41. Under a provision of the Constitution that was never applied. Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states.
(A) was never applied, Congress has been required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do it
(B) was never applied, there has been a requirement that Congress call a convention for consideration of possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(C) was never applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention for considering possible amendments to the document when asked to do it formally
(D) has never been applied, whereby Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
(E) has never been applied. Congress is required to call a convention to consider possible amendments to the document when formally asked to do so
Choices A, B, C, and D contain tense errors (the use of was never applied with has been required in A, for example), unidiomatic expressions (call... for considering), and uses of a pronoun (it) with no noun referent. By introducing the subordinating conjunction whereby, C and D produce sentence fragments. Only E, the best choice, corrects all of these problems. The predicate has never been applied refers to a span of time, from the writing of the Constitution to the present, rather than to a past event (as was does), and the phrase is required indicates that the provision still applies. The phrase call... to consider is idiomatic, and to do so can substitute grammatically for it.
划线部分的解释不是很理解，这样为什么不对？错在哪里？从意思上看有什么不合逻辑的地方吗？
顶
A, B,D 选项含时态错误（例如，A 中 was never applied 与 has been required)
-- 现在时与过去时不连用
A, B,D 选项含时态错误（例如，A 中 was never applied 与 has been required)
-- 现在时与过去时不连用
"现在时与过去时不连用" 这是确定的吗？
A, B,D 选项含时态错误（例如，A 中 was never applied 与 has been required)
-- 现在时与过去时不连用
是A,B,C含时态错误, 就这跟帖的还谢谢?
贴个og11的解释，清楚多了
The meaning of this sentence is distorted by the use of incorrect verb tenses．The provisions of the Constitution, created in 1789，remain in force today．The present perfect tense has been applied is used for action that began in the past and continues into the present．Since the provisions currently apply, the present tense is needed for the next verb：Congress is required．．The idiom is call．．．to consider，not call．．．for considering．Finally, the pronoun it ungrammatically refers back to the entire expression regarding what Congress is required to do and should be replaced by to do so, which more clearly and correctly refers to what Congress must do．
那是否就可以说，现在时可以跟现在完成时一起使用，过去时跟过去完成时一起使用啊？
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |