ChaseDream
标题: LZM的更多错误 [打印本页]
作者: mzyzhu 时间: 2003-7-8 21:22
标题: LZM的更多错误
p18, e1-13, OG183答案就错了。
p68 5-5, og 143, 答案虽然对了，但在解释为什么C不对时，错误。ETS解释得非常非常漂亮
p68 5-6, og 66, 答案虽然对了，但在解释为什么C不对时，错误。C明显错在单数主语reduction 应该接acknowledges and attempts。但是LZM还说如果主语改成the federal reserve就可以了。the federal reserve 还是一个单数三人称。
待续未完。。。
[此贴子已经被作者于2003-7-8 21:33:17编辑过]
作者: siebel 时间: 2003-7-8 21:52
已阅。转刘振民同志。请刘同志先行自查。为维护刘同志威信，建议暂列保密级。
作者: tocean0222 时间: 2003-7-9 00:10
siebel,
你怎么把这个秘密发在这里了啊？
作者: perfection 时间: 2003-7-9 12:36
以下是引用mzyzhu在2003-7-8 21:22:00的发言： 待续未完。。。
[此贴子已经被作者于2003-7-8 21:33:17编辑过]
在LZM书上，他在A,B中选择。
[attachimg]1835[/attachimg]
作者: nettalker 时间: 2003-10-6 19:52
虽然我也认为lzm中错误极多，不小心会被误导，但楼上perfection的researchers题我觉得a相对较好：a, they originally seemed (to take).
而e, it originally seemed (that) they would (take).比较对象不对等啊，是plastics 和 主语从句 that they would take比较，
a中是plastics 和 they(指plastics)一致。
另外，此题选项中they显然指代plastics, 与前面的they(researchers) are finding 不一致，这在og中极为罕见。请问此题是gmat真题么？另外这是那个软件里面的题啊？
请多多指教。
作者: remeo 时间: 2003-10-6 20:36
129. In an effort to reduce their inventories, Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines have been priced to sell. and they are.
(A) have been priced to sell, and they are
(B) are priced to sell, and they have
(C) are priced to sell, and they do
(D) are being priced to sell, and have
(E) had been priced to sell, and they have
In choice C, the best answer, do is correctly used in place of the full verb do sell; in this verb, do is a conjugated form and sell is in the infinitive form, corresponding to its previous use in the sentence (in the phrase priced to sell). In choice A, the omitted word is selling; in B, D, and E, it is sold. Neither of these forms corresponds properly to to sell earlier in the sentence. Also, in E, the past perfect had been priced signifies that the wines had been priced to sell before the prices were cut.
这种代词指代不一致的现象确实很少见，我也不明白为什么可以这么用，哪位牛牛来解释一下？
另外对a, they originally seemed 的解释我也不是很清楚。
作者: allaneli 时间: 2003-10-13 03:03
五楼的朋友，我认为答案还是A对，THEY 在从句中指代从句中的主语PLASTICS,
在SEEMED后省略了TO DETERIORATE。IT 既然不是形式主语，在句中没有指代对象，
必错。
作者: renprince 时间: 2004-4-22 02:21
不明白,请大牛牛们前来讨论,谢谢
作者: liu_9000 时间: 2004-4-23 15:02
我的理解是:
这里比较的是"plastics实际的情况"与"我们原来想当然的情况比较"
正如题中所说: plastics 自身不能seem, E中的IT是形式主语,指后面的then would. 请大家指教
作者: liu_9000 时间: 2004-4-23 15:06
以下是引用remeo在2003-10-6 20:36:00的发言：
129. In an effort to reduce their inventories, Italian vintners have cut prices; their wines have been priced to sell. and they are.
(A) have been priced to sell, and they are
(B) are priced to sell, and they have
(C) are priced to sell, and they do
(D) are being priced to sell, and have
(E) had been priced to sell, and they have
In choice C, the best answer, do is correctly used in place of the full verb do sell; in this verb, do is a conjugated form and sell is in the infinitive form, corresponding to its previous use in the sentence (in the phrase priced to sell). In choice A, the omitted word is selling; in B, D, and E, it is sold. Neither of these forms corresponds properly to to sell earlier in the sentence. Also, in E, the past perfect had been priced signifies that the wines had been priced to sell before the prices were cut.
这种代词指代不一致的现象确实很少见，我也不明白为什么可以这么用，哪位牛牛来解释一下？
另外对a, they originally seemed 的解释我也不是很清楚。
这里我不懂,为什么"do is correctly used in place of the full verb do sell",而不是"are priced to sell". 还有这句话什么意思? 最后的they 指 Italian vintners吗?
请大家指点
作者: dreamer2007 时间: 2007-5-16 04:48
Although A seems Ok, E definitely is the best.
The answer E turns out to be more precise than it originally seemed (that) A would (be).
作者: iammuse 时间: 2009-5-4 22:13
代词应该一致，前面their是Italian vinters‘，所以they应该是Italian vinters.they do的意思应该是they sell the wine.应该是卖出去的意思。不知道对不对。。。。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |