferation…导致的结果是法案的通过,而不是导致了法案,因此lead to the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which was passed in 1999意思表达不完整;with the sole intent to sell错误,应该改为with the sole intent of selling.
(E) 错误同D,逻辑意思表达不完整
我个人觉得B选项前半句和C选项前半句并没有本质区别，只是C选项的Consumer Protection Act, which allows 看起来更工整、更规矩一点，我觉得B前面不存在重大问题，是否导致修饰不清并不是cut B选项的重要决定因素。
反而是后面的they指代不清，因为离它最近的就是names，they指代成names，而逻辑上应该是those。
A选项的allowing为什么错？怎么修饰歧义了？
不谈别的错误原因。
The proliferation of so-called cybersquatters, people who register the Internet domain names of high-profile companies in hopes of reselling the rights to those names for a profit, led to passing the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999, allowing companies to seek up to $100,000 in damages against those who register domain names with the sole intent of selling them later.
doing分词短语在句尾
1.表示动作，状态，功能，逻辑主语等于句子主语
2.表示伴随结果，主句是因，导致分词动作产生，无逻辑主语
这里allowing很是适合第二条啊，led to the passage是因， allowing是果
盼解答！！！
这题还是想问问这个intent to do的结构，to do只能修饰动词么？不定词应该可以做定语修饰名词，如：ability to do等。
我在Longman查到的intent的一种解释：the intention to do something illegal
with intent (to do something)
eg：Jones was found guilty of wounding with intent.
He is charged with possession of a gun with intent to commit a robber。
这里的with intent to do是否一定要与intent的意思有关？
我怎么觉得有led to allowing，和做伴随，结果的歧义？
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |