213. (31838-!-item-!-188;#058&006170) (GWD-3-Q34)
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
Will在and后可省,那么can可否??
好问题.
我根据你的思路想到了这么一个例子:
I can play basketball and go to the court everyday.
这是否就造成了歧义:
1. 我能打球,并且能每天都去球场.
2. 我能打球,并且每天都去球场.
请NN们指教了~
还是那个原则,没有歧义的话可以省略
呵呵,感谢msuzengli兄夸奖哈,我个人有这么种感觉,因为后面and接否定not,所以这里will在后面省略是不歧义的。而msuzengli兄提的那个例子我个人认为也是不歧义的,就像另一位兄弟说的,这里面都会理解为我会打球而且每天都去球场,强说歧义我觉得是矫枉过正,不是gmac的本意。就像版主说的,不歧义就没问题。
还说打球的例子,如果改为I can play ball and not go ...这里面我认为很显然and后面就是省略can了,否则就不通了。其实学到今天我挺感谢gmac的,我觉得gmat的语法让我真正的感觉到一门语言是怎样用的。这个就是很好的例子,语言没有一定之规,因为语言的本意就是为了表达思想的,表达清楚了就是正确的语言。
有点跑题了。。说回我的例子,我认为如果后面and没有not还想表示将来时的话就一定要加will了,不然大家都会认为是现在时了。当然,我在cd上看见一个大牛说过,and前后的时态不一定必须是一致的,还是要看句意。也就是说,即使后面没有not也没有will也不能肯定就错了。这或许就是语言的魅力所在吧,当然也是每个人要过的那道坎。。。
这题C错在哪里呢?
请教一下,我读着知道C不顺,但是不知道错在哪
欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |