ChaseDream

标题: [求助]关于代词优先指代问题 [打印本页]

作者: lc837981213 时间: 2009-7-14 09:43
标题: [求助]关于代词优先指代问题

请比较下面两道题：

In 1981 children in the United States spent an average
of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing
household chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week.

A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours
a week

B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly
six hours a week

C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were
spent in 1997

D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997

E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997 答案：B

这道题A选项错误的原因是they指代不明有可能产生歧义，但是又有说they优先指代主语即children,因此不产生歧义。因此我还是不明白为什么不选A

GWD-29-Q19

Critical-thinking instruction is predicted on two assumptions: that there are clearly identifiable thinking skills that students can be taught to recognize and apply appropriately, and if recognized and applied, students will become more effective thinkers.

A. if recognized and applied, students

B. if these skills are recognized and applied, that students

C. if students recognize and apply them, that they

D. that if recognized and applied, students

E. that if students recognize and apply these skills, they 答案：E

这个题的they的情况跟上题一样，如果上题是因为they产生歧义而导致错误，这里的they也不应该选，因为这里的they也可指these skills.

请各位nn指教。

作者: sophiaruan 时间: 2009-7-14 10:10

个人观点：

（1）A中过去完成时不对，1981年是一般过去式，1997年怎么会是过去的过去呢，they的指代没有问题。

B我也同样觉得不对，虽然有新名词出现，但是时态是最重要的，不应该用过去完成时，C是被动不好，D正好，E是动词ing表示延伸和伴随，这里没有这个意思。而从表达上看，作者有意图要表示对比。

（2）两个假设，冒号表示解释。一个是that....另一个是that....所以排除ABC,and连接两个句子，they可以指代各自的主语。E逻辑通顺。辩证思维有两个假设，一个是技巧可以被教和应用，一个如果学生如果学了和应用就可以成为有效的思考者。

欢迎指正。

作者: lc837981213 时间: 2009-7-14 10:30

以下是引用aegean040在2008-6-19 17:13:00的发言：

GWD26-Q20

In 1981 children in the United States spent an average
  of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing
  household chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week.

A. chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours
a week

B. chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly
six hours a week

C. chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were
spent in 1997

D. chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997

E. chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997

选B，不是很明白。我选的C

A：they精确指代children,错误

D：compared逻辑主语不一致

E：growing做伴随改变了句意

有人说C错是因为in 1997改变了句意，但是我觉得句子本身要表达的意思就是1981年和1997年情况的对比。请大家指正，谢谢。

我个人觉得分号前后两句不一定非要相同的时态吧，前面是in 1981，后面是by 1997 用过去完成时也合理啊。

作者: crazyfight 时间: 2009-7-14 10:54

以下是引用sophiaruan在2009-7-14 10:10:00的发言：

个人观点：

（1）A中过去完成时不对，1981年是一般过去式，1997年怎么会是过去的过去呢，they的指代没有问题。

欢迎指正。

关于1。 D的问题在与比较的对象不是很明确，究竟是哪两个对象在compare。 B选项因为出现了分号，所以可以看成是两个独立的句子，不必过分考虑从句时态的情况。所以最好答案是b。

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