标题: GWD-29-Q29 [打印本页] 作者: hughlv 时间: 2010-4-12 22:53 标题: GWD-29-Q29 40: GWD-29-Q29 Most of Portugal’s 250,000 university students boycotted classes in a one-day strike to protest a law that requires them to contribute $330 a year toward the cost of higher education, previously paying $7 per year. A. year toward the cost of higher education, previously paying $7 per year B. year toward the cost of higher education, for which was previously paid $7 per year C. year, compared to the previously $7 per year, toward the cost of higher education D. year toward the cost of higher education, instead of the $7 per year required previously E. year as opposed to the $7 per year required previously for the cost of higher education
答案是D。搜过之前的讨论，但是没有找到令人信服的解释。有人说C错的原因是compare最靠近year所以修饰对象不对，感觉这个不太有说服力，$300 a year和$7 per year相比较看起来蛮对称的。
有没有可能是previously的位置放的不对？应该是previous？作者: 切尔西 时间: 2010-4-12 23:13
首先C应该是第一个被排除的，因为compared to意思是把...比作... 另外那个previously的位置也应该有问题 还有就是compared to the previously $7 per year作为同位语优先修饰a year逻辑意思不符作者: hughlv 时间: 2010-4-12 23:22
那如果改成$300 a year compared with the previous $7 per year是不是就对了？把逗号去掉，compare to改成compare with。作者: 切尔西 时间: 2010-4-13 06:54
应该还是错，这个选项还有一个错误就是toward 引导的介词短语既可以修饰$300 a year 和$7 per year, 又可以只修饰后者，导致歧义；作者: hughlv 时间: 2010-4-13 09:01
分析得很有道理，谢谢切尔西。作者: ashleybaby 时间: 2010-5-7 21:21
查下字典就知道了 表示“相比、比较”时可以既用compare with也可以用compare to （有很多例句）; 表示“把...比作”时只能用compare to.
因此这里把compared to the previously $7 per year作为插入语看没有问题，可能错就错在previously吧。作者: ViannaLIN 时间: 2011-9-22 17:47
但在GMAT里 是不分compare to 和compare with的吧。