ffice" />222. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.fficeffice" />
(A) enabling it to withhold from the public
(B) for it to withhold from the public
(C) for withholding disclosure to the public of
(D) that enable them to withhold from public disclosure
(E) that they can withhold public disclosure of
It is no doubt that ans is A, but why B is wrong?
"ward X sth for X to do.... " can not?
anybody got idea? Thanx!
为什么呢？请牛人再解释OG222. 1, B的错误在于，实义动词enable不见了，句子意思有变化。fficeffice" />
2, B带入原句：The Supreme Court awarded the CIA broad discretionary powers for it to withhold from the public the identities of sb. OG的解释非常不负责任。不定式前面加for sb.是标准的添加不定式逻辑主语的方法，所以这个for it to withhold from the public本身是没有问题的。但是，在这里这个带有逻辑主语的不定式带有二义性，它既可以做句子的目的状语，也可以做抽象词discretionary powers的同位语定语，产生了二义性。所以就像现在分词放在句中，搞不清楚是做状语还是定语一样，是不好的。
所以1和2决定了B是不完美的。实际上，并不是说B荒谬或错了，但这两点缺点造成了B不如A好。
3 看看it, (A) enabling it to withhold from the public中，则有：SC gives CIA powers enabling it to withhold the identities of its source of intelligent information from the public. 后面的its指向CIA(CIA才有source of intelligent information, 不要抬杠)， 所以it指向CIA。只能从逻辑上分析出来。从语法上分析，“og的意思不是说这里的it语法上就是指向Central Intelligence Agency的么？事实上就语法角度而言指代the Supreme Court 也是有可能的，对不？”ecsniffer的观点，我认为是正确的。
这一题ETS出的不严谨，解释也不严谨。
请NN指正。
totally and seriously agree with the explanation of philikittist!
NN!!
复习到这题，不同意楼上的意见，把贴再翻出来。
我觉得本题指代没有歧义。tianwan分析的非常仔细了（惭愧，我做题时就压根没注意后面的its），一个是指代一致问题，还有我觉得ETS对于指代有这样的倾向，就是优先指代跟代词功能相同的。比如，如果代词在从句里做主语，那么其优先指代主句主语。如果代词作宾语（如本题），那优先指代主句宾语（CIA）。philikittist举的例子中information两次都是动作的承受者，因此不存在指代问题。本题SC是动作的发出者，it是动作的承受者，不符合ETS的指代习惯。
3 看看it, (A) enabling it to withhold from the public中，则有：SC gives CIA powers enabling it to withhold the identities of its source of intelligent information from the public. 后面的its指向CIA(CIA才有source of intelligent information, 不要抬杠)， 所以it指向CIA。只能从逻辑上分析出来。从语法上分析，“og的意思不是说这里的it语法上就是指向Central Intelligence Agency的么？事实上就语法角度而言指代the Supreme Court 也是有可能的，对不？”ecsniffer的观点，我认为是正确的。
222. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.
(A) enabling it to withhold from the public
(B) for it to withhold from the public
(C) for withholding disclosure to the public of
(D) that enable them to withhold from public disclosure
(E) that they can withhold public disclosure of
It is no doubt that ans is A, but why B is wrong?
"ward X sth for X to do.... " can not?
anybody got idea? Thanx
先A是因为，enabling是指法律赋予一种能力，可多次重复使用这种能力，只要法律有效就可以使用，是持续状态，而B中暗含了只能用一次，以后能不能用不知道，凡是法律法规应该都用VING来修饰。
thanks!
谁能帮助解释一下这句话什么意思，谢谢
222. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.
直译：以9-0的投票结果，最高法院授予中央情报局（CIA）自主的权力，使它能拒绝给予公众那些，来自于它的情报信息资源的个人身份资料。
我们重新回到OG的解释：In choices B and C, the preposition for is used unidiomatically in place of the "-ing" modifier to introduce the phrase describing powers 意思是power后的phrase是用来形容power的。所以，若使用Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers for it to withhold….则for it就重复了一次前句的意思。换言之，power之后，只要形容power的内容即可，不必再说一次「赋予它（CIA）．．．」。从这个角度看，A确实比B更好。
另外，我认为这里重复it和philikittist所提的状况不一样，因为，这个句子很清楚是谁赋予谁什么权力，所以问题很单纯，就是加个phrase来形容power。至于 philikittist所说的，倒是和og183的情况较接近：
183. Archaeologists in Ireland believe that a recently discovered chalice, which dates from the eighth century, was probably buried to keep from being stolen by invaders.
(A) to keep from
(B) to keep it from
(C) to avoid
(D) in order that it would avoid
(E) in order to keep from
In choice A, the phrase/row being stolen lacks the necessary noun or pronoun that specifies what it is that might be stolen. Choice B is best because it provides the pronoun it, which refers to chalice. Like choice A, choices C and E lack the pronoun. D is wordy and awkward in its use of the passive voice. Moreover, avoid is used imprecisely in C and D because it illogically suggests that the chalice is acting to prevent its own theft.
还请NN指正！
who can translate this sentence especially the part after "enabling".
I cannot completely understand the meaning of this sentence.
Thank you
先A是因为，enabling是指法律赋予一种能力，可多次重复使用这种能力，只要法律有效就可以使用，是持续状态，而B中暗含了只能用一次，以后能不能用不知道，凡是法律法规应该都用VING来修饰
who can translate this sentence especially the part after "enabling".
I cannot completely understand the meaning of this sentence.
Thank you
20楼的jerjer 不是解释的很好？ enabling在这里是“使得，使能够”的意思！
另外补充一点，enabling还有特指法律给予某人某种法律权力。
222. By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.
直译：以9-0的投票结果，最高法院授予中央情报局（CIA）自主的权力，使它能拒绝给予公众那些，来自于它的情报信息资源的个人身份资料。
By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold from the public the identities of its sources of intelligence information.
from the public the identities 什么成分啊？
By a vote of 9 to 0, the Supreme Court awarded the Central Intelligence Agency broad discretionary powers enabling it to withhold the identities of its sources of intelligence information from the public.
因为根据汉译 withhold＋n 使句子意思更完整 不知这样理解对不对？
复习到这题，不同意楼上的意见，把贴再翻出来。
我觉得本题指代没有歧义。tianwan分析的非常仔细了（惭愧，我做题时就压根没注意后面的its），一个是指代一致问题，还有我觉得ETS对于指代有这样的倾向，就是优先指代跟代词功能相同的。比如，如果代词在从句里做主语，那么其优先指代主句主语。如果代词作宾语（如本题），那优先指代主句宾语（CIA）。philikittist举的例子中information两次都是动作的承受者，因此不存在指代问题。本题SC是动作的发出者，it是动作的承受者，不符合ETS的指代习惯。
同意携隐的观点，philikittist举的例子it只有一个只带对象怎么会有歧义产生，此列不能说明问题
逻辑是最高境界,也是最高标准.从逻辑上来讲,"最高法院赋予CIA一项自由的权力来使最高法院自己能够有能力来XXX",不感觉是在绕圈子,多此一举么??? 既然最高法院是权力的发源地,它又想充当执法者的角色,CIA直接成为浮云,(CIA
, 愤愤不平地质问:SC老大你自己想动手做干嘛不'天赋己权',那我当幌子哪!!!) 按以上逻辑感觉SC不但在玩弄CIA,还在玩弄它自己的智商,就像对待我们一样
. 所以正确的逻辑下it只能是指代CIA.
如果非要撇开逻辑,单从语法上强行认定it是最高法院的话,同样站不住脚的. it应该改为反身代词itself (powers是复数,被排除指代可能)
所以从语法上来讲it也不会误指代SC,那就只能是CIA了. OG的解释没有错.
复习到这题，不同意楼上的意见，把贴再翻出来。
我觉得本题指代没有歧义。tianwan分析的非常仔细了（惭愧，我做题时就压根没注意后面的its），一个是指代一致问题，还有我觉得ETS对于指代有这样的倾向，就是优先指代跟代词功能相同的。比如，如果代词在从句里做主语，那么其优先指代主句主语。如果代词作宾语（如本题），那优先指代主句宾语（CIA）。philikittist举的例子中information两次都是动作的承受者，因此不存在指代问题。本题SC是动作的发出者，it是动作的承受者，不符合ETS的指代习惯。
正好找到这道题，顶！
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |